The reshaping of urban structure in South Africa through municipal capital investment: Evidence from 3 municipalities Sharthi Laldaparsad, EM Policy Research Statistics South Africa • Well.
Download ReportTranscript The reshaping of urban structure in South Africa through municipal capital investment: Evidence from 3 municipalities Sharthi Laldaparsad, EM Policy Research Statistics South Africa • Well.
Slide 1
The reshaping of urban structure in
South Africa through municipal
capital investment:
Evidence from 3 municipalities
Sharthi Laldaparsad, EM Policy Research
Statistics South Africa
• Well known structural and morphological deficiencies of SA
cities
SETTLEMENT TYPE
City regions and cities (e.g CoJ,
CT, eThekwini, Nelson-Mandela Bay,
etc.)
Other towns and settlements
(excluding dispersed rural
settlements)
% POPULATION
% ECONOMY
2001
2011
(2007)
46.0
49.7
69
28.2
27.7
23
Source: Stats SA & CSIR, 2013; NUDF, 2009
• Importance
Continues to be the primary sites of population growth
Drivers of economic growth
Concentration of poverty, social and ecological challenges
• The RDP in 1994 introduced spatial planning concepts such as “the
need to break down the apartheid geography through land reform,
more compact cities and decent public transport” (1994:83) and
“densification and unification of the urban fabric” (1994:86).
• “Since 1994, densities have increased in some urban areas and there
has also been partial regeneration of inner cities, but, overall, little
progress has been made in reversing apartheid geography, and in
some cases the divides have been exacerbated” (NDP 2011: 238).
• For nearly 20 years, the concept of “restructuring South African cities”
remained at the top of the urban spatial planning agenda.
• Since 1994 several policies and legislative mechanisms were implemented to
transform the spatial landscape of SA.
• SDFs are regarded as the key spatial restructuring tool for local municipalities.
• Perhaps the most under-recognised instrument for spatial restructuring is the
municipal budget itself.
• The need has arose for a comprehensive spatial vision for the country.
• A strategic approach to capital investment is essential to enable spatial
transformation.
• Infrastructure planning more powerful in shaping the spatial structure of
cities than spatial planning (Todes, 2008).
• Aligning & integrating the two, effective restructuring mechanism for local
municipalities. To what extent is there alignment in the City of Jo’Burg, City of
Cape Town, & the Rustenburg Local Municipality.
The presentation looks at • the capital investment patterns in 3 municipalities of South Africa
over the five-year period, 2007/8 to 2011/12.
• whether municipal capital spending patterns have contributed to
reshaping the spatial structure of the municipalities.
• whether municipal capital investment follows the strategic vision
of the IDPs and the SDFs.
• the statistical and geographical frameworks underpinning such
planning.
Capital spending for the five-year period
Capital spending has largely
benefitted key historical economic
hubs. Other areas have benefited
but to a lesser extent.
CoJ
Capital
expenditure (% of
CoCT
RLM
Average
15
21.5
16.7
17.7
municipal budget)
Capital spending between 15-21% of
municipal budget. Over 80% spent
on basic services infrastructure.
Economic (%)
2.4
1.2
1.1
1.5
Social (%)
4.4
6.8
7.2
6.1
Given budget constraints more
motivation to align policies.
Housing (%)
10.2
8.1
3.1
7.1
Infrastructure (%)
81.1
81.4
86.6
83.0
The City of Jo’Burg
Economic spending:
south, south east parts
of the city (CBD, City
Deep, Devland); parts of
Soweto.
Social spending: parts of
Soweto; City Centre,
Cosmos City
Housing spending:
southern parts, eastwest corridor; also in
Cosmos City.
Infrastructure spending:
City Centre, Cosmos City,
Diepsloot area.
The City of Jo’Burg
Highest spending in the consolidation area (public transport, soccer infrastructure,
inner city regeneration), although SDF strategy mentions it should limit spending
there.
Spending for new housing development outside the densification priority area and
movement system of the city. Mixed-use and industrial nodes have attracted higher
levels of capital spending.
Central city areas have attracted high levels of capital spending, whilst
other public transport management areas have not.
The City of Cape Town
Economic spending: CBD, southeast parts of the City; urban
regeneration areas like Mfuleni,
Maccassar, Khayelitsha.
Social spending: CBD, southeast parts of the City like Langa,
Blue Downs, Khayelitsha.
Housing spending: southern &
south-east suburbs (Belhar,
Khayelitsha, Bellmont Park), far
north-western parts (Atlantis),
Kuilsrivier & Brackenfell areas.
Infrastructure spending: In and
around the CBD (Green Point,
Milnerton areas).
The City of Cape Town
Accessibility grid in and around the CBD have attracted high capital
spending.
IRT (phase 1) has influenced spending patterns. Areas in the far north, not
part of the accessibility grid, linked thro IRT.
Parts of the marginalised area in the SE of the city have received capital
spending, but much lower than the designated metropolitan nodes.
The Rustenburg LM
Economic spending:
north-western areas,
north of the central city,
later years eastern parts.
Social spending: higher
density low income
areas like Meriting,
Freedom Park, Phokeng.
Housing spending: new
housing development
close to central city, then
also to rural settlements.
Infrastructure spending:
in and around the central
city; also low income
residential areas like
Meriting.
Rustenburg Local Municipality
Areas where residential, industrial and commercial development nodes are
defined, have attracted higher levels of capital investment.
With the exception of the central areas, both the rapid bus transport system
and the development corridor did not attract substantial capital spending.
Concluding statements on the integration:
Some concepts of the SDF strategies did indeed influenced
capital spending patterns, however there is still significant
scope to improve on the integration and alignment.
All case-study municipalities identified measures to manage urban growth (urban
edge, compaction, densification, development corridors, viable nodes).
And to address connectivity (BRT, IRT, Rapid Bus Transport system).
Public transport corridors (focus areas for development & intensification) has high
levels of influence over investment in the City of Cape Town, but less pronounced
in the City of Jo’Burg & Rustenburg LM.
Areas identified as development nodes (residential, industrial, commercial)
generally attracted higher levels of capital spending.
There is evidence of capital spending directed towards marginalised areas,
although the central core is the main focus. Mainly due to urban renewal & the
main centre of the transport system.
There are evidence of integrated spending for housing projects & its infrastructure.
Although many housing projects are located outside the main development &
accessibility areas, municipalities are using expensive transport infrastructure
investment to connect fragmented settlements.
Government’s unique capacity to secure
consensus between public & private capital
investment, enabling the achievement of multiple
development aims such as economic
development, employment creation and service
delivery (UN-Habitat, 2008).
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Proportion of
persons
employed
2001
58.4
2011
63.3
Unemployment
rate (expanded)
24.0
18.4
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
CAPEX 2011
CAPEX 2012
CAPEX 2011
CAPEX 2012
Stats SA collects CAPEX data from National, Provincial, District, Municipal public
entities; and public corporations.
Important source for empirical evidence on the implications of infrastructure
spending: does it contribute to growth in SA? Does it reduce poverty?
Data must be spatial referenced – location of spending.
SDFs must give direction to capital expenditure.
Municipal integrated geostatistical system
Provincial integrated geostatistical system
National
Municipal and provincial
Regions
Wards
Settlements
National integrated
geo-statistical
system
Dissemination
geographies with
key statistical
data
Small areas
Cadastre and addresses
Other core spatial datasets
Current data supply not
suitable for planning. Call
for innovative approaches
to provide the required
statistical data for planning.
Strong case for the spatial
management of municipal
financial data.
Implying integrated geostatistical information
systems, from National to
below the municipal level.
Framework geographies
with identifiers and
classifiers
Aligning policy will imply
standard geographical
boundaries.
Policy design and implementation
National priorities
more jobs, united state, more infrastructure,
better education and health, adequate housing
– better quality of life
Aligning policy will imply
mechanisms (like a small
spatial unit with regular key
statistical denominators)
that can aggregate to other
geographical levels
Having a national statistical
system that underpins
development planning: a
spatial expression of facts &
figures
Thank You
email: [email protected]
Acknowledgements - Danie, Herman, Amanda & Prof Geyer from CRUISE.
Slide 2
The reshaping of urban structure in
South Africa through municipal
capital investment:
Evidence from 3 municipalities
Sharthi Laldaparsad, EM Policy Research
Statistics South Africa
• Well known structural and morphological deficiencies of SA
cities
SETTLEMENT TYPE
City regions and cities (e.g CoJ,
CT, eThekwini, Nelson-Mandela Bay,
etc.)
Other towns and settlements
(excluding dispersed rural
settlements)
% POPULATION
% ECONOMY
2001
2011
(2007)
46.0
49.7
69
28.2
27.7
23
Source: Stats SA & CSIR, 2013; NUDF, 2009
• Importance
Continues to be the primary sites of population growth
Drivers of economic growth
Concentration of poverty, social and ecological challenges
• The RDP in 1994 introduced spatial planning concepts such as “the
need to break down the apartheid geography through land reform,
more compact cities and decent public transport” (1994:83) and
“densification and unification of the urban fabric” (1994:86).
• “Since 1994, densities have increased in some urban areas and there
has also been partial regeneration of inner cities, but, overall, little
progress has been made in reversing apartheid geography, and in
some cases the divides have been exacerbated” (NDP 2011: 238).
• For nearly 20 years, the concept of “restructuring South African cities”
remained at the top of the urban spatial planning agenda.
• Since 1994 several policies and legislative mechanisms were implemented to
transform the spatial landscape of SA.
• SDFs are regarded as the key spatial restructuring tool for local municipalities.
• Perhaps the most under-recognised instrument for spatial restructuring is the
municipal budget itself.
• The need has arose for a comprehensive spatial vision for the country.
• A strategic approach to capital investment is essential to enable spatial
transformation.
• Infrastructure planning more powerful in shaping the spatial structure of
cities than spatial planning (Todes, 2008).
• Aligning & integrating the two, effective restructuring mechanism for local
municipalities. To what extent is there alignment in the City of Jo’Burg, City of
Cape Town, & the Rustenburg Local Municipality.
The presentation looks at • the capital investment patterns in 3 municipalities of South Africa
over the five-year period, 2007/8 to 2011/12.
• whether municipal capital spending patterns have contributed to
reshaping the spatial structure of the municipalities.
• whether municipal capital investment follows the strategic vision
of the IDPs and the SDFs.
• the statistical and geographical frameworks underpinning such
planning.
Capital spending for the five-year period
Capital spending has largely
benefitted key historical economic
hubs. Other areas have benefited
but to a lesser extent.
CoJ
Capital
expenditure (% of
CoCT
RLM
Average
15
21.5
16.7
17.7
municipal budget)
Capital spending between 15-21% of
municipal budget. Over 80% spent
on basic services infrastructure.
Economic (%)
2.4
1.2
1.1
1.5
Social (%)
4.4
6.8
7.2
6.1
Given budget constraints more
motivation to align policies.
Housing (%)
10.2
8.1
3.1
7.1
Infrastructure (%)
81.1
81.4
86.6
83.0
The City of Jo’Burg
Economic spending:
south, south east parts
of the city (CBD, City
Deep, Devland); parts of
Soweto.
Social spending: parts of
Soweto; City Centre,
Cosmos City
Housing spending:
southern parts, eastwest corridor; also in
Cosmos City.
Infrastructure spending:
City Centre, Cosmos City,
Diepsloot area.
The City of Jo’Burg
Highest spending in the consolidation area (public transport, soccer infrastructure,
inner city regeneration), although SDF strategy mentions it should limit spending
there.
Spending for new housing development outside the densification priority area and
movement system of the city. Mixed-use and industrial nodes have attracted higher
levels of capital spending.
Central city areas have attracted high levels of capital spending, whilst
other public transport management areas have not.
The City of Cape Town
Economic spending: CBD, southeast parts of the City; urban
regeneration areas like Mfuleni,
Maccassar, Khayelitsha.
Social spending: CBD, southeast parts of the City like Langa,
Blue Downs, Khayelitsha.
Housing spending: southern &
south-east suburbs (Belhar,
Khayelitsha, Bellmont Park), far
north-western parts (Atlantis),
Kuilsrivier & Brackenfell areas.
Infrastructure spending: In and
around the CBD (Green Point,
Milnerton areas).
The City of Cape Town
Accessibility grid in and around the CBD have attracted high capital
spending.
IRT (phase 1) has influenced spending patterns. Areas in the far north, not
part of the accessibility grid, linked thro IRT.
Parts of the marginalised area in the SE of the city have received capital
spending, but much lower than the designated metropolitan nodes.
The Rustenburg LM
Economic spending:
north-western areas,
north of the central city,
later years eastern parts.
Social spending: higher
density low income
areas like Meriting,
Freedom Park, Phokeng.
Housing spending: new
housing development
close to central city, then
also to rural settlements.
Infrastructure spending:
in and around the central
city; also low income
residential areas like
Meriting.
Rustenburg Local Municipality
Areas where residential, industrial and commercial development nodes are
defined, have attracted higher levels of capital investment.
With the exception of the central areas, both the rapid bus transport system
and the development corridor did not attract substantial capital spending.
Concluding statements on the integration:
Some concepts of the SDF strategies did indeed influenced
capital spending patterns, however there is still significant
scope to improve on the integration and alignment.
All case-study municipalities identified measures to manage urban growth (urban
edge, compaction, densification, development corridors, viable nodes).
And to address connectivity (BRT, IRT, Rapid Bus Transport system).
Public transport corridors (focus areas for development & intensification) has high
levels of influence over investment in the City of Cape Town, but less pronounced
in the City of Jo’Burg & Rustenburg LM.
Areas identified as development nodes (residential, industrial, commercial)
generally attracted higher levels of capital spending.
There is evidence of capital spending directed towards marginalised areas,
although the central core is the main focus. Mainly due to urban renewal & the
main centre of the transport system.
There are evidence of integrated spending for housing projects & its infrastructure.
Although many housing projects are located outside the main development &
accessibility areas, municipalities are using expensive transport infrastructure
investment to connect fragmented settlements.
Government’s unique capacity to secure
consensus between public & private capital
investment, enabling the achievement of multiple
development aims such as economic
development, employment creation and service
delivery (UN-Habitat, 2008).
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Proportion of
persons
employed
2001
58.4
2011
63.3
Unemployment
rate (expanded)
24.0
18.4
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
CAPEX 2011
CAPEX 2012
CAPEX 2011
CAPEX 2012
Stats SA collects CAPEX data from National, Provincial, District, Municipal public
entities; and public corporations.
Important source for empirical evidence on the implications of infrastructure
spending: does it contribute to growth in SA? Does it reduce poverty?
Data must be spatial referenced – location of spending.
SDFs must give direction to capital expenditure.
Municipal integrated geostatistical system
Provincial integrated geostatistical system
National
Municipal and provincial
Regions
Wards
Settlements
National integrated
geo-statistical
system
Dissemination
geographies with
key statistical
data
Small areas
Cadastre and addresses
Other core spatial datasets
Current data supply not
suitable for planning. Call
for innovative approaches
to provide the required
statistical data for planning.
Strong case for the spatial
management of municipal
financial data.
Implying integrated geostatistical information
systems, from National to
below the municipal level.
Framework geographies
with identifiers and
classifiers
Aligning policy will imply
standard geographical
boundaries.
Policy design and implementation
National priorities
more jobs, united state, more infrastructure,
better education and health, adequate housing
– better quality of life
Aligning policy will imply
mechanisms (like a small
spatial unit with regular key
statistical denominators)
that can aggregate to other
geographical levels
Having a national statistical
system that underpins
development planning: a
spatial expression of facts &
figures
Thank You
email: [email protected]
Acknowledgements - Danie, Herman, Amanda & Prof Geyer from CRUISE.
Slide 3
The reshaping of urban structure in
South Africa through municipal
capital investment:
Evidence from 3 municipalities
Sharthi Laldaparsad, EM Policy Research
Statistics South Africa
• Well known structural and morphological deficiencies of SA
cities
SETTLEMENT TYPE
City regions and cities (e.g CoJ,
CT, eThekwini, Nelson-Mandela Bay,
etc.)
Other towns and settlements
(excluding dispersed rural
settlements)
% POPULATION
% ECONOMY
2001
2011
(2007)
46.0
49.7
69
28.2
27.7
23
Source: Stats SA & CSIR, 2013; NUDF, 2009
• Importance
Continues to be the primary sites of population growth
Drivers of economic growth
Concentration of poverty, social and ecological challenges
• The RDP in 1994 introduced spatial planning concepts such as “the
need to break down the apartheid geography through land reform,
more compact cities and decent public transport” (1994:83) and
“densification and unification of the urban fabric” (1994:86).
• “Since 1994, densities have increased in some urban areas and there
has also been partial regeneration of inner cities, but, overall, little
progress has been made in reversing apartheid geography, and in
some cases the divides have been exacerbated” (NDP 2011: 238).
• For nearly 20 years, the concept of “restructuring South African cities”
remained at the top of the urban spatial planning agenda.
• Since 1994 several policies and legislative mechanisms were implemented to
transform the spatial landscape of SA.
• SDFs are regarded as the key spatial restructuring tool for local municipalities.
• Perhaps the most under-recognised instrument for spatial restructuring is the
municipal budget itself.
• The need has arose for a comprehensive spatial vision for the country.
• A strategic approach to capital investment is essential to enable spatial
transformation.
• Infrastructure planning more powerful in shaping the spatial structure of
cities than spatial planning (Todes, 2008).
• Aligning & integrating the two, effective restructuring mechanism for local
municipalities. To what extent is there alignment in the City of Jo’Burg, City of
Cape Town, & the Rustenburg Local Municipality.
The presentation looks at • the capital investment patterns in 3 municipalities of South Africa
over the five-year period, 2007/8 to 2011/12.
• whether municipal capital spending patterns have contributed to
reshaping the spatial structure of the municipalities.
• whether municipal capital investment follows the strategic vision
of the IDPs and the SDFs.
• the statistical and geographical frameworks underpinning such
planning.
Capital spending for the five-year period
Capital spending has largely
benefitted key historical economic
hubs. Other areas have benefited
but to a lesser extent.
CoJ
Capital
expenditure (% of
CoCT
RLM
Average
15
21.5
16.7
17.7
municipal budget)
Capital spending between 15-21% of
municipal budget. Over 80% spent
on basic services infrastructure.
Economic (%)
2.4
1.2
1.1
1.5
Social (%)
4.4
6.8
7.2
6.1
Given budget constraints more
motivation to align policies.
Housing (%)
10.2
8.1
3.1
7.1
Infrastructure (%)
81.1
81.4
86.6
83.0
The City of Jo’Burg
Economic spending:
south, south east parts
of the city (CBD, City
Deep, Devland); parts of
Soweto.
Social spending: parts of
Soweto; City Centre,
Cosmos City
Housing spending:
southern parts, eastwest corridor; also in
Cosmos City.
Infrastructure spending:
City Centre, Cosmos City,
Diepsloot area.
The City of Jo’Burg
Highest spending in the consolidation area (public transport, soccer infrastructure,
inner city regeneration), although SDF strategy mentions it should limit spending
there.
Spending for new housing development outside the densification priority area and
movement system of the city. Mixed-use and industrial nodes have attracted higher
levels of capital spending.
Central city areas have attracted high levels of capital spending, whilst
other public transport management areas have not.
The City of Cape Town
Economic spending: CBD, southeast parts of the City; urban
regeneration areas like Mfuleni,
Maccassar, Khayelitsha.
Social spending: CBD, southeast parts of the City like Langa,
Blue Downs, Khayelitsha.
Housing spending: southern &
south-east suburbs (Belhar,
Khayelitsha, Bellmont Park), far
north-western parts (Atlantis),
Kuilsrivier & Brackenfell areas.
Infrastructure spending: In and
around the CBD (Green Point,
Milnerton areas).
The City of Cape Town
Accessibility grid in and around the CBD have attracted high capital
spending.
IRT (phase 1) has influenced spending patterns. Areas in the far north, not
part of the accessibility grid, linked thro IRT.
Parts of the marginalised area in the SE of the city have received capital
spending, but much lower than the designated metropolitan nodes.
The Rustenburg LM
Economic spending:
north-western areas,
north of the central city,
later years eastern parts.
Social spending: higher
density low income
areas like Meriting,
Freedom Park, Phokeng.
Housing spending: new
housing development
close to central city, then
also to rural settlements.
Infrastructure spending:
in and around the central
city; also low income
residential areas like
Meriting.
Rustenburg Local Municipality
Areas where residential, industrial and commercial development nodes are
defined, have attracted higher levels of capital investment.
With the exception of the central areas, both the rapid bus transport system
and the development corridor did not attract substantial capital spending.
Concluding statements on the integration:
Some concepts of the SDF strategies did indeed influenced
capital spending patterns, however there is still significant
scope to improve on the integration and alignment.
All case-study municipalities identified measures to manage urban growth (urban
edge, compaction, densification, development corridors, viable nodes).
And to address connectivity (BRT, IRT, Rapid Bus Transport system).
Public transport corridors (focus areas for development & intensification) has high
levels of influence over investment in the City of Cape Town, but less pronounced
in the City of Jo’Burg & Rustenburg LM.
Areas identified as development nodes (residential, industrial, commercial)
generally attracted higher levels of capital spending.
There is evidence of capital spending directed towards marginalised areas,
although the central core is the main focus. Mainly due to urban renewal & the
main centre of the transport system.
There are evidence of integrated spending for housing projects & its infrastructure.
Although many housing projects are located outside the main development &
accessibility areas, municipalities are using expensive transport infrastructure
investment to connect fragmented settlements.
Government’s unique capacity to secure
consensus between public & private capital
investment, enabling the achievement of multiple
development aims such as economic
development, employment creation and service
delivery (UN-Habitat, 2008).
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Proportion of
persons
employed
2001
58.4
2011
63.3
Unemployment
rate (expanded)
24.0
18.4
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
CAPEX 2011
CAPEX 2012
CAPEX 2011
CAPEX 2012
Stats SA collects CAPEX data from National, Provincial, District, Municipal public
entities; and public corporations.
Important source for empirical evidence on the implications of infrastructure
spending: does it contribute to growth in SA? Does it reduce poverty?
Data must be spatial referenced – location of spending.
SDFs must give direction to capital expenditure.
Municipal integrated geostatistical system
Provincial integrated geostatistical system
National
Municipal and provincial
Regions
Wards
Settlements
National integrated
geo-statistical
system
Dissemination
geographies with
key statistical
data
Small areas
Cadastre and addresses
Other core spatial datasets
Current data supply not
suitable for planning. Call
for innovative approaches
to provide the required
statistical data for planning.
Strong case for the spatial
management of municipal
financial data.
Implying integrated geostatistical information
systems, from National to
below the municipal level.
Framework geographies
with identifiers and
classifiers
Aligning policy will imply
standard geographical
boundaries.
Policy design and implementation
National priorities
more jobs, united state, more infrastructure,
better education and health, adequate housing
– better quality of life
Aligning policy will imply
mechanisms (like a small
spatial unit with regular key
statistical denominators)
that can aggregate to other
geographical levels
Having a national statistical
system that underpins
development planning: a
spatial expression of facts &
figures
Thank You
email: [email protected]
Acknowledgements - Danie, Herman, Amanda & Prof Geyer from CRUISE.
Slide 4
The reshaping of urban structure in
South Africa through municipal
capital investment:
Evidence from 3 municipalities
Sharthi Laldaparsad, EM Policy Research
Statistics South Africa
• Well known structural and morphological deficiencies of SA
cities
SETTLEMENT TYPE
City regions and cities (e.g CoJ,
CT, eThekwini, Nelson-Mandela Bay,
etc.)
Other towns and settlements
(excluding dispersed rural
settlements)
% POPULATION
% ECONOMY
2001
2011
(2007)
46.0
49.7
69
28.2
27.7
23
Source: Stats SA & CSIR, 2013; NUDF, 2009
• Importance
Continues to be the primary sites of population growth
Drivers of economic growth
Concentration of poverty, social and ecological challenges
• The RDP in 1994 introduced spatial planning concepts such as “the
need to break down the apartheid geography through land reform,
more compact cities and decent public transport” (1994:83) and
“densification and unification of the urban fabric” (1994:86).
• “Since 1994, densities have increased in some urban areas and there
has also been partial regeneration of inner cities, but, overall, little
progress has been made in reversing apartheid geography, and in
some cases the divides have been exacerbated” (NDP 2011: 238).
• For nearly 20 years, the concept of “restructuring South African cities”
remained at the top of the urban spatial planning agenda.
• Since 1994 several policies and legislative mechanisms were implemented to
transform the spatial landscape of SA.
• SDFs are regarded as the key spatial restructuring tool for local municipalities.
• Perhaps the most under-recognised instrument for spatial restructuring is the
municipal budget itself.
• The need has arose for a comprehensive spatial vision for the country.
• A strategic approach to capital investment is essential to enable spatial
transformation.
• Infrastructure planning more powerful in shaping the spatial structure of
cities than spatial planning (Todes, 2008).
• Aligning & integrating the two, effective restructuring mechanism for local
municipalities. To what extent is there alignment in the City of Jo’Burg, City of
Cape Town, & the Rustenburg Local Municipality.
The presentation looks at • the capital investment patterns in 3 municipalities of South Africa
over the five-year period, 2007/8 to 2011/12.
• whether municipal capital spending patterns have contributed to
reshaping the spatial structure of the municipalities.
• whether municipal capital investment follows the strategic vision
of the IDPs and the SDFs.
• the statistical and geographical frameworks underpinning such
planning.
Capital spending for the five-year period
Capital spending has largely
benefitted key historical economic
hubs. Other areas have benefited
but to a lesser extent.
CoJ
Capital
expenditure (% of
CoCT
RLM
Average
15
21.5
16.7
17.7
municipal budget)
Capital spending between 15-21% of
municipal budget. Over 80% spent
on basic services infrastructure.
Economic (%)
2.4
1.2
1.1
1.5
Social (%)
4.4
6.8
7.2
6.1
Given budget constraints more
motivation to align policies.
Housing (%)
10.2
8.1
3.1
7.1
Infrastructure (%)
81.1
81.4
86.6
83.0
The City of Jo’Burg
Economic spending:
south, south east parts
of the city (CBD, City
Deep, Devland); parts of
Soweto.
Social spending: parts of
Soweto; City Centre,
Cosmos City
Housing spending:
southern parts, eastwest corridor; also in
Cosmos City.
Infrastructure spending:
City Centre, Cosmos City,
Diepsloot area.
The City of Jo’Burg
Highest spending in the consolidation area (public transport, soccer infrastructure,
inner city regeneration), although SDF strategy mentions it should limit spending
there.
Spending for new housing development outside the densification priority area and
movement system of the city. Mixed-use and industrial nodes have attracted higher
levels of capital spending.
Central city areas have attracted high levels of capital spending, whilst
other public transport management areas have not.
The City of Cape Town
Economic spending: CBD, southeast parts of the City; urban
regeneration areas like Mfuleni,
Maccassar, Khayelitsha.
Social spending: CBD, southeast parts of the City like Langa,
Blue Downs, Khayelitsha.
Housing spending: southern &
south-east suburbs (Belhar,
Khayelitsha, Bellmont Park), far
north-western parts (Atlantis),
Kuilsrivier & Brackenfell areas.
Infrastructure spending: In and
around the CBD (Green Point,
Milnerton areas).
The City of Cape Town
Accessibility grid in and around the CBD have attracted high capital
spending.
IRT (phase 1) has influenced spending patterns. Areas in the far north, not
part of the accessibility grid, linked thro IRT.
Parts of the marginalised area in the SE of the city have received capital
spending, but much lower than the designated metropolitan nodes.
The Rustenburg LM
Economic spending:
north-western areas,
north of the central city,
later years eastern parts.
Social spending: higher
density low income
areas like Meriting,
Freedom Park, Phokeng.
Housing spending: new
housing development
close to central city, then
also to rural settlements.
Infrastructure spending:
in and around the central
city; also low income
residential areas like
Meriting.
Rustenburg Local Municipality
Areas where residential, industrial and commercial development nodes are
defined, have attracted higher levels of capital investment.
With the exception of the central areas, both the rapid bus transport system
and the development corridor did not attract substantial capital spending.
Concluding statements on the integration:
Some concepts of the SDF strategies did indeed influenced
capital spending patterns, however there is still significant
scope to improve on the integration and alignment.
All case-study municipalities identified measures to manage urban growth (urban
edge, compaction, densification, development corridors, viable nodes).
And to address connectivity (BRT, IRT, Rapid Bus Transport system).
Public transport corridors (focus areas for development & intensification) has high
levels of influence over investment in the City of Cape Town, but less pronounced
in the City of Jo’Burg & Rustenburg LM.
Areas identified as development nodes (residential, industrial, commercial)
generally attracted higher levels of capital spending.
There is evidence of capital spending directed towards marginalised areas,
although the central core is the main focus. Mainly due to urban renewal & the
main centre of the transport system.
There are evidence of integrated spending for housing projects & its infrastructure.
Although many housing projects are located outside the main development &
accessibility areas, municipalities are using expensive transport infrastructure
investment to connect fragmented settlements.
Government’s unique capacity to secure
consensus between public & private capital
investment, enabling the achievement of multiple
development aims such as economic
development, employment creation and service
delivery (UN-Habitat, 2008).
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Proportion of
persons
employed
2001
58.4
2011
63.3
Unemployment
rate (expanded)
24.0
18.4
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
CAPEX 2011
CAPEX 2012
CAPEX 2011
CAPEX 2012
Stats SA collects CAPEX data from National, Provincial, District, Municipal public
entities; and public corporations.
Important source for empirical evidence on the implications of infrastructure
spending: does it contribute to growth in SA? Does it reduce poverty?
Data must be spatial referenced – location of spending.
SDFs must give direction to capital expenditure.
Municipal integrated geostatistical system
Provincial integrated geostatistical system
National
Municipal and provincial
Regions
Wards
Settlements
National integrated
geo-statistical
system
Dissemination
geographies with
key statistical
data
Small areas
Cadastre and addresses
Other core spatial datasets
Current data supply not
suitable for planning. Call
for innovative approaches
to provide the required
statistical data for planning.
Strong case for the spatial
management of municipal
financial data.
Implying integrated geostatistical information
systems, from National to
below the municipal level.
Framework geographies
with identifiers and
classifiers
Aligning policy will imply
standard geographical
boundaries.
Policy design and implementation
National priorities
more jobs, united state, more infrastructure,
better education and health, adequate housing
– better quality of life
Aligning policy will imply
mechanisms (like a small
spatial unit with regular key
statistical denominators)
that can aggregate to other
geographical levels
Having a national statistical
system that underpins
development planning: a
spatial expression of facts &
figures
Thank You
email: [email protected]
Acknowledgements - Danie, Herman, Amanda & Prof Geyer from CRUISE.
Slide 5
The reshaping of urban structure in
South Africa through municipal
capital investment:
Evidence from 3 municipalities
Sharthi Laldaparsad, EM Policy Research
Statistics South Africa
• Well known structural and morphological deficiencies of SA
cities
SETTLEMENT TYPE
City regions and cities (e.g CoJ,
CT, eThekwini, Nelson-Mandela Bay,
etc.)
Other towns and settlements
(excluding dispersed rural
settlements)
% POPULATION
% ECONOMY
2001
2011
(2007)
46.0
49.7
69
28.2
27.7
23
Source: Stats SA & CSIR, 2013; NUDF, 2009
• Importance
Continues to be the primary sites of population growth
Drivers of economic growth
Concentration of poverty, social and ecological challenges
• The RDP in 1994 introduced spatial planning concepts such as “the
need to break down the apartheid geography through land reform,
more compact cities and decent public transport” (1994:83) and
“densification and unification of the urban fabric” (1994:86).
• “Since 1994, densities have increased in some urban areas and there
has also been partial regeneration of inner cities, but, overall, little
progress has been made in reversing apartheid geography, and in
some cases the divides have been exacerbated” (NDP 2011: 238).
• For nearly 20 years, the concept of “restructuring South African cities”
remained at the top of the urban spatial planning agenda.
• Since 1994 several policies and legislative mechanisms were implemented to
transform the spatial landscape of SA.
• SDFs are regarded as the key spatial restructuring tool for local municipalities.
• Perhaps the most under-recognised instrument for spatial restructuring is the
municipal budget itself.
• The need has arose for a comprehensive spatial vision for the country.
• A strategic approach to capital investment is essential to enable spatial
transformation.
• Infrastructure planning more powerful in shaping the spatial structure of
cities than spatial planning (Todes, 2008).
• Aligning & integrating the two, effective restructuring mechanism for local
municipalities. To what extent is there alignment in the City of Jo’Burg, City of
Cape Town, & the Rustenburg Local Municipality.
The presentation looks at • the capital investment patterns in 3 municipalities of South Africa
over the five-year period, 2007/8 to 2011/12.
• whether municipal capital spending patterns have contributed to
reshaping the spatial structure of the municipalities.
• whether municipal capital investment follows the strategic vision
of the IDPs and the SDFs.
• the statistical and geographical frameworks underpinning such
planning.
Capital spending for the five-year period
Capital spending has largely
benefitted key historical economic
hubs. Other areas have benefited
but to a lesser extent.
CoJ
Capital
expenditure (% of
CoCT
RLM
Average
15
21.5
16.7
17.7
municipal budget)
Capital spending between 15-21% of
municipal budget. Over 80% spent
on basic services infrastructure.
Economic (%)
2.4
1.2
1.1
1.5
Social (%)
4.4
6.8
7.2
6.1
Given budget constraints more
motivation to align policies.
Housing (%)
10.2
8.1
3.1
7.1
Infrastructure (%)
81.1
81.4
86.6
83.0
The City of Jo’Burg
Economic spending:
south, south east parts
of the city (CBD, City
Deep, Devland); parts of
Soweto.
Social spending: parts of
Soweto; City Centre,
Cosmos City
Housing spending:
southern parts, eastwest corridor; also in
Cosmos City.
Infrastructure spending:
City Centre, Cosmos City,
Diepsloot area.
The City of Jo’Burg
Highest spending in the consolidation area (public transport, soccer infrastructure,
inner city regeneration), although SDF strategy mentions it should limit spending
there.
Spending for new housing development outside the densification priority area and
movement system of the city. Mixed-use and industrial nodes have attracted higher
levels of capital spending.
Central city areas have attracted high levels of capital spending, whilst
other public transport management areas have not.
The City of Cape Town
Economic spending: CBD, southeast parts of the City; urban
regeneration areas like Mfuleni,
Maccassar, Khayelitsha.
Social spending: CBD, southeast parts of the City like Langa,
Blue Downs, Khayelitsha.
Housing spending: southern &
south-east suburbs (Belhar,
Khayelitsha, Bellmont Park), far
north-western parts (Atlantis),
Kuilsrivier & Brackenfell areas.
Infrastructure spending: In and
around the CBD (Green Point,
Milnerton areas).
The City of Cape Town
Accessibility grid in and around the CBD have attracted high capital
spending.
IRT (phase 1) has influenced spending patterns. Areas in the far north, not
part of the accessibility grid, linked thro IRT.
Parts of the marginalised area in the SE of the city have received capital
spending, but much lower than the designated metropolitan nodes.
The Rustenburg LM
Economic spending:
north-western areas,
north of the central city,
later years eastern parts.
Social spending: higher
density low income
areas like Meriting,
Freedom Park, Phokeng.
Housing spending: new
housing development
close to central city, then
also to rural settlements.
Infrastructure spending:
in and around the central
city; also low income
residential areas like
Meriting.
Rustenburg Local Municipality
Areas where residential, industrial and commercial development nodes are
defined, have attracted higher levels of capital investment.
With the exception of the central areas, both the rapid bus transport system
and the development corridor did not attract substantial capital spending.
Concluding statements on the integration:
Some concepts of the SDF strategies did indeed influenced
capital spending patterns, however there is still significant
scope to improve on the integration and alignment.
All case-study municipalities identified measures to manage urban growth (urban
edge, compaction, densification, development corridors, viable nodes).
And to address connectivity (BRT, IRT, Rapid Bus Transport system).
Public transport corridors (focus areas for development & intensification) has high
levels of influence over investment in the City of Cape Town, but less pronounced
in the City of Jo’Burg & Rustenburg LM.
Areas identified as development nodes (residential, industrial, commercial)
generally attracted higher levels of capital spending.
There is evidence of capital spending directed towards marginalised areas,
although the central core is the main focus. Mainly due to urban renewal & the
main centre of the transport system.
There are evidence of integrated spending for housing projects & its infrastructure.
Although many housing projects are located outside the main development &
accessibility areas, municipalities are using expensive transport infrastructure
investment to connect fragmented settlements.
Government’s unique capacity to secure
consensus between public & private capital
investment, enabling the achievement of multiple
development aims such as economic
development, employment creation and service
delivery (UN-Habitat, 2008).
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Proportion of
persons
employed
2001
58.4
2011
63.3
Unemployment
rate (expanded)
24.0
18.4
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
CAPEX 2011
CAPEX 2012
CAPEX 2011
CAPEX 2012
Stats SA collects CAPEX data from National, Provincial, District, Municipal public
entities; and public corporations.
Important source for empirical evidence on the implications of infrastructure
spending: does it contribute to growth in SA? Does it reduce poverty?
Data must be spatial referenced – location of spending.
SDFs must give direction to capital expenditure.
Municipal integrated geostatistical system
Provincial integrated geostatistical system
National
Municipal and provincial
Regions
Wards
Settlements
National integrated
geo-statistical
system
Dissemination
geographies with
key statistical
data
Small areas
Cadastre and addresses
Other core spatial datasets
Current data supply not
suitable for planning. Call
for innovative approaches
to provide the required
statistical data for planning.
Strong case for the spatial
management of municipal
financial data.
Implying integrated geostatistical information
systems, from National to
below the municipal level.
Framework geographies
with identifiers and
classifiers
Aligning policy will imply
standard geographical
boundaries.
Policy design and implementation
National priorities
more jobs, united state, more infrastructure,
better education and health, adequate housing
– better quality of life
Aligning policy will imply
mechanisms (like a small
spatial unit with regular key
statistical denominators)
that can aggregate to other
geographical levels
Having a national statistical
system that underpins
development planning: a
spatial expression of facts &
figures
Thank You
email: [email protected]
Acknowledgements - Danie, Herman, Amanda & Prof Geyer from CRUISE.
Slide 6
The reshaping of urban structure in
South Africa through municipal
capital investment:
Evidence from 3 municipalities
Sharthi Laldaparsad, EM Policy Research
Statistics South Africa
• Well known structural and morphological deficiencies of SA
cities
SETTLEMENT TYPE
City regions and cities (e.g CoJ,
CT, eThekwini, Nelson-Mandela Bay,
etc.)
Other towns and settlements
(excluding dispersed rural
settlements)
% POPULATION
% ECONOMY
2001
2011
(2007)
46.0
49.7
69
28.2
27.7
23
Source: Stats SA & CSIR, 2013; NUDF, 2009
• Importance
Continues to be the primary sites of population growth
Drivers of economic growth
Concentration of poverty, social and ecological challenges
• The RDP in 1994 introduced spatial planning concepts such as “the
need to break down the apartheid geography through land reform,
more compact cities and decent public transport” (1994:83) and
“densification and unification of the urban fabric” (1994:86).
• “Since 1994, densities have increased in some urban areas and there
has also been partial regeneration of inner cities, but, overall, little
progress has been made in reversing apartheid geography, and in
some cases the divides have been exacerbated” (NDP 2011: 238).
• For nearly 20 years, the concept of “restructuring South African cities”
remained at the top of the urban spatial planning agenda.
• Since 1994 several policies and legislative mechanisms were implemented to
transform the spatial landscape of SA.
• SDFs are regarded as the key spatial restructuring tool for local municipalities.
• Perhaps the most under-recognised instrument for spatial restructuring is the
municipal budget itself.
• The need has arose for a comprehensive spatial vision for the country.
• A strategic approach to capital investment is essential to enable spatial
transformation.
• Infrastructure planning more powerful in shaping the spatial structure of
cities than spatial planning (Todes, 2008).
• Aligning & integrating the two, effective restructuring mechanism for local
municipalities. To what extent is there alignment in the City of Jo’Burg, City of
Cape Town, & the Rustenburg Local Municipality.
The presentation looks at • the capital investment patterns in 3 municipalities of South Africa
over the five-year period, 2007/8 to 2011/12.
• whether municipal capital spending patterns have contributed to
reshaping the spatial structure of the municipalities.
• whether municipal capital investment follows the strategic vision
of the IDPs and the SDFs.
• the statistical and geographical frameworks underpinning such
planning.
Capital spending for the five-year period
Capital spending has largely
benefitted key historical economic
hubs. Other areas have benefited
but to a lesser extent.
CoJ
Capital
expenditure (% of
CoCT
RLM
Average
15
21.5
16.7
17.7
municipal budget)
Capital spending between 15-21% of
municipal budget. Over 80% spent
on basic services infrastructure.
Economic (%)
2.4
1.2
1.1
1.5
Social (%)
4.4
6.8
7.2
6.1
Given budget constraints more
motivation to align policies.
Housing (%)
10.2
8.1
3.1
7.1
Infrastructure (%)
81.1
81.4
86.6
83.0
The City of Jo’Burg
Economic spending:
south, south east parts
of the city (CBD, City
Deep, Devland); parts of
Soweto.
Social spending: parts of
Soweto; City Centre,
Cosmos City
Housing spending:
southern parts, eastwest corridor; also in
Cosmos City.
Infrastructure spending:
City Centre, Cosmos City,
Diepsloot area.
The City of Jo’Burg
Highest spending in the consolidation area (public transport, soccer infrastructure,
inner city regeneration), although SDF strategy mentions it should limit spending
there.
Spending for new housing development outside the densification priority area and
movement system of the city. Mixed-use and industrial nodes have attracted higher
levels of capital spending.
Central city areas have attracted high levels of capital spending, whilst
other public transport management areas have not.
The City of Cape Town
Economic spending: CBD, southeast parts of the City; urban
regeneration areas like Mfuleni,
Maccassar, Khayelitsha.
Social spending: CBD, southeast parts of the City like Langa,
Blue Downs, Khayelitsha.
Housing spending: southern &
south-east suburbs (Belhar,
Khayelitsha, Bellmont Park), far
north-western parts (Atlantis),
Kuilsrivier & Brackenfell areas.
Infrastructure spending: In and
around the CBD (Green Point,
Milnerton areas).
The City of Cape Town
Accessibility grid in and around the CBD have attracted high capital
spending.
IRT (phase 1) has influenced spending patterns. Areas in the far north, not
part of the accessibility grid, linked thro IRT.
Parts of the marginalised area in the SE of the city have received capital
spending, but much lower than the designated metropolitan nodes.
The Rustenburg LM
Economic spending:
north-western areas,
north of the central city,
later years eastern parts.
Social spending: higher
density low income
areas like Meriting,
Freedom Park, Phokeng.
Housing spending: new
housing development
close to central city, then
also to rural settlements.
Infrastructure spending:
in and around the central
city; also low income
residential areas like
Meriting.
Rustenburg Local Municipality
Areas where residential, industrial and commercial development nodes are
defined, have attracted higher levels of capital investment.
With the exception of the central areas, both the rapid bus transport system
and the development corridor did not attract substantial capital spending.
Concluding statements on the integration:
Some concepts of the SDF strategies did indeed influenced
capital spending patterns, however there is still significant
scope to improve on the integration and alignment.
All case-study municipalities identified measures to manage urban growth (urban
edge, compaction, densification, development corridors, viable nodes).
And to address connectivity (BRT, IRT, Rapid Bus Transport system).
Public transport corridors (focus areas for development & intensification) has high
levels of influence over investment in the City of Cape Town, but less pronounced
in the City of Jo’Burg & Rustenburg LM.
Areas identified as development nodes (residential, industrial, commercial)
generally attracted higher levels of capital spending.
There is evidence of capital spending directed towards marginalised areas,
although the central core is the main focus. Mainly due to urban renewal & the
main centre of the transport system.
There are evidence of integrated spending for housing projects & its infrastructure.
Although many housing projects are located outside the main development &
accessibility areas, municipalities are using expensive transport infrastructure
investment to connect fragmented settlements.
Government’s unique capacity to secure
consensus between public & private capital
investment, enabling the achievement of multiple
development aims such as economic
development, employment creation and service
delivery (UN-Habitat, 2008).
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Proportion of
persons
employed
2001
58.4
2011
63.3
Unemployment
rate (expanded)
24.0
18.4
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
CAPEX 2011
CAPEX 2012
CAPEX 2011
CAPEX 2012
Stats SA collects CAPEX data from National, Provincial, District, Municipal public
entities; and public corporations.
Important source for empirical evidence on the implications of infrastructure
spending: does it contribute to growth in SA? Does it reduce poverty?
Data must be spatial referenced – location of spending.
SDFs must give direction to capital expenditure.
Municipal integrated geostatistical system
Provincial integrated geostatistical system
National
Municipal and provincial
Regions
Wards
Settlements
National integrated
geo-statistical
system
Dissemination
geographies with
key statistical
data
Small areas
Cadastre and addresses
Other core spatial datasets
Current data supply not
suitable for planning. Call
for innovative approaches
to provide the required
statistical data for planning.
Strong case for the spatial
management of municipal
financial data.
Implying integrated geostatistical information
systems, from National to
below the municipal level.
Framework geographies
with identifiers and
classifiers
Aligning policy will imply
standard geographical
boundaries.
Policy design and implementation
National priorities
more jobs, united state, more infrastructure,
better education and health, adequate housing
– better quality of life
Aligning policy will imply
mechanisms (like a small
spatial unit with regular key
statistical denominators)
that can aggregate to other
geographical levels
Having a national statistical
system that underpins
development planning: a
spatial expression of facts &
figures
Thank You
email: [email protected]
Acknowledgements - Danie, Herman, Amanda & Prof Geyer from CRUISE.
Slide 7
The reshaping of urban structure in
South Africa through municipal
capital investment:
Evidence from 3 municipalities
Sharthi Laldaparsad, EM Policy Research
Statistics South Africa
• Well known structural and morphological deficiencies of SA
cities
SETTLEMENT TYPE
City regions and cities (e.g CoJ,
CT, eThekwini, Nelson-Mandela Bay,
etc.)
Other towns and settlements
(excluding dispersed rural
settlements)
% POPULATION
% ECONOMY
2001
2011
(2007)
46.0
49.7
69
28.2
27.7
23
Source: Stats SA & CSIR, 2013; NUDF, 2009
• Importance
Continues to be the primary sites of population growth
Drivers of economic growth
Concentration of poverty, social and ecological challenges
• The RDP in 1994 introduced spatial planning concepts such as “the
need to break down the apartheid geography through land reform,
more compact cities and decent public transport” (1994:83) and
“densification and unification of the urban fabric” (1994:86).
• “Since 1994, densities have increased in some urban areas and there
has also been partial regeneration of inner cities, but, overall, little
progress has been made in reversing apartheid geography, and in
some cases the divides have been exacerbated” (NDP 2011: 238).
• For nearly 20 years, the concept of “restructuring South African cities”
remained at the top of the urban spatial planning agenda.
• Since 1994 several policies and legislative mechanisms were implemented to
transform the spatial landscape of SA.
• SDFs are regarded as the key spatial restructuring tool for local municipalities.
• Perhaps the most under-recognised instrument for spatial restructuring is the
municipal budget itself.
• The need has arose for a comprehensive spatial vision for the country.
• A strategic approach to capital investment is essential to enable spatial
transformation.
• Infrastructure planning more powerful in shaping the spatial structure of
cities than spatial planning (Todes, 2008).
• Aligning & integrating the two, effective restructuring mechanism for local
municipalities. To what extent is there alignment in the City of Jo’Burg, City of
Cape Town, & the Rustenburg Local Municipality.
The presentation looks at • the capital investment patterns in 3 municipalities of South Africa
over the five-year period, 2007/8 to 2011/12.
• whether municipal capital spending patterns have contributed to
reshaping the spatial structure of the municipalities.
• whether municipal capital investment follows the strategic vision
of the IDPs and the SDFs.
• the statistical and geographical frameworks underpinning such
planning.
Capital spending for the five-year period
Capital spending has largely
benefitted key historical economic
hubs. Other areas have benefited
but to a lesser extent.
CoJ
Capital
expenditure (% of
CoCT
RLM
Average
15
21.5
16.7
17.7
municipal budget)
Capital spending between 15-21% of
municipal budget. Over 80% spent
on basic services infrastructure.
Economic (%)
2.4
1.2
1.1
1.5
Social (%)
4.4
6.8
7.2
6.1
Given budget constraints more
motivation to align policies.
Housing (%)
10.2
8.1
3.1
7.1
Infrastructure (%)
81.1
81.4
86.6
83.0
The City of Jo’Burg
Economic spending:
south, south east parts
of the city (CBD, City
Deep, Devland); parts of
Soweto.
Social spending: parts of
Soweto; City Centre,
Cosmos City
Housing spending:
southern parts, eastwest corridor; also in
Cosmos City.
Infrastructure spending:
City Centre, Cosmos City,
Diepsloot area.
The City of Jo’Burg
Highest spending in the consolidation area (public transport, soccer infrastructure,
inner city regeneration), although SDF strategy mentions it should limit spending
there.
Spending for new housing development outside the densification priority area and
movement system of the city. Mixed-use and industrial nodes have attracted higher
levels of capital spending.
Central city areas have attracted high levels of capital spending, whilst
other public transport management areas have not.
The City of Cape Town
Economic spending: CBD, southeast parts of the City; urban
regeneration areas like Mfuleni,
Maccassar, Khayelitsha.
Social spending: CBD, southeast parts of the City like Langa,
Blue Downs, Khayelitsha.
Housing spending: southern &
south-east suburbs (Belhar,
Khayelitsha, Bellmont Park), far
north-western parts (Atlantis),
Kuilsrivier & Brackenfell areas.
Infrastructure spending: In and
around the CBD (Green Point,
Milnerton areas).
The City of Cape Town
Accessibility grid in and around the CBD have attracted high capital
spending.
IRT (phase 1) has influenced spending patterns. Areas in the far north, not
part of the accessibility grid, linked thro IRT.
Parts of the marginalised area in the SE of the city have received capital
spending, but much lower than the designated metropolitan nodes.
The Rustenburg LM
Economic spending:
north-western areas,
north of the central city,
later years eastern parts.
Social spending: higher
density low income
areas like Meriting,
Freedom Park, Phokeng.
Housing spending: new
housing development
close to central city, then
also to rural settlements.
Infrastructure spending:
in and around the central
city; also low income
residential areas like
Meriting.
Rustenburg Local Municipality
Areas where residential, industrial and commercial development nodes are
defined, have attracted higher levels of capital investment.
With the exception of the central areas, both the rapid bus transport system
and the development corridor did not attract substantial capital spending.
Concluding statements on the integration:
Some concepts of the SDF strategies did indeed influenced
capital spending patterns, however there is still significant
scope to improve on the integration and alignment.
All case-study municipalities identified measures to manage urban growth (urban
edge, compaction, densification, development corridors, viable nodes).
And to address connectivity (BRT, IRT, Rapid Bus Transport system).
Public transport corridors (focus areas for development & intensification) has high
levels of influence over investment in the City of Cape Town, but less pronounced
in the City of Jo’Burg & Rustenburg LM.
Areas identified as development nodes (residential, industrial, commercial)
generally attracted higher levels of capital spending.
There is evidence of capital spending directed towards marginalised areas,
although the central core is the main focus. Mainly due to urban renewal & the
main centre of the transport system.
There are evidence of integrated spending for housing projects & its infrastructure.
Although many housing projects are located outside the main development &
accessibility areas, municipalities are using expensive transport infrastructure
investment to connect fragmented settlements.
Government’s unique capacity to secure
consensus between public & private capital
investment, enabling the achievement of multiple
development aims such as economic
development, employment creation and service
delivery (UN-Habitat, 2008).
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Proportion of
persons
employed
2001
58.4
2011
63.3
Unemployment
rate (expanded)
24.0
18.4
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
CAPEX 2011
CAPEX 2012
CAPEX 2011
CAPEX 2012
Stats SA collects CAPEX data from National, Provincial, District, Municipal public
entities; and public corporations.
Important source for empirical evidence on the implications of infrastructure
spending: does it contribute to growth in SA? Does it reduce poverty?
Data must be spatial referenced – location of spending.
SDFs must give direction to capital expenditure.
Municipal integrated geostatistical system
Provincial integrated geostatistical system
National
Municipal and provincial
Regions
Wards
Settlements
National integrated
geo-statistical
system
Dissemination
geographies with
key statistical
data
Small areas
Cadastre and addresses
Other core spatial datasets
Current data supply not
suitable for planning. Call
for innovative approaches
to provide the required
statistical data for planning.
Strong case for the spatial
management of municipal
financial data.
Implying integrated geostatistical information
systems, from National to
below the municipal level.
Framework geographies
with identifiers and
classifiers
Aligning policy will imply
standard geographical
boundaries.
Policy design and implementation
National priorities
more jobs, united state, more infrastructure,
better education and health, adequate housing
– better quality of life
Aligning policy will imply
mechanisms (like a small
spatial unit with regular key
statistical denominators)
that can aggregate to other
geographical levels
Having a national statistical
system that underpins
development planning: a
spatial expression of facts &
figures
Thank You
email: [email protected]
Acknowledgements - Danie, Herman, Amanda & Prof Geyer from CRUISE.
Slide 8
The reshaping of urban structure in
South Africa through municipal
capital investment:
Evidence from 3 municipalities
Sharthi Laldaparsad, EM Policy Research
Statistics South Africa
• Well known structural and morphological deficiencies of SA
cities
SETTLEMENT TYPE
City regions and cities (e.g CoJ,
CT, eThekwini, Nelson-Mandela Bay,
etc.)
Other towns and settlements
(excluding dispersed rural
settlements)
% POPULATION
% ECONOMY
2001
2011
(2007)
46.0
49.7
69
28.2
27.7
23
Source: Stats SA & CSIR, 2013; NUDF, 2009
• Importance
Continues to be the primary sites of population growth
Drivers of economic growth
Concentration of poverty, social and ecological challenges
• The RDP in 1994 introduced spatial planning concepts such as “the
need to break down the apartheid geography through land reform,
more compact cities and decent public transport” (1994:83) and
“densification and unification of the urban fabric” (1994:86).
• “Since 1994, densities have increased in some urban areas and there
has also been partial regeneration of inner cities, but, overall, little
progress has been made in reversing apartheid geography, and in
some cases the divides have been exacerbated” (NDP 2011: 238).
• For nearly 20 years, the concept of “restructuring South African cities”
remained at the top of the urban spatial planning agenda.
• Since 1994 several policies and legislative mechanisms were implemented to
transform the spatial landscape of SA.
• SDFs are regarded as the key spatial restructuring tool for local municipalities.
• Perhaps the most under-recognised instrument for spatial restructuring is the
municipal budget itself.
• The need has arose for a comprehensive spatial vision for the country.
• A strategic approach to capital investment is essential to enable spatial
transformation.
• Infrastructure planning more powerful in shaping the spatial structure of
cities than spatial planning (Todes, 2008).
• Aligning & integrating the two, effective restructuring mechanism for local
municipalities. To what extent is there alignment in the City of Jo’Burg, City of
Cape Town, & the Rustenburg Local Municipality.
The presentation looks at • the capital investment patterns in 3 municipalities of South Africa
over the five-year period, 2007/8 to 2011/12.
• whether municipal capital spending patterns have contributed to
reshaping the spatial structure of the municipalities.
• whether municipal capital investment follows the strategic vision
of the IDPs and the SDFs.
• the statistical and geographical frameworks underpinning such
planning.
Capital spending for the five-year period
Capital spending has largely
benefitted key historical economic
hubs. Other areas have benefited
but to a lesser extent.
CoJ
Capital
expenditure (% of
CoCT
RLM
Average
15
21.5
16.7
17.7
municipal budget)
Capital spending between 15-21% of
municipal budget. Over 80% spent
on basic services infrastructure.
Economic (%)
2.4
1.2
1.1
1.5
Social (%)
4.4
6.8
7.2
6.1
Given budget constraints more
motivation to align policies.
Housing (%)
10.2
8.1
3.1
7.1
Infrastructure (%)
81.1
81.4
86.6
83.0
The City of Jo’Burg
Economic spending:
south, south east parts
of the city (CBD, City
Deep, Devland); parts of
Soweto.
Social spending: parts of
Soweto; City Centre,
Cosmos City
Housing spending:
southern parts, eastwest corridor; also in
Cosmos City.
Infrastructure spending:
City Centre, Cosmos City,
Diepsloot area.
The City of Jo’Burg
Highest spending in the consolidation area (public transport, soccer infrastructure,
inner city regeneration), although SDF strategy mentions it should limit spending
there.
Spending for new housing development outside the densification priority area and
movement system of the city. Mixed-use and industrial nodes have attracted higher
levels of capital spending.
Central city areas have attracted high levels of capital spending, whilst
other public transport management areas have not.
The City of Cape Town
Economic spending: CBD, southeast parts of the City; urban
regeneration areas like Mfuleni,
Maccassar, Khayelitsha.
Social spending: CBD, southeast parts of the City like Langa,
Blue Downs, Khayelitsha.
Housing spending: southern &
south-east suburbs (Belhar,
Khayelitsha, Bellmont Park), far
north-western parts (Atlantis),
Kuilsrivier & Brackenfell areas.
Infrastructure spending: In and
around the CBD (Green Point,
Milnerton areas).
The City of Cape Town
Accessibility grid in and around the CBD have attracted high capital
spending.
IRT (phase 1) has influenced spending patterns. Areas in the far north, not
part of the accessibility grid, linked thro IRT.
Parts of the marginalised area in the SE of the city have received capital
spending, but much lower than the designated metropolitan nodes.
The Rustenburg LM
Economic spending:
north-western areas,
north of the central city,
later years eastern parts.
Social spending: higher
density low income
areas like Meriting,
Freedom Park, Phokeng.
Housing spending: new
housing development
close to central city, then
also to rural settlements.
Infrastructure spending:
in and around the central
city; also low income
residential areas like
Meriting.
Rustenburg Local Municipality
Areas where residential, industrial and commercial development nodes are
defined, have attracted higher levels of capital investment.
With the exception of the central areas, both the rapid bus transport system
and the development corridor did not attract substantial capital spending.
Concluding statements on the integration:
Some concepts of the SDF strategies did indeed influenced
capital spending patterns, however there is still significant
scope to improve on the integration and alignment.
All case-study municipalities identified measures to manage urban growth (urban
edge, compaction, densification, development corridors, viable nodes).
And to address connectivity (BRT, IRT, Rapid Bus Transport system).
Public transport corridors (focus areas for development & intensification) has high
levels of influence over investment in the City of Cape Town, but less pronounced
in the City of Jo’Burg & Rustenburg LM.
Areas identified as development nodes (residential, industrial, commercial)
generally attracted higher levels of capital spending.
There is evidence of capital spending directed towards marginalised areas,
although the central core is the main focus. Mainly due to urban renewal & the
main centre of the transport system.
There are evidence of integrated spending for housing projects & its infrastructure.
Although many housing projects are located outside the main development &
accessibility areas, municipalities are using expensive transport infrastructure
investment to connect fragmented settlements.
Government’s unique capacity to secure
consensus between public & private capital
investment, enabling the achievement of multiple
development aims such as economic
development, employment creation and service
delivery (UN-Habitat, 2008).
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Proportion of
persons
employed
2001
58.4
2011
63.3
Unemployment
rate (expanded)
24.0
18.4
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
CAPEX 2011
CAPEX 2012
CAPEX 2011
CAPEX 2012
Stats SA collects CAPEX data from National, Provincial, District, Municipal public
entities; and public corporations.
Important source for empirical evidence on the implications of infrastructure
spending: does it contribute to growth in SA? Does it reduce poverty?
Data must be spatial referenced – location of spending.
SDFs must give direction to capital expenditure.
Municipal integrated geostatistical system
Provincial integrated geostatistical system
National
Municipal and provincial
Regions
Wards
Settlements
National integrated
geo-statistical
system
Dissemination
geographies with
key statistical
data
Small areas
Cadastre and addresses
Other core spatial datasets
Current data supply not
suitable for planning. Call
for innovative approaches
to provide the required
statistical data for planning.
Strong case for the spatial
management of municipal
financial data.
Implying integrated geostatistical information
systems, from National to
below the municipal level.
Framework geographies
with identifiers and
classifiers
Aligning policy will imply
standard geographical
boundaries.
Policy design and implementation
National priorities
more jobs, united state, more infrastructure,
better education and health, adequate housing
– better quality of life
Aligning policy will imply
mechanisms (like a small
spatial unit with regular key
statistical denominators)
that can aggregate to other
geographical levels
Having a national statistical
system that underpins
development planning: a
spatial expression of facts &
figures
Thank You
email: [email protected]
Acknowledgements - Danie, Herman, Amanda & Prof Geyer from CRUISE.
Slide 9
The reshaping of urban structure in
South Africa through municipal
capital investment:
Evidence from 3 municipalities
Sharthi Laldaparsad, EM Policy Research
Statistics South Africa
• Well known structural and morphological deficiencies of SA
cities
SETTLEMENT TYPE
City regions and cities (e.g CoJ,
CT, eThekwini, Nelson-Mandela Bay,
etc.)
Other towns and settlements
(excluding dispersed rural
settlements)
% POPULATION
% ECONOMY
2001
2011
(2007)
46.0
49.7
69
28.2
27.7
23
Source: Stats SA & CSIR, 2013; NUDF, 2009
• Importance
Continues to be the primary sites of population growth
Drivers of economic growth
Concentration of poverty, social and ecological challenges
• The RDP in 1994 introduced spatial planning concepts such as “the
need to break down the apartheid geography through land reform,
more compact cities and decent public transport” (1994:83) and
“densification and unification of the urban fabric” (1994:86).
• “Since 1994, densities have increased in some urban areas and there
has also been partial regeneration of inner cities, but, overall, little
progress has been made in reversing apartheid geography, and in
some cases the divides have been exacerbated” (NDP 2011: 238).
• For nearly 20 years, the concept of “restructuring South African cities”
remained at the top of the urban spatial planning agenda.
• Since 1994 several policies and legislative mechanisms were implemented to
transform the spatial landscape of SA.
• SDFs are regarded as the key spatial restructuring tool for local municipalities.
• Perhaps the most under-recognised instrument for spatial restructuring is the
municipal budget itself.
• The need has arose for a comprehensive spatial vision for the country.
• A strategic approach to capital investment is essential to enable spatial
transformation.
• Infrastructure planning more powerful in shaping the spatial structure of
cities than spatial planning (Todes, 2008).
• Aligning & integrating the two, effective restructuring mechanism for local
municipalities. To what extent is there alignment in the City of Jo’Burg, City of
Cape Town, & the Rustenburg Local Municipality.
The presentation looks at • the capital investment patterns in 3 municipalities of South Africa
over the five-year period, 2007/8 to 2011/12.
• whether municipal capital spending patterns have contributed to
reshaping the spatial structure of the municipalities.
• whether municipal capital investment follows the strategic vision
of the IDPs and the SDFs.
• the statistical and geographical frameworks underpinning such
planning.
Capital spending for the five-year period
Capital spending has largely
benefitted key historical economic
hubs. Other areas have benefited
but to a lesser extent.
CoJ
Capital
expenditure (% of
CoCT
RLM
Average
15
21.5
16.7
17.7
municipal budget)
Capital spending between 15-21% of
municipal budget. Over 80% spent
on basic services infrastructure.
Economic (%)
2.4
1.2
1.1
1.5
Social (%)
4.4
6.8
7.2
6.1
Given budget constraints more
motivation to align policies.
Housing (%)
10.2
8.1
3.1
7.1
Infrastructure (%)
81.1
81.4
86.6
83.0
The City of Jo’Burg
Economic spending:
south, south east parts
of the city (CBD, City
Deep, Devland); parts of
Soweto.
Social spending: parts of
Soweto; City Centre,
Cosmos City
Housing spending:
southern parts, eastwest corridor; also in
Cosmos City.
Infrastructure spending:
City Centre, Cosmos City,
Diepsloot area.
The City of Jo’Burg
Highest spending in the consolidation area (public transport, soccer infrastructure,
inner city regeneration), although SDF strategy mentions it should limit spending
there.
Spending for new housing development outside the densification priority area and
movement system of the city. Mixed-use and industrial nodes have attracted higher
levels of capital spending.
Central city areas have attracted high levels of capital spending, whilst
other public transport management areas have not.
The City of Cape Town
Economic spending: CBD, southeast parts of the City; urban
regeneration areas like Mfuleni,
Maccassar, Khayelitsha.
Social spending: CBD, southeast parts of the City like Langa,
Blue Downs, Khayelitsha.
Housing spending: southern &
south-east suburbs (Belhar,
Khayelitsha, Bellmont Park), far
north-western parts (Atlantis),
Kuilsrivier & Brackenfell areas.
Infrastructure spending: In and
around the CBD (Green Point,
Milnerton areas).
The City of Cape Town
Accessibility grid in and around the CBD have attracted high capital
spending.
IRT (phase 1) has influenced spending patterns. Areas in the far north, not
part of the accessibility grid, linked thro IRT.
Parts of the marginalised area in the SE of the city have received capital
spending, but much lower than the designated metropolitan nodes.
The Rustenburg LM
Economic spending:
north-western areas,
north of the central city,
later years eastern parts.
Social spending: higher
density low income
areas like Meriting,
Freedom Park, Phokeng.
Housing spending: new
housing development
close to central city, then
also to rural settlements.
Infrastructure spending:
in and around the central
city; also low income
residential areas like
Meriting.
Rustenburg Local Municipality
Areas where residential, industrial and commercial development nodes are
defined, have attracted higher levels of capital investment.
With the exception of the central areas, both the rapid bus transport system
and the development corridor did not attract substantial capital spending.
Concluding statements on the integration:
Some concepts of the SDF strategies did indeed influenced
capital spending patterns, however there is still significant
scope to improve on the integration and alignment.
All case-study municipalities identified measures to manage urban growth (urban
edge, compaction, densification, development corridors, viable nodes).
And to address connectivity (BRT, IRT, Rapid Bus Transport system).
Public transport corridors (focus areas for development & intensification) has high
levels of influence over investment in the City of Cape Town, but less pronounced
in the City of Jo’Burg & Rustenburg LM.
Areas identified as development nodes (residential, industrial, commercial)
generally attracted higher levels of capital spending.
There is evidence of capital spending directed towards marginalised areas,
although the central core is the main focus. Mainly due to urban renewal & the
main centre of the transport system.
There are evidence of integrated spending for housing projects & its infrastructure.
Although many housing projects are located outside the main development &
accessibility areas, municipalities are using expensive transport infrastructure
investment to connect fragmented settlements.
Government’s unique capacity to secure
consensus between public & private capital
investment, enabling the achievement of multiple
development aims such as economic
development, employment creation and service
delivery (UN-Habitat, 2008).
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Proportion of
persons
employed
2001
58.4
2011
63.3
Unemployment
rate (expanded)
24.0
18.4
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
CAPEX 2011
CAPEX 2012
CAPEX 2011
CAPEX 2012
Stats SA collects CAPEX data from National, Provincial, District, Municipal public
entities; and public corporations.
Important source for empirical evidence on the implications of infrastructure
spending: does it contribute to growth in SA? Does it reduce poverty?
Data must be spatial referenced – location of spending.
SDFs must give direction to capital expenditure.
Municipal integrated geostatistical system
Provincial integrated geostatistical system
National
Municipal and provincial
Regions
Wards
Settlements
National integrated
geo-statistical
system
Dissemination
geographies with
key statistical
data
Small areas
Cadastre and addresses
Other core spatial datasets
Current data supply not
suitable for planning. Call
for innovative approaches
to provide the required
statistical data for planning.
Strong case for the spatial
management of municipal
financial data.
Implying integrated geostatistical information
systems, from National to
below the municipal level.
Framework geographies
with identifiers and
classifiers
Aligning policy will imply
standard geographical
boundaries.
Policy design and implementation
National priorities
more jobs, united state, more infrastructure,
better education and health, adequate housing
– better quality of life
Aligning policy will imply
mechanisms (like a small
spatial unit with regular key
statistical denominators)
that can aggregate to other
geographical levels
Having a national statistical
system that underpins
development planning: a
spatial expression of facts &
figures
Thank You
email: [email protected]
Acknowledgements - Danie, Herman, Amanda & Prof Geyer from CRUISE.
Slide 10
The reshaping of urban structure in
South Africa through municipal
capital investment:
Evidence from 3 municipalities
Sharthi Laldaparsad, EM Policy Research
Statistics South Africa
• Well known structural and morphological deficiencies of SA
cities
SETTLEMENT TYPE
City regions and cities (e.g CoJ,
CT, eThekwini, Nelson-Mandela Bay,
etc.)
Other towns and settlements
(excluding dispersed rural
settlements)
% POPULATION
% ECONOMY
2001
2011
(2007)
46.0
49.7
69
28.2
27.7
23
Source: Stats SA & CSIR, 2013; NUDF, 2009
• Importance
Continues to be the primary sites of population growth
Drivers of economic growth
Concentration of poverty, social and ecological challenges
• The RDP in 1994 introduced spatial planning concepts such as “the
need to break down the apartheid geography through land reform,
more compact cities and decent public transport” (1994:83) and
“densification and unification of the urban fabric” (1994:86).
• “Since 1994, densities have increased in some urban areas and there
has also been partial regeneration of inner cities, but, overall, little
progress has been made in reversing apartheid geography, and in
some cases the divides have been exacerbated” (NDP 2011: 238).
• For nearly 20 years, the concept of “restructuring South African cities”
remained at the top of the urban spatial planning agenda.
• Since 1994 several policies and legislative mechanisms were implemented to
transform the spatial landscape of SA.
• SDFs are regarded as the key spatial restructuring tool for local municipalities.
• Perhaps the most under-recognised instrument for spatial restructuring is the
municipal budget itself.
• The need has arose for a comprehensive spatial vision for the country.
• A strategic approach to capital investment is essential to enable spatial
transformation.
• Infrastructure planning more powerful in shaping the spatial structure of
cities than spatial planning (Todes, 2008).
• Aligning & integrating the two, effective restructuring mechanism for local
municipalities. To what extent is there alignment in the City of Jo’Burg, City of
Cape Town, & the Rustenburg Local Municipality.
The presentation looks at • the capital investment patterns in 3 municipalities of South Africa
over the five-year period, 2007/8 to 2011/12.
• whether municipal capital spending patterns have contributed to
reshaping the spatial structure of the municipalities.
• whether municipal capital investment follows the strategic vision
of the IDPs and the SDFs.
• the statistical and geographical frameworks underpinning such
planning.
Capital spending for the five-year period
Capital spending has largely
benefitted key historical economic
hubs. Other areas have benefited
but to a lesser extent.
CoJ
Capital
expenditure (% of
CoCT
RLM
Average
15
21.5
16.7
17.7
municipal budget)
Capital spending between 15-21% of
municipal budget. Over 80% spent
on basic services infrastructure.
Economic (%)
2.4
1.2
1.1
1.5
Social (%)
4.4
6.8
7.2
6.1
Given budget constraints more
motivation to align policies.
Housing (%)
10.2
8.1
3.1
7.1
Infrastructure (%)
81.1
81.4
86.6
83.0
The City of Jo’Burg
Economic spending:
south, south east parts
of the city (CBD, City
Deep, Devland); parts of
Soweto.
Social spending: parts of
Soweto; City Centre,
Cosmos City
Housing spending:
southern parts, eastwest corridor; also in
Cosmos City.
Infrastructure spending:
City Centre, Cosmos City,
Diepsloot area.
The City of Jo’Burg
Highest spending in the consolidation area (public transport, soccer infrastructure,
inner city regeneration), although SDF strategy mentions it should limit spending
there.
Spending for new housing development outside the densification priority area and
movement system of the city. Mixed-use and industrial nodes have attracted higher
levels of capital spending.
Central city areas have attracted high levels of capital spending, whilst
other public transport management areas have not.
The City of Cape Town
Economic spending: CBD, southeast parts of the City; urban
regeneration areas like Mfuleni,
Maccassar, Khayelitsha.
Social spending: CBD, southeast parts of the City like Langa,
Blue Downs, Khayelitsha.
Housing spending: southern &
south-east suburbs (Belhar,
Khayelitsha, Bellmont Park), far
north-western parts (Atlantis),
Kuilsrivier & Brackenfell areas.
Infrastructure spending: In and
around the CBD (Green Point,
Milnerton areas).
The City of Cape Town
Accessibility grid in and around the CBD have attracted high capital
spending.
IRT (phase 1) has influenced spending patterns. Areas in the far north, not
part of the accessibility grid, linked thro IRT.
Parts of the marginalised area in the SE of the city have received capital
spending, but much lower than the designated metropolitan nodes.
The Rustenburg LM
Economic spending:
north-western areas,
north of the central city,
later years eastern parts.
Social spending: higher
density low income
areas like Meriting,
Freedom Park, Phokeng.
Housing spending: new
housing development
close to central city, then
also to rural settlements.
Infrastructure spending:
in and around the central
city; also low income
residential areas like
Meriting.
Rustenburg Local Municipality
Areas where residential, industrial and commercial development nodes are
defined, have attracted higher levels of capital investment.
With the exception of the central areas, both the rapid bus transport system
and the development corridor did not attract substantial capital spending.
Concluding statements on the integration:
Some concepts of the SDF strategies did indeed influenced
capital spending patterns, however there is still significant
scope to improve on the integration and alignment.
All case-study municipalities identified measures to manage urban growth (urban
edge, compaction, densification, development corridors, viable nodes).
And to address connectivity (BRT, IRT, Rapid Bus Transport system).
Public transport corridors (focus areas for development & intensification) has high
levels of influence over investment in the City of Cape Town, but less pronounced
in the City of Jo’Burg & Rustenburg LM.
Areas identified as development nodes (residential, industrial, commercial)
generally attracted higher levels of capital spending.
There is evidence of capital spending directed towards marginalised areas,
although the central core is the main focus. Mainly due to urban renewal & the
main centre of the transport system.
There are evidence of integrated spending for housing projects & its infrastructure.
Although many housing projects are located outside the main development &
accessibility areas, municipalities are using expensive transport infrastructure
investment to connect fragmented settlements.
Government’s unique capacity to secure
consensus between public & private capital
investment, enabling the achievement of multiple
development aims such as economic
development, employment creation and service
delivery (UN-Habitat, 2008).
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Proportion of
persons
employed
2001
58.4
2011
63.3
Unemployment
rate (expanded)
24.0
18.4
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
CAPEX 2011
CAPEX 2012
CAPEX 2011
CAPEX 2012
Stats SA collects CAPEX data from National, Provincial, District, Municipal public
entities; and public corporations.
Important source for empirical evidence on the implications of infrastructure
spending: does it contribute to growth in SA? Does it reduce poverty?
Data must be spatial referenced – location of spending.
SDFs must give direction to capital expenditure.
Municipal integrated geostatistical system
Provincial integrated geostatistical system
National
Municipal and provincial
Regions
Wards
Settlements
National integrated
geo-statistical
system
Dissemination
geographies with
key statistical
data
Small areas
Cadastre and addresses
Other core spatial datasets
Current data supply not
suitable for planning. Call
for innovative approaches
to provide the required
statistical data for planning.
Strong case for the spatial
management of municipal
financial data.
Implying integrated geostatistical information
systems, from National to
below the municipal level.
Framework geographies
with identifiers and
classifiers
Aligning policy will imply
standard geographical
boundaries.
Policy design and implementation
National priorities
more jobs, united state, more infrastructure,
better education and health, adequate housing
– better quality of life
Aligning policy will imply
mechanisms (like a small
spatial unit with regular key
statistical denominators)
that can aggregate to other
geographical levels
Having a national statistical
system that underpins
development planning: a
spatial expression of facts &
figures
Thank You
email: [email protected]
Acknowledgements - Danie, Herman, Amanda & Prof Geyer from CRUISE.
Slide 11
The reshaping of urban structure in
South Africa through municipal
capital investment:
Evidence from 3 municipalities
Sharthi Laldaparsad, EM Policy Research
Statistics South Africa
• Well known structural and morphological deficiencies of SA
cities
SETTLEMENT TYPE
City regions and cities (e.g CoJ,
CT, eThekwini, Nelson-Mandela Bay,
etc.)
Other towns and settlements
(excluding dispersed rural
settlements)
% POPULATION
% ECONOMY
2001
2011
(2007)
46.0
49.7
69
28.2
27.7
23
Source: Stats SA & CSIR, 2013; NUDF, 2009
• Importance
Continues to be the primary sites of population growth
Drivers of economic growth
Concentration of poverty, social and ecological challenges
• The RDP in 1994 introduced spatial planning concepts such as “the
need to break down the apartheid geography through land reform,
more compact cities and decent public transport” (1994:83) and
“densification and unification of the urban fabric” (1994:86).
• “Since 1994, densities have increased in some urban areas and there
has also been partial regeneration of inner cities, but, overall, little
progress has been made in reversing apartheid geography, and in
some cases the divides have been exacerbated” (NDP 2011: 238).
• For nearly 20 years, the concept of “restructuring South African cities”
remained at the top of the urban spatial planning agenda.
• Since 1994 several policies and legislative mechanisms were implemented to
transform the spatial landscape of SA.
• SDFs are regarded as the key spatial restructuring tool for local municipalities.
• Perhaps the most under-recognised instrument for spatial restructuring is the
municipal budget itself.
• The need has arose for a comprehensive spatial vision for the country.
• A strategic approach to capital investment is essential to enable spatial
transformation.
• Infrastructure planning more powerful in shaping the spatial structure of
cities than spatial planning (Todes, 2008).
• Aligning & integrating the two, effective restructuring mechanism for local
municipalities. To what extent is there alignment in the City of Jo’Burg, City of
Cape Town, & the Rustenburg Local Municipality.
The presentation looks at • the capital investment patterns in 3 municipalities of South Africa
over the five-year period, 2007/8 to 2011/12.
• whether municipal capital spending patterns have contributed to
reshaping the spatial structure of the municipalities.
• whether municipal capital investment follows the strategic vision
of the IDPs and the SDFs.
• the statistical and geographical frameworks underpinning such
planning.
Capital spending for the five-year period
Capital spending has largely
benefitted key historical economic
hubs. Other areas have benefited
but to a lesser extent.
CoJ
Capital
expenditure (% of
CoCT
RLM
Average
15
21.5
16.7
17.7
municipal budget)
Capital spending between 15-21% of
municipal budget. Over 80% spent
on basic services infrastructure.
Economic (%)
2.4
1.2
1.1
1.5
Social (%)
4.4
6.8
7.2
6.1
Given budget constraints more
motivation to align policies.
Housing (%)
10.2
8.1
3.1
7.1
Infrastructure (%)
81.1
81.4
86.6
83.0
The City of Jo’Burg
Economic spending:
south, south east parts
of the city (CBD, City
Deep, Devland); parts of
Soweto.
Social spending: parts of
Soweto; City Centre,
Cosmos City
Housing spending:
southern parts, eastwest corridor; also in
Cosmos City.
Infrastructure spending:
City Centre, Cosmos City,
Diepsloot area.
The City of Jo’Burg
Highest spending in the consolidation area (public transport, soccer infrastructure,
inner city regeneration), although SDF strategy mentions it should limit spending
there.
Spending for new housing development outside the densification priority area and
movement system of the city. Mixed-use and industrial nodes have attracted higher
levels of capital spending.
Central city areas have attracted high levels of capital spending, whilst
other public transport management areas have not.
The City of Cape Town
Economic spending: CBD, southeast parts of the City; urban
regeneration areas like Mfuleni,
Maccassar, Khayelitsha.
Social spending: CBD, southeast parts of the City like Langa,
Blue Downs, Khayelitsha.
Housing spending: southern &
south-east suburbs (Belhar,
Khayelitsha, Bellmont Park), far
north-western parts (Atlantis),
Kuilsrivier & Brackenfell areas.
Infrastructure spending: In and
around the CBD (Green Point,
Milnerton areas).
The City of Cape Town
Accessibility grid in and around the CBD have attracted high capital
spending.
IRT (phase 1) has influenced spending patterns. Areas in the far north, not
part of the accessibility grid, linked thro IRT.
Parts of the marginalised area in the SE of the city have received capital
spending, but much lower than the designated metropolitan nodes.
The Rustenburg LM
Economic spending:
north-western areas,
north of the central city,
later years eastern parts.
Social spending: higher
density low income
areas like Meriting,
Freedom Park, Phokeng.
Housing spending: new
housing development
close to central city, then
also to rural settlements.
Infrastructure spending:
in and around the central
city; also low income
residential areas like
Meriting.
Rustenburg Local Municipality
Areas where residential, industrial and commercial development nodes are
defined, have attracted higher levels of capital investment.
With the exception of the central areas, both the rapid bus transport system
and the development corridor did not attract substantial capital spending.
Concluding statements on the integration:
Some concepts of the SDF strategies did indeed influenced
capital spending patterns, however there is still significant
scope to improve on the integration and alignment.
All case-study municipalities identified measures to manage urban growth (urban
edge, compaction, densification, development corridors, viable nodes).
And to address connectivity (BRT, IRT, Rapid Bus Transport system).
Public transport corridors (focus areas for development & intensification) has high
levels of influence over investment in the City of Cape Town, but less pronounced
in the City of Jo’Burg & Rustenburg LM.
Areas identified as development nodes (residential, industrial, commercial)
generally attracted higher levels of capital spending.
There is evidence of capital spending directed towards marginalised areas,
although the central core is the main focus. Mainly due to urban renewal & the
main centre of the transport system.
There are evidence of integrated spending for housing projects & its infrastructure.
Although many housing projects are located outside the main development &
accessibility areas, municipalities are using expensive transport infrastructure
investment to connect fragmented settlements.
Government’s unique capacity to secure
consensus between public & private capital
investment, enabling the achievement of multiple
development aims such as economic
development, employment creation and service
delivery (UN-Habitat, 2008).
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Proportion of
persons
employed
2001
58.4
2011
63.3
Unemployment
rate (expanded)
24.0
18.4
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
CAPEX 2011
CAPEX 2012
CAPEX 2011
CAPEX 2012
Stats SA collects CAPEX data from National, Provincial, District, Municipal public
entities; and public corporations.
Important source for empirical evidence on the implications of infrastructure
spending: does it contribute to growth in SA? Does it reduce poverty?
Data must be spatial referenced – location of spending.
SDFs must give direction to capital expenditure.
Municipal integrated geostatistical system
Provincial integrated geostatistical system
National
Municipal and provincial
Regions
Wards
Settlements
National integrated
geo-statistical
system
Dissemination
geographies with
key statistical
data
Small areas
Cadastre and addresses
Other core spatial datasets
Current data supply not
suitable for planning. Call
for innovative approaches
to provide the required
statistical data for planning.
Strong case for the spatial
management of municipal
financial data.
Implying integrated geostatistical information
systems, from National to
below the municipal level.
Framework geographies
with identifiers and
classifiers
Aligning policy will imply
standard geographical
boundaries.
Policy design and implementation
National priorities
more jobs, united state, more infrastructure,
better education and health, adequate housing
– better quality of life
Aligning policy will imply
mechanisms (like a small
spatial unit with regular key
statistical denominators)
that can aggregate to other
geographical levels
Having a national statistical
system that underpins
development planning: a
spatial expression of facts &
figures
Thank You
email: [email protected]
Acknowledgements - Danie, Herman, Amanda & Prof Geyer from CRUISE.
Slide 12
The reshaping of urban structure in
South Africa through municipal
capital investment:
Evidence from 3 municipalities
Sharthi Laldaparsad, EM Policy Research
Statistics South Africa
• Well known structural and morphological deficiencies of SA
cities
SETTLEMENT TYPE
City regions and cities (e.g CoJ,
CT, eThekwini, Nelson-Mandela Bay,
etc.)
Other towns and settlements
(excluding dispersed rural
settlements)
% POPULATION
% ECONOMY
2001
2011
(2007)
46.0
49.7
69
28.2
27.7
23
Source: Stats SA & CSIR, 2013; NUDF, 2009
• Importance
Continues to be the primary sites of population growth
Drivers of economic growth
Concentration of poverty, social and ecological challenges
• The RDP in 1994 introduced spatial planning concepts such as “the
need to break down the apartheid geography through land reform,
more compact cities and decent public transport” (1994:83) and
“densification and unification of the urban fabric” (1994:86).
• “Since 1994, densities have increased in some urban areas and there
has also been partial regeneration of inner cities, but, overall, little
progress has been made in reversing apartheid geography, and in
some cases the divides have been exacerbated” (NDP 2011: 238).
• For nearly 20 years, the concept of “restructuring South African cities”
remained at the top of the urban spatial planning agenda.
• Since 1994 several policies and legislative mechanisms were implemented to
transform the spatial landscape of SA.
• SDFs are regarded as the key spatial restructuring tool for local municipalities.
• Perhaps the most under-recognised instrument for spatial restructuring is the
municipal budget itself.
• The need has arose for a comprehensive spatial vision for the country.
• A strategic approach to capital investment is essential to enable spatial
transformation.
• Infrastructure planning more powerful in shaping the spatial structure of
cities than spatial planning (Todes, 2008).
• Aligning & integrating the two, effective restructuring mechanism for local
municipalities. To what extent is there alignment in the City of Jo’Burg, City of
Cape Town, & the Rustenburg Local Municipality.
The presentation looks at • the capital investment patterns in 3 municipalities of South Africa
over the five-year period, 2007/8 to 2011/12.
• whether municipal capital spending patterns have contributed to
reshaping the spatial structure of the municipalities.
• whether municipal capital investment follows the strategic vision
of the IDPs and the SDFs.
• the statistical and geographical frameworks underpinning such
planning.
Capital spending for the five-year period
Capital spending has largely
benefitted key historical economic
hubs. Other areas have benefited
but to a lesser extent.
CoJ
Capital
expenditure (% of
CoCT
RLM
Average
15
21.5
16.7
17.7
municipal budget)
Capital spending between 15-21% of
municipal budget. Over 80% spent
on basic services infrastructure.
Economic (%)
2.4
1.2
1.1
1.5
Social (%)
4.4
6.8
7.2
6.1
Given budget constraints more
motivation to align policies.
Housing (%)
10.2
8.1
3.1
7.1
Infrastructure (%)
81.1
81.4
86.6
83.0
The City of Jo’Burg
Economic spending:
south, south east parts
of the city (CBD, City
Deep, Devland); parts of
Soweto.
Social spending: parts of
Soweto; City Centre,
Cosmos City
Housing spending:
southern parts, eastwest corridor; also in
Cosmos City.
Infrastructure spending:
City Centre, Cosmos City,
Diepsloot area.
The City of Jo’Burg
Highest spending in the consolidation area (public transport, soccer infrastructure,
inner city regeneration), although SDF strategy mentions it should limit spending
there.
Spending for new housing development outside the densification priority area and
movement system of the city. Mixed-use and industrial nodes have attracted higher
levels of capital spending.
Central city areas have attracted high levels of capital spending, whilst
other public transport management areas have not.
The City of Cape Town
Economic spending: CBD, southeast parts of the City; urban
regeneration areas like Mfuleni,
Maccassar, Khayelitsha.
Social spending: CBD, southeast parts of the City like Langa,
Blue Downs, Khayelitsha.
Housing spending: southern &
south-east suburbs (Belhar,
Khayelitsha, Bellmont Park), far
north-western parts (Atlantis),
Kuilsrivier & Brackenfell areas.
Infrastructure spending: In and
around the CBD (Green Point,
Milnerton areas).
The City of Cape Town
Accessibility grid in and around the CBD have attracted high capital
spending.
IRT (phase 1) has influenced spending patterns. Areas in the far north, not
part of the accessibility grid, linked thro IRT.
Parts of the marginalised area in the SE of the city have received capital
spending, but much lower than the designated metropolitan nodes.
The Rustenburg LM
Economic spending:
north-western areas,
north of the central city,
later years eastern parts.
Social spending: higher
density low income
areas like Meriting,
Freedom Park, Phokeng.
Housing spending: new
housing development
close to central city, then
also to rural settlements.
Infrastructure spending:
in and around the central
city; also low income
residential areas like
Meriting.
Rustenburg Local Municipality
Areas where residential, industrial and commercial development nodes are
defined, have attracted higher levels of capital investment.
With the exception of the central areas, both the rapid bus transport system
and the development corridor did not attract substantial capital spending.
Concluding statements on the integration:
Some concepts of the SDF strategies did indeed influenced
capital spending patterns, however there is still significant
scope to improve on the integration and alignment.
All case-study municipalities identified measures to manage urban growth (urban
edge, compaction, densification, development corridors, viable nodes).
And to address connectivity (BRT, IRT, Rapid Bus Transport system).
Public transport corridors (focus areas for development & intensification) has high
levels of influence over investment in the City of Cape Town, but less pronounced
in the City of Jo’Burg & Rustenburg LM.
Areas identified as development nodes (residential, industrial, commercial)
generally attracted higher levels of capital spending.
There is evidence of capital spending directed towards marginalised areas,
although the central core is the main focus. Mainly due to urban renewal & the
main centre of the transport system.
There are evidence of integrated spending for housing projects & its infrastructure.
Although many housing projects are located outside the main development &
accessibility areas, municipalities are using expensive transport infrastructure
investment to connect fragmented settlements.
Government’s unique capacity to secure
consensus between public & private capital
investment, enabling the achievement of multiple
development aims such as economic
development, employment creation and service
delivery (UN-Habitat, 2008).
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Proportion of
persons
employed
2001
58.4
2011
63.3
Unemployment
rate (expanded)
24.0
18.4
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
CAPEX 2011
CAPEX 2012
CAPEX 2011
CAPEX 2012
Stats SA collects CAPEX data from National, Provincial, District, Municipal public
entities; and public corporations.
Important source for empirical evidence on the implications of infrastructure
spending: does it contribute to growth in SA? Does it reduce poverty?
Data must be spatial referenced – location of spending.
SDFs must give direction to capital expenditure.
Municipal integrated geostatistical system
Provincial integrated geostatistical system
National
Municipal and provincial
Regions
Wards
Settlements
National integrated
geo-statistical
system
Dissemination
geographies with
key statistical
data
Small areas
Cadastre and addresses
Other core spatial datasets
Current data supply not
suitable for planning. Call
for innovative approaches
to provide the required
statistical data for planning.
Strong case for the spatial
management of municipal
financial data.
Implying integrated geostatistical information
systems, from National to
below the municipal level.
Framework geographies
with identifiers and
classifiers
Aligning policy will imply
standard geographical
boundaries.
Policy design and implementation
National priorities
more jobs, united state, more infrastructure,
better education and health, adequate housing
– better quality of life
Aligning policy will imply
mechanisms (like a small
spatial unit with regular key
statistical denominators)
that can aggregate to other
geographical levels
Having a national statistical
system that underpins
development planning: a
spatial expression of facts &
figures
Thank You
email: [email protected]
Acknowledgements - Danie, Herman, Amanda & Prof Geyer from CRUISE.
Slide 13
The reshaping of urban structure in
South Africa through municipal
capital investment:
Evidence from 3 municipalities
Sharthi Laldaparsad, EM Policy Research
Statistics South Africa
• Well known structural and morphological deficiencies of SA
cities
SETTLEMENT TYPE
City regions and cities (e.g CoJ,
CT, eThekwini, Nelson-Mandela Bay,
etc.)
Other towns and settlements
(excluding dispersed rural
settlements)
% POPULATION
% ECONOMY
2001
2011
(2007)
46.0
49.7
69
28.2
27.7
23
Source: Stats SA & CSIR, 2013; NUDF, 2009
• Importance
Continues to be the primary sites of population growth
Drivers of economic growth
Concentration of poverty, social and ecological challenges
• The RDP in 1994 introduced spatial planning concepts such as “the
need to break down the apartheid geography through land reform,
more compact cities and decent public transport” (1994:83) and
“densification and unification of the urban fabric” (1994:86).
• “Since 1994, densities have increased in some urban areas and there
has also been partial regeneration of inner cities, but, overall, little
progress has been made in reversing apartheid geography, and in
some cases the divides have been exacerbated” (NDP 2011: 238).
• For nearly 20 years, the concept of “restructuring South African cities”
remained at the top of the urban spatial planning agenda.
• Since 1994 several policies and legislative mechanisms were implemented to
transform the spatial landscape of SA.
• SDFs are regarded as the key spatial restructuring tool for local municipalities.
• Perhaps the most under-recognised instrument for spatial restructuring is the
municipal budget itself.
• The need has arose for a comprehensive spatial vision for the country.
• A strategic approach to capital investment is essential to enable spatial
transformation.
• Infrastructure planning more powerful in shaping the spatial structure of
cities than spatial planning (Todes, 2008).
• Aligning & integrating the two, effective restructuring mechanism for local
municipalities. To what extent is there alignment in the City of Jo’Burg, City of
Cape Town, & the Rustenburg Local Municipality.
The presentation looks at • the capital investment patterns in 3 municipalities of South Africa
over the five-year period, 2007/8 to 2011/12.
• whether municipal capital spending patterns have contributed to
reshaping the spatial structure of the municipalities.
• whether municipal capital investment follows the strategic vision
of the IDPs and the SDFs.
• the statistical and geographical frameworks underpinning such
planning.
Capital spending for the five-year period
Capital spending has largely
benefitted key historical economic
hubs. Other areas have benefited
but to a lesser extent.
CoJ
Capital
expenditure (% of
CoCT
RLM
Average
15
21.5
16.7
17.7
municipal budget)
Capital spending between 15-21% of
municipal budget. Over 80% spent
on basic services infrastructure.
Economic (%)
2.4
1.2
1.1
1.5
Social (%)
4.4
6.8
7.2
6.1
Given budget constraints more
motivation to align policies.
Housing (%)
10.2
8.1
3.1
7.1
Infrastructure (%)
81.1
81.4
86.6
83.0
The City of Jo’Burg
Economic spending:
south, south east parts
of the city (CBD, City
Deep, Devland); parts of
Soweto.
Social spending: parts of
Soweto; City Centre,
Cosmos City
Housing spending:
southern parts, eastwest corridor; also in
Cosmos City.
Infrastructure spending:
City Centre, Cosmos City,
Diepsloot area.
The City of Jo’Burg
Highest spending in the consolidation area (public transport, soccer infrastructure,
inner city regeneration), although SDF strategy mentions it should limit spending
there.
Spending for new housing development outside the densification priority area and
movement system of the city. Mixed-use and industrial nodes have attracted higher
levels of capital spending.
Central city areas have attracted high levels of capital spending, whilst
other public transport management areas have not.
The City of Cape Town
Economic spending: CBD, southeast parts of the City; urban
regeneration areas like Mfuleni,
Maccassar, Khayelitsha.
Social spending: CBD, southeast parts of the City like Langa,
Blue Downs, Khayelitsha.
Housing spending: southern &
south-east suburbs (Belhar,
Khayelitsha, Bellmont Park), far
north-western parts (Atlantis),
Kuilsrivier & Brackenfell areas.
Infrastructure spending: In and
around the CBD (Green Point,
Milnerton areas).
The City of Cape Town
Accessibility grid in and around the CBD have attracted high capital
spending.
IRT (phase 1) has influenced spending patterns. Areas in the far north, not
part of the accessibility grid, linked thro IRT.
Parts of the marginalised area in the SE of the city have received capital
spending, but much lower than the designated metropolitan nodes.
The Rustenburg LM
Economic spending:
north-western areas,
north of the central city,
later years eastern parts.
Social spending: higher
density low income
areas like Meriting,
Freedom Park, Phokeng.
Housing spending: new
housing development
close to central city, then
also to rural settlements.
Infrastructure spending:
in and around the central
city; also low income
residential areas like
Meriting.
Rustenburg Local Municipality
Areas where residential, industrial and commercial development nodes are
defined, have attracted higher levels of capital investment.
With the exception of the central areas, both the rapid bus transport system
and the development corridor did not attract substantial capital spending.
Concluding statements on the integration:
Some concepts of the SDF strategies did indeed influenced
capital spending patterns, however there is still significant
scope to improve on the integration and alignment.
All case-study municipalities identified measures to manage urban growth (urban
edge, compaction, densification, development corridors, viable nodes).
And to address connectivity (BRT, IRT, Rapid Bus Transport system).
Public transport corridors (focus areas for development & intensification) has high
levels of influence over investment in the City of Cape Town, but less pronounced
in the City of Jo’Burg & Rustenburg LM.
Areas identified as development nodes (residential, industrial, commercial)
generally attracted higher levels of capital spending.
There is evidence of capital spending directed towards marginalised areas,
although the central core is the main focus. Mainly due to urban renewal & the
main centre of the transport system.
There are evidence of integrated spending for housing projects & its infrastructure.
Although many housing projects are located outside the main development &
accessibility areas, municipalities are using expensive transport infrastructure
investment to connect fragmented settlements.
Government’s unique capacity to secure
consensus between public & private capital
investment, enabling the achievement of multiple
development aims such as economic
development, employment creation and service
delivery (UN-Habitat, 2008).
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Proportion of
persons
employed
2001
58.4
2011
63.3
Unemployment
rate (expanded)
24.0
18.4
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
CAPEX 2011
CAPEX 2012
CAPEX 2011
CAPEX 2012
Stats SA collects CAPEX data from National, Provincial, District, Municipal public
entities; and public corporations.
Important source for empirical evidence on the implications of infrastructure
spending: does it contribute to growth in SA? Does it reduce poverty?
Data must be spatial referenced – location of spending.
SDFs must give direction to capital expenditure.
Municipal integrated geostatistical system
Provincial integrated geostatistical system
National
Municipal and provincial
Regions
Wards
Settlements
National integrated
geo-statistical
system
Dissemination
geographies with
key statistical
data
Small areas
Cadastre and addresses
Other core spatial datasets
Current data supply not
suitable for planning. Call
for innovative approaches
to provide the required
statistical data for planning.
Strong case for the spatial
management of municipal
financial data.
Implying integrated geostatistical information
systems, from National to
below the municipal level.
Framework geographies
with identifiers and
classifiers
Aligning policy will imply
standard geographical
boundaries.
Policy design and implementation
National priorities
more jobs, united state, more infrastructure,
better education and health, adequate housing
– better quality of life
Aligning policy will imply
mechanisms (like a small
spatial unit with regular key
statistical denominators)
that can aggregate to other
geographical levels
Having a national statistical
system that underpins
development planning: a
spatial expression of facts &
figures
Thank You
email: [email protected]
Acknowledgements - Danie, Herman, Amanda & Prof Geyer from CRUISE.
Slide 14
The reshaping of urban structure in
South Africa through municipal
capital investment:
Evidence from 3 municipalities
Sharthi Laldaparsad, EM Policy Research
Statistics South Africa
• Well known structural and morphological deficiencies of SA
cities
SETTLEMENT TYPE
City regions and cities (e.g CoJ,
CT, eThekwini, Nelson-Mandela Bay,
etc.)
Other towns and settlements
(excluding dispersed rural
settlements)
% POPULATION
% ECONOMY
2001
2011
(2007)
46.0
49.7
69
28.2
27.7
23
Source: Stats SA & CSIR, 2013; NUDF, 2009
• Importance
Continues to be the primary sites of population growth
Drivers of economic growth
Concentration of poverty, social and ecological challenges
• The RDP in 1994 introduced spatial planning concepts such as “the
need to break down the apartheid geography through land reform,
more compact cities and decent public transport” (1994:83) and
“densification and unification of the urban fabric” (1994:86).
• “Since 1994, densities have increased in some urban areas and there
has also been partial regeneration of inner cities, but, overall, little
progress has been made in reversing apartheid geography, and in
some cases the divides have been exacerbated” (NDP 2011: 238).
• For nearly 20 years, the concept of “restructuring South African cities”
remained at the top of the urban spatial planning agenda.
• Since 1994 several policies and legislative mechanisms were implemented to
transform the spatial landscape of SA.
• SDFs are regarded as the key spatial restructuring tool for local municipalities.
• Perhaps the most under-recognised instrument for spatial restructuring is the
municipal budget itself.
• The need has arose for a comprehensive spatial vision for the country.
• A strategic approach to capital investment is essential to enable spatial
transformation.
• Infrastructure planning more powerful in shaping the spatial structure of
cities than spatial planning (Todes, 2008).
• Aligning & integrating the two, effective restructuring mechanism for local
municipalities. To what extent is there alignment in the City of Jo’Burg, City of
Cape Town, & the Rustenburg Local Municipality.
The presentation looks at • the capital investment patterns in 3 municipalities of South Africa
over the five-year period, 2007/8 to 2011/12.
• whether municipal capital spending patterns have contributed to
reshaping the spatial structure of the municipalities.
• whether municipal capital investment follows the strategic vision
of the IDPs and the SDFs.
• the statistical and geographical frameworks underpinning such
planning.
Capital spending for the five-year period
Capital spending has largely
benefitted key historical economic
hubs. Other areas have benefited
but to a lesser extent.
CoJ
Capital
expenditure (% of
CoCT
RLM
Average
15
21.5
16.7
17.7
municipal budget)
Capital spending between 15-21% of
municipal budget. Over 80% spent
on basic services infrastructure.
Economic (%)
2.4
1.2
1.1
1.5
Social (%)
4.4
6.8
7.2
6.1
Given budget constraints more
motivation to align policies.
Housing (%)
10.2
8.1
3.1
7.1
Infrastructure (%)
81.1
81.4
86.6
83.0
The City of Jo’Burg
Economic spending:
south, south east parts
of the city (CBD, City
Deep, Devland); parts of
Soweto.
Social spending: parts of
Soweto; City Centre,
Cosmos City
Housing spending:
southern parts, eastwest corridor; also in
Cosmos City.
Infrastructure spending:
City Centre, Cosmos City,
Diepsloot area.
The City of Jo’Burg
Highest spending in the consolidation area (public transport, soccer infrastructure,
inner city regeneration), although SDF strategy mentions it should limit spending
there.
Spending for new housing development outside the densification priority area and
movement system of the city. Mixed-use and industrial nodes have attracted higher
levels of capital spending.
Central city areas have attracted high levels of capital spending, whilst
other public transport management areas have not.
The City of Cape Town
Economic spending: CBD, southeast parts of the City; urban
regeneration areas like Mfuleni,
Maccassar, Khayelitsha.
Social spending: CBD, southeast parts of the City like Langa,
Blue Downs, Khayelitsha.
Housing spending: southern &
south-east suburbs (Belhar,
Khayelitsha, Bellmont Park), far
north-western parts (Atlantis),
Kuilsrivier & Brackenfell areas.
Infrastructure spending: In and
around the CBD (Green Point,
Milnerton areas).
The City of Cape Town
Accessibility grid in and around the CBD have attracted high capital
spending.
IRT (phase 1) has influenced spending patterns. Areas in the far north, not
part of the accessibility grid, linked thro IRT.
Parts of the marginalised area in the SE of the city have received capital
spending, but much lower than the designated metropolitan nodes.
The Rustenburg LM
Economic spending:
north-western areas,
north of the central city,
later years eastern parts.
Social spending: higher
density low income
areas like Meriting,
Freedom Park, Phokeng.
Housing spending: new
housing development
close to central city, then
also to rural settlements.
Infrastructure spending:
in and around the central
city; also low income
residential areas like
Meriting.
Rustenburg Local Municipality
Areas where residential, industrial and commercial development nodes are
defined, have attracted higher levels of capital investment.
With the exception of the central areas, both the rapid bus transport system
and the development corridor did not attract substantial capital spending.
Concluding statements on the integration:
Some concepts of the SDF strategies did indeed influenced
capital spending patterns, however there is still significant
scope to improve on the integration and alignment.
All case-study municipalities identified measures to manage urban growth (urban
edge, compaction, densification, development corridors, viable nodes).
And to address connectivity (BRT, IRT, Rapid Bus Transport system).
Public transport corridors (focus areas for development & intensification) has high
levels of influence over investment in the City of Cape Town, but less pronounced
in the City of Jo’Burg & Rustenburg LM.
Areas identified as development nodes (residential, industrial, commercial)
generally attracted higher levels of capital spending.
There is evidence of capital spending directed towards marginalised areas,
although the central core is the main focus. Mainly due to urban renewal & the
main centre of the transport system.
There are evidence of integrated spending for housing projects & its infrastructure.
Although many housing projects are located outside the main development &
accessibility areas, municipalities are using expensive transport infrastructure
investment to connect fragmented settlements.
Government’s unique capacity to secure
consensus between public & private capital
investment, enabling the achievement of multiple
development aims such as economic
development, employment creation and service
delivery (UN-Habitat, 2008).
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Proportion of
persons
employed
2001
58.4
2011
63.3
Unemployment
rate (expanded)
24.0
18.4
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
CAPEX 2011
CAPEX 2012
CAPEX 2011
CAPEX 2012
Stats SA collects CAPEX data from National, Provincial, District, Municipal public
entities; and public corporations.
Important source for empirical evidence on the implications of infrastructure
spending: does it contribute to growth in SA? Does it reduce poverty?
Data must be spatial referenced – location of spending.
SDFs must give direction to capital expenditure.
Municipal integrated geostatistical system
Provincial integrated geostatistical system
National
Municipal and provincial
Regions
Wards
Settlements
National integrated
geo-statistical
system
Dissemination
geographies with
key statistical
data
Small areas
Cadastre and addresses
Other core spatial datasets
Current data supply not
suitable for planning. Call
for innovative approaches
to provide the required
statistical data for planning.
Strong case for the spatial
management of municipal
financial data.
Implying integrated geostatistical information
systems, from National to
below the municipal level.
Framework geographies
with identifiers and
classifiers
Aligning policy will imply
standard geographical
boundaries.
Policy design and implementation
National priorities
more jobs, united state, more infrastructure,
better education and health, adequate housing
– better quality of life
Aligning policy will imply
mechanisms (like a small
spatial unit with regular key
statistical denominators)
that can aggregate to other
geographical levels
Having a national statistical
system that underpins
development planning: a
spatial expression of facts &
figures
Thank You
email: [email protected]
Acknowledgements - Danie, Herman, Amanda & Prof Geyer from CRUISE.
Slide 15
The reshaping of urban structure in
South Africa through municipal
capital investment:
Evidence from 3 municipalities
Sharthi Laldaparsad, EM Policy Research
Statistics South Africa
• Well known structural and morphological deficiencies of SA
cities
SETTLEMENT TYPE
City regions and cities (e.g CoJ,
CT, eThekwini, Nelson-Mandela Bay,
etc.)
Other towns and settlements
(excluding dispersed rural
settlements)
% POPULATION
% ECONOMY
2001
2011
(2007)
46.0
49.7
69
28.2
27.7
23
Source: Stats SA & CSIR, 2013; NUDF, 2009
• Importance
Continues to be the primary sites of population growth
Drivers of economic growth
Concentration of poverty, social and ecological challenges
• The RDP in 1994 introduced spatial planning concepts such as “the
need to break down the apartheid geography through land reform,
more compact cities and decent public transport” (1994:83) and
“densification and unification of the urban fabric” (1994:86).
• “Since 1994, densities have increased in some urban areas and there
has also been partial regeneration of inner cities, but, overall, little
progress has been made in reversing apartheid geography, and in
some cases the divides have been exacerbated” (NDP 2011: 238).
• For nearly 20 years, the concept of “restructuring South African cities”
remained at the top of the urban spatial planning agenda.
• Since 1994 several policies and legislative mechanisms were implemented to
transform the spatial landscape of SA.
• SDFs are regarded as the key spatial restructuring tool for local municipalities.
• Perhaps the most under-recognised instrument for spatial restructuring is the
municipal budget itself.
• The need has arose for a comprehensive spatial vision for the country.
• A strategic approach to capital investment is essential to enable spatial
transformation.
• Infrastructure planning more powerful in shaping the spatial structure of
cities than spatial planning (Todes, 2008).
• Aligning & integrating the two, effective restructuring mechanism for local
municipalities. To what extent is there alignment in the City of Jo’Burg, City of
Cape Town, & the Rustenburg Local Municipality.
The presentation looks at • the capital investment patterns in 3 municipalities of South Africa
over the five-year period, 2007/8 to 2011/12.
• whether municipal capital spending patterns have contributed to
reshaping the spatial structure of the municipalities.
• whether municipal capital investment follows the strategic vision
of the IDPs and the SDFs.
• the statistical and geographical frameworks underpinning such
planning.
Capital spending for the five-year period
Capital spending has largely
benefitted key historical economic
hubs. Other areas have benefited
but to a lesser extent.
CoJ
Capital
expenditure (% of
CoCT
RLM
Average
15
21.5
16.7
17.7
municipal budget)
Capital spending between 15-21% of
municipal budget. Over 80% spent
on basic services infrastructure.
Economic (%)
2.4
1.2
1.1
1.5
Social (%)
4.4
6.8
7.2
6.1
Given budget constraints more
motivation to align policies.
Housing (%)
10.2
8.1
3.1
7.1
Infrastructure (%)
81.1
81.4
86.6
83.0
The City of Jo’Burg
Economic spending:
south, south east parts
of the city (CBD, City
Deep, Devland); parts of
Soweto.
Social spending: parts of
Soweto; City Centre,
Cosmos City
Housing spending:
southern parts, eastwest corridor; also in
Cosmos City.
Infrastructure spending:
City Centre, Cosmos City,
Diepsloot area.
The City of Jo’Burg
Highest spending in the consolidation area (public transport, soccer infrastructure,
inner city regeneration), although SDF strategy mentions it should limit spending
there.
Spending for new housing development outside the densification priority area and
movement system of the city. Mixed-use and industrial nodes have attracted higher
levels of capital spending.
Central city areas have attracted high levels of capital spending, whilst
other public transport management areas have not.
The City of Cape Town
Economic spending: CBD, southeast parts of the City; urban
regeneration areas like Mfuleni,
Maccassar, Khayelitsha.
Social spending: CBD, southeast parts of the City like Langa,
Blue Downs, Khayelitsha.
Housing spending: southern &
south-east suburbs (Belhar,
Khayelitsha, Bellmont Park), far
north-western parts (Atlantis),
Kuilsrivier & Brackenfell areas.
Infrastructure spending: In and
around the CBD (Green Point,
Milnerton areas).
The City of Cape Town
Accessibility grid in and around the CBD have attracted high capital
spending.
IRT (phase 1) has influenced spending patterns. Areas in the far north, not
part of the accessibility grid, linked thro IRT.
Parts of the marginalised area in the SE of the city have received capital
spending, but much lower than the designated metropolitan nodes.
The Rustenburg LM
Economic spending:
north-western areas,
north of the central city,
later years eastern parts.
Social spending: higher
density low income
areas like Meriting,
Freedom Park, Phokeng.
Housing spending: new
housing development
close to central city, then
also to rural settlements.
Infrastructure spending:
in and around the central
city; also low income
residential areas like
Meriting.
Rustenburg Local Municipality
Areas where residential, industrial and commercial development nodes are
defined, have attracted higher levels of capital investment.
With the exception of the central areas, both the rapid bus transport system
and the development corridor did not attract substantial capital spending.
Concluding statements on the integration:
Some concepts of the SDF strategies did indeed influenced
capital spending patterns, however there is still significant
scope to improve on the integration and alignment.
All case-study municipalities identified measures to manage urban growth (urban
edge, compaction, densification, development corridors, viable nodes).
And to address connectivity (BRT, IRT, Rapid Bus Transport system).
Public transport corridors (focus areas for development & intensification) has high
levels of influence over investment in the City of Cape Town, but less pronounced
in the City of Jo’Burg & Rustenburg LM.
Areas identified as development nodes (residential, industrial, commercial)
generally attracted higher levels of capital spending.
There is evidence of capital spending directed towards marginalised areas,
although the central core is the main focus. Mainly due to urban renewal & the
main centre of the transport system.
There are evidence of integrated spending for housing projects & its infrastructure.
Although many housing projects are located outside the main development &
accessibility areas, municipalities are using expensive transport infrastructure
investment to connect fragmented settlements.
Government’s unique capacity to secure
consensus between public & private capital
investment, enabling the achievement of multiple
development aims such as economic
development, employment creation and service
delivery (UN-Habitat, 2008).
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Proportion of
persons
employed
2001
58.4
2011
63.3
Unemployment
rate (expanded)
24.0
18.4
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
CAPEX 2011
CAPEX 2012
CAPEX 2011
CAPEX 2012
Stats SA collects CAPEX data from National, Provincial, District, Municipal public
entities; and public corporations.
Important source for empirical evidence on the implications of infrastructure
spending: does it contribute to growth in SA? Does it reduce poverty?
Data must be spatial referenced – location of spending.
SDFs must give direction to capital expenditure.
Municipal integrated geostatistical system
Provincial integrated geostatistical system
National
Municipal and provincial
Regions
Wards
Settlements
National integrated
geo-statistical
system
Dissemination
geographies with
key statistical
data
Small areas
Cadastre and addresses
Other core spatial datasets
Current data supply not
suitable for planning. Call
for innovative approaches
to provide the required
statistical data for planning.
Strong case for the spatial
management of municipal
financial data.
Implying integrated geostatistical information
systems, from National to
below the municipal level.
Framework geographies
with identifiers and
classifiers
Aligning policy will imply
standard geographical
boundaries.
Policy design and implementation
National priorities
more jobs, united state, more infrastructure,
better education and health, adequate housing
– better quality of life
Aligning policy will imply
mechanisms (like a small
spatial unit with regular key
statistical denominators)
that can aggregate to other
geographical levels
Having a national statistical
system that underpins
development planning: a
spatial expression of facts &
figures
Thank You
email: [email protected]
Acknowledgements - Danie, Herman, Amanda & Prof Geyer from CRUISE.
Slide 16
The reshaping of urban structure in
South Africa through municipal
capital investment:
Evidence from 3 municipalities
Sharthi Laldaparsad, EM Policy Research
Statistics South Africa
• Well known structural and morphological deficiencies of SA
cities
SETTLEMENT TYPE
City regions and cities (e.g CoJ,
CT, eThekwini, Nelson-Mandela Bay,
etc.)
Other towns and settlements
(excluding dispersed rural
settlements)
% POPULATION
% ECONOMY
2001
2011
(2007)
46.0
49.7
69
28.2
27.7
23
Source: Stats SA & CSIR, 2013; NUDF, 2009
• Importance
Continues to be the primary sites of population growth
Drivers of economic growth
Concentration of poverty, social and ecological challenges
• The RDP in 1994 introduced spatial planning concepts such as “the
need to break down the apartheid geography through land reform,
more compact cities and decent public transport” (1994:83) and
“densification and unification of the urban fabric” (1994:86).
• “Since 1994, densities have increased in some urban areas and there
has also been partial regeneration of inner cities, but, overall, little
progress has been made in reversing apartheid geography, and in
some cases the divides have been exacerbated” (NDP 2011: 238).
• For nearly 20 years, the concept of “restructuring South African cities”
remained at the top of the urban spatial planning agenda.
• Since 1994 several policies and legislative mechanisms were implemented to
transform the spatial landscape of SA.
• SDFs are regarded as the key spatial restructuring tool for local municipalities.
• Perhaps the most under-recognised instrument for spatial restructuring is the
municipal budget itself.
• The need has arose for a comprehensive spatial vision for the country.
• A strategic approach to capital investment is essential to enable spatial
transformation.
• Infrastructure planning more powerful in shaping the spatial structure of
cities than spatial planning (Todes, 2008).
• Aligning & integrating the two, effective restructuring mechanism for local
municipalities. To what extent is there alignment in the City of Jo’Burg, City of
Cape Town, & the Rustenburg Local Municipality.
The presentation looks at • the capital investment patterns in 3 municipalities of South Africa
over the five-year period, 2007/8 to 2011/12.
• whether municipal capital spending patterns have contributed to
reshaping the spatial structure of the municipalities.
• whether municipal capital investment follows the strategic vision
of the IDPs and the SDFs.
• the statistical and geographical frameworks underpinning such
planning.
Capital spending for the five-year period
Capital spending has largely
benefitted key historical economic
hubs. Other areas have benefited
but to a lesser extent.
CoJ
Capital
expenditure (% of
CoCT
RLM
Average
15
21.5
16.7
17.7
municipal budget)
Capital spending between 15-21% of
municipal budget. Over 80% spent
on basic services infrastructure.
Economic (%)
2.4
1.2
1.1
1.5
Social (%)
4.4
6.8
7.2
6.1
Given budget constraints more
motivation to align policies.
Housing (%)
10.2
8.1
3.1
7.1
Infrastructure (%)
81.1
81.4
86.6
83.0
The City of Jo’Burg
Economic spending:
south, south east parts
of the city (CBD, City
Deep, Devland); parts of
Soweto.
Social spending: parts of
Soweto; City Centre,
Cosmos City
Housing spending:
southern parts, eastwest corridor; also in
Cosmos City.
Infrastructure spending:
City Centre, Cosmos City,
Diepsloot area.
The City of Jo’Burg
Highest spending in the consolidation area (public transport, soccer infrastructure,
inner city regeneration), although SDF strategy mentions it should limit spending
there.
Spending for new housing development outside the densification priority area and
movement system of the city. Mixed-use and industrial nodes have attracted higher
levels of capital spending.
Central city areas have attracted high levels of capital spending, whilst
other public transport management areas have not.
The City of Cape Town
Economic spending: CBD, southeast parts of the City; urban
regeneration areas like Mfuleni,
Maccassar, Khayelitsha.
Social spending: CBD, southeast parts of the City like Langa,
Blue Downs, Khayelitsha.
Housing spending: southern &
south-east suburbs (Belhar,
Khayelitsha, Bellmont Park), far
north-western parts (Atlantis),
Kuilsrivier & Brackenfell areas.
Infrastructure spending: In and
around the CBD (Green Point,
Milnerton areas).
The City of Cape Town
Accessibility grid in and around the CBD have attracted high capital
spending.
IRT (phase 1) has influenced spending patterns. Areas in the far north, not
part of the accessibility grid, linked thro IRT.
Parts of the marginalised area in the SE of the city have received capital
spending, but much lower than the designated metropolitan nodes.
The Rustenburg LM
Economic spending:
north-western areas,
north of the central city,
later years eastern parts.
Social spending: higher
density low income
areas like Meriting,
Freedom Park, Phokeng.
Housing spending: new
housing development
close to central city, then
also to rural settlements.
Infrastructure spending:
in and around the central
city; also low income
residential areas like
Meriting.
Rustenburg Local Municipality
Areas where residential, industrial and commercial development nodes are
defined, have attracted higher levels of capital investment.
With the exception of the central areas, both the rapid bus transport system
and the development corridor did not attract substantial capital spending.
Concluding statements on the integration:
Some concepts of the SDF strategies did indeed influenced
capital spending patterns, however there is still significant
scope to improve on the integration and alignment.
All case-study municipalities identified measures to manage urban growth (urban
edge, compaction, densification, development corridors, viable nodes).
And to address connectivity (BRT, IRT, Rapid Bus Transport system).
Public transport corridors (focus areas for development & intensification) has high
levels of influence over investment in the City of Cape Town, but less pronounced
in the City of Jo’Burg & Rustenburg LM.
Areas identified as development nodes (residential, industrial, commercial)
generally attracted higher levels of capital spending.
There is evidence of capital spending directed towards marginalised areas,
although the central core is the main focus. Mainly due to urban renewal & the
main centre of the transport system.
There are evidence of integrated spending for housing projects & its infrastructure.
Although many housing projects are located outside the main development &
accessibility areas, municipalities are using expensive transport infrastructure
investment to connect fragmented settlements.
Government’s unique capacity to secure
consensus between public & private capital
investment, enabling the achievement of multiple
development aims such as economic
development, employment creation and service
delivery (UN-Habitat, 2008).
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Proportion of
persons
employed
2001
58.4
2011
63.3
Unemployment
rate (expanded)
24.0
18.4
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
CAPEX 2011
CAPEX 2012
CAPEX 2011
CAPEX 2012
Stats SA collects CAPEX data from National, Provincial, District, Municipal public
entities; and public corporations.
Important source for empirical evidence on the implications of infrastructure
spending: does it contribute to growth in SA? Does it reduce poverty?
Data must be spatial referenced – location of spending.
SDFs must give direction to capital expenditure.
Municipal integrated geostatistical system
Provincial integrated geostatistical system
National
Municipal and provincial
Regions
Wards
Settlements
National integrated
geo-statistical
system
Dissemination
geographies with
key statistical
data
Small areas
Cadastre and addresses
Other core spatial datasets
Current data supply not
suitable for planning. Call
for innovative approaches
to provide the required
statistical data for planning.
Strong case for the spatial
management of municipal
financial data.
Implying integrated geostatistical information
systems, from National to
below the municipal level.
Framework geographies
with identifiers and
classifiers
Aligning policy will imply
standard geographical
boundaries.
Policy design and implementation
National priorities
more jobs, united state, more infrastructure,
better education and health, adequate housing
– better quality of life
Aligning policy will imply
mechanisms (like a small
spatial unit with regular key
statistical denominators)
that can aggregate to other
geographical levels
Having a national statistical
system that underpins
development planning: a
spatial expression of facts &
figures
Thank You
email: [email protected]
Acknowledgements - Danie, Herman, Amanda & Prof Geyer from CRUISE.
Slide 17
The reshaping of urban structure in
South Africa through municipal
capital investment:
Evidence from 3 municipalities
Sharthi Laldaparsad, EM Policy Research
Statistics South Africa
• Well known structural and morphological deficiencies of SA
cities
SETTLEMENT TYPE
City regions and cities (e.g CoJ,
CT, eThekwini, Nelson-Mandela Bay,
etc.)
Other towns and settlements
(excluding dispersed rural
settlements)
% POPULATION
% ECONOMY
2001
2011
(2007)
46.0
49.7
69
28.2
27.7
23
Source: Stats SA & CSIR, 2013; NUDF, 2009
• Importance
Continues to be the primary sites of population growth
Drivers of economic growth
Concentration of poverty, social and ecological challenges
• The RDP in 1994 introduced spatial planning concepts such as “the
need to break down the apartheid geography through land reform,
more compact cities and decent public transport” (1994:83) and
“densification and unification of the urban fabric” (1994:86).
• “Since 1994, densities have increased in some urban areas and there
has also been partial regeneration of inner cities, but, overall, little
progress has been made in reversing apartheid geography, and in
some cases the divides have been exacerbated” (NDP 2011: 238).
• For nearly 20 years, the concept of “restructuring South African cities”
remained at the top of the urban spatial planning agenda.
• Since 1994 several policies and legislative mechanisms were implemented to
transform the spatial landscape of SA.
• SDFs are regarded as the key spatial restructuring tool for local municipalities.
• Perhaps the most under-recognised instrument for spatial restructuring is the
municipal budget itself.
• The need has arose for a comprehensive spatial vision for the country.
• A strategic approach to capital investment is essential to enable spatial
transformation.
• Infrastructure planning more powerful in shaping the spatial structure of
cities than spatial planning (Todes, 2008).
• Aligning & integrating the two, effective restructuring mechanism for local
municipalities. To what extent is there alignment in the City of Jo’Burg, City of
Cape Town, & the Rustenburg Local Municipality.
The presentation looks at • the capital investment patterns in 3 municipalities of South Africa
over the five-year period, 2007/8 to 2011/12.
• whether municipal capital spending patterns have contributed to
reshaping the spatial structure of the municipalities.
• whether municipal capital investment follows the strategic vision
of the IDPs and the SDFs.
• the statistical and geographical frameworks underpinning such
planning.
Capital spending for the five-year period
Capital spending has largely
benefitted key historical economic
hubs. Other areas have benefited
but to a lesser extent.
CoJ
Capital
expenditure (% of
CoCT
RLM
Average
15
21.5
16.7
17.7
municipal budget)
Capital spending between 15-21% of
municipal budget. Over 80% spent
on basic services infrastructure.
Economic (%)
2.4
1.2
1.1
1.5
Social (%)
4.4
6.8
7.2
6.1
Given budget constraints more
motivation to align policies.
Housing (%)
10.2
8.1
3.1
7.1
Infrastructure (%)
81.1
81.4
86.6
83.0
The City of Jo’Burg
Economic spending:
south, south east parts
of the city (CBD, City
Deep, Devland); parts of
Soweto.
Social spending: parts of
Soweto; City Centre,
Cosmos City
Housing spending:
southern parts, eastwest corridor; also in
Cosmos City.
Infrastructure spending:
City Centre, Cosmos City,
Diepsloot area.
The City of Jo’Burg
Highest spending in the consolidation area (public transport, soccer infrastructure,
inner city regeneration), although SDF strategy mentions it should limit spending
there.
Spending for new housing development outside the densification priority area and
movement system of the city. Mixed-use and industrial nodes have attracted higher
levels of capital spending.
Central city areas have attracted high levels of capital spending, whilst
other public transport management areas have not.
The City of Cape Town
Economic spending: CBD, southeast parts of the City; urban
regeneration areas like Mfuleni,
Maccassar, Khayelitsha.
Social spending: CBD, southeast parts of the City like Langa,
Blue Downs, Khayelitsha.
Housing spending: southern &
south-east suburbs (Belhar,
Khayelitsha, Bellmont Park), far
north-western parts (Atlantis),
Kuilsrivier & Brackenfell areas.
Infrastructure spending: In and
around the CBD (Green Point,
Milnerton areas).
The City of Cape Town
Accessibility grid in and around the CBD have attracted high capital
spending.
IRT (phase 1) has influenced spending patterns. Areas in the far north, not
part of the accessibility grid, linked thro IRT.
Parts of the marginalised area in the SE of the city have received capital
spending, but much lower than the designated metropolitan nodes.
The Rustenburg LM
Economic spending:
north-western areas,
north of the central city,
later years eastern parts.
Social spending: higher
density low income
areas like Meriting,
Freedom Park, Phokeng.
Housing spending: new
housing development
close to central city, then
also to rural settlements.
Infrastructure spending:
in and around the central
city; also low income
residential areas like
Meriting.
Rustenburg Local Municipality
Areas where residential, industrial and commercial development nodes are
defined, have attracted higher levels of capital investment.
With the exception of the central areas, both the rapid bus transport system
and the development corridor did not attract substantial capital spending.
Concluding statements on the integration:
Some concepts of the SDF strategies did indeed influenced
capital spending patterns, however there is still significant
scope to improve on the integration and alignment.
All case-study municipalities identified measures to manage urban growth (urban
edge, compaction, densification, development corridors, viable nodes).
And to address connectivity (BRT, IRT, Rapid Bus Transport system).
Public transport corridors (focus areas for development & intensification) has high
levels of influence over investment in the City of Cape Town, but less pronounced
in the City of Jo’Burg & Rustenburg LM.
Areas identified as development nodes (residential, industrial, commercial)
generally attracted higher levels of capital spending.
There is evidence of capital spending directed towards marginalised areas,
although the central core is the main focus. Mainly due to urban renewal & the
main centre of the transport system.
There are evidence of integrated spending for housing projects & its infrastructure.
Although many housing projects are located outside the main development &
accessibility areas, municipalities are using expensive transport infrastructure
investment to connect fragmented settlements.
Government’s unique capacity to secure
consensus between public & private capital
investment, enabling the achievement of multiple
development aims such as economic
development, employment creation and service
delivery (UN-Habitat, 2008).
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Proportion of
persons
employed
2001
58.4
2011
63.3
Unemployment
rate (expanded)
24.0
18.4
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
CAPEX 2011
CAPEX 2012
CAPEX 2011
CAPEX 2012
Stats SA collects CAPEX data from National, Provincial, District, Municipal public
entities; and public corporations.
Important source for empirical evidence on the implications of infrastructure
spending: does it contribute to growth in SA? Does it reduce poverty?
Data must be spatial referenced – location of spending.
SDFs must give direction to capital expenditure.
Municipal integrated geostatistical system
Provincial integrated geostatistical system
National
Municipal and provincial
Regions
Wards
Settlements
National integrated
geo-statistical
system
Dissemination
geographies with
key statistical
data
Small areas
Cadastre and addresses
Other core spatial datasets
Current data supply not
suitable for planning. Call
for innovative approaches
to provide the required
statistical data for planning.
Strong case for the spatial
management of municipal
financial data.
Implying integrated geostatistical information
systems, from National to
below the municipal level.
Framework geographies
with identifiers and
classifiers
Aligning policy will imply
standard geographical
boundaries.
Policy design and implementation
National priorities
more jobs, united state, more infrastructure,
better education and health, adequate housing
– better quality of life
Aligning policy will imply
mechanisms (like a small
spatial unit with regular key
statistical denominators)
that can aggregate to other
geographical levels
Having a national statistical
system that underpins
development planning: a
spatial expression of facts &
figures
Thank You
email: [email protected]
Acknowledgements - Danie, Herman, Amanda & Prof Geyer from CRUISE.
Slide 18
The reshaping of urban structure in
South Africa through municipal
capital investment:
Evidence from 3 municipalities
Sharthi Laldaparsad, EM Policy Research
Statistics South Africa
• Well known structural and morphological deficiencies of SA
cities
SETTLEMENT TYPE
City regions and cities (e.g CoJ,
CT, eThekwini, Nelson-Mandela Bay,
etc.)
Other towns and settlements
(excluding dispersed rural
settlements)
% POPULATION
% ECONOMY
2001
2011
(2007)
46.0
49.7
69
28.2
27.7
23
Source: Stats SA & CSIR, 2013; NUDF, 2009
• Importance
Continues to be the primary sites of population growth
Drivers of economic growth
Concentration of poverty, social and ecological challenges
• The RDP in 1994 introduced spatial planning concepts such as “the
need to break down the apartheid geography through land reform,
more compact cities and decent public transport” (1994:83) and
“densification and unification of the urban fabric” (1994:86).
• “Since 1994, densities have increased in some urban areas and there
has also been partial regeneration of inner cities, but, overall, little
progress has been made in reversing apartheid geography, and in
some cases the divides have been exacerbated” (NDP 2011: 238).
• For nearly 20 years, the concept of “restructuring South African cities”
remained at the top of the urban spatial planning agenda.
• Since 1994 several policies and legislative mechanisms were implemented to
transform the spatial landscape of SA.
• SDFs are regarded as the key spatial restructuring tool for local municipalities.
• Perhaps the most under-recognised instrument for spatial restructuring is the
municipal budget itself.
• The need has arose for a comprehensive spatial vision for the country.
• A strategic approach to capital investment is essential to enable spatial
transformation.
• Infrastructure planning more powerful in shaping the spatial structure of
cities than spatial planning (Todes, 2008).
• Aligning & integrating the two, effective restructuring mechanism for local
municipalities. To what extent is there alignment in the City of Jo’Burg, City of
Cape Town, & the Rustenburg Local Municipality.
The presentation looks at • the capital investment patterns in 3 municipalities of South Africa
over the five-year period, 2007/8 to 2011/12.
• whether municipal capital spending patterns have contributed to
reshaping the spatial structure of the municipalities.
• whether municipal capital investment follows the strategic vision
of the IDPs and the SDFs.
• the statistical and geographical frameworks underpinning such
planning.
Capital spending for the five-year period
Capital spending has largely
benefitted key historical economic
hubs. Other areas have benefited
but to a lesser extent.
CoJ
Capital
expenditure (% of
CoCT
RLM
Average
15
21.5
16.7
17.7
municipal budget)
Capital spending between 15-21% of
municipal budget. Over 80% spent
on basic services infrastructure.
Economic (%)
2.4
1.2
1.1
1.5
Social (%)
4.4
6.8
7.2
6.1
Given budget constraints more
motivation to align policies.
Housing (%)
10.2
8.1
3.1
7.1
Infrastructure (%)
81.1
81.4
86.6
83.0
The City of Jo’Burg
Economic spending:
south, south east parts
of the city (CBD, City
Deep, Devland); parts of
Soweto.
Social spending: parts of
Soweto; City Centre,
Cosmos City
Housing spending:
southern parts, eastwest corridor; also in
Cosmos City.
Infrastructure spending:
City Centre, Cosmos City,
Diepsloot area.
The City of Jo’Burg
Highest spending in the consolidation area (public transport, soccer infrastructure,
inner city regeneration), although SDF strategy mentions it should limit spending
there.
Spending for new housing development outside the densification priority area and
movement system of the city. Mixed-use and industrial nodes have attracted higher
levels of capital spending.
Central city areas have attracted high levels of capital spending, whilst
other public transport management areas have not.
The City of Cape Town
Economic spending: CBD, southeast parts of the City; urban
regeneration areas like Mfuleni,
Maccassar, Khayelitsha.
Social spending: CBD, southeast parts of the City like Langa,
Blue Downs, Khayelitsha.
Housing spending: southern &
south-east suburbs (Belhar,
Khayelitsha, Bellmont Park), far
north-western parts (Atlantis),
Kuilsrivier & Brackenfell areas.
Infrastructure spending: In and
around the CBD (Green Point,
Milnerton areas).
The City of Cape Town
Accessibility grid in and around the CBD have attracted high capital
spending.
IRT (phase 1) has influenced spending patterns. Areas in the far north, not
part of the accessibility grid, linked thro IRT.
Parts of the marginalised area in the SE of the city have received capital
spending, but much lower than the designated metropolitan nodes.
The Rustenburg LM
Economic spending:
north-western areas,
north of the central city,
later years eastern parts.
Social spending: higher
density low income
areas like Meriting,
Freedom Park, Phokeng.
Housing spending: new
housing development
close to central city, then
also to rural settlements.
Infrastructure spending:
in and around the central
city; also low income
residential areas like
Meriting.
Rustenburg Local Municipality
Areas where residential, industrial and commercial development nodes are
defined, have attracted higher levels of capital investment.
With the exception of the central areas, both the rapid bus transport system
and the development corridor did not attract substantial capital spending.
Concluding statements on the integration:
Some concepts of the SDF strategies did indeed influenced
capital spending patterns, however there is still significant
scope to improve on the integration and alignment.
All case-study municipalities identified measures to manage urban growth (urban
edge, compaction, densification, development corridors, viable nodes).
And to address connectivity (BRT, IRT, Rapid Bus Transport system).
Public transport corridors (focus areas for development & intensification) has high
levels of influence over investment in the City of Cape Town, but less pronounced
in the City of Jo’Burg & Rustenburg LM.
Areas identified as development nodes (residential, industrial, commercial)
generally attracted higher levels of capital spending.
There is evidence of capital spending directed towards marginalised areas,
although the central core is the main focus. Mainly due to urban renewal & the
main centre of the transport system.
There are evidence of integrated spending for housing projects & its infrastructure.
Although many housing projects are located outside the main development &
accessibility areas, municipalities are using expensive transport infrastructure
investment to connect fragmented settlements.
Government’s unique capacity to secure
consensus between public & private capital
investment, enabling the achievement of multiple
development aims such as economic
development, employment creation and service
delivery (UN-Habitat, 2008).
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Proportion of
persons
employed
2001
58.4
2011
63.3
Unemployment
rate (expanded)
24.0
18.4
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
CAPEX 2011
CAPEX 2012
CAPEX 2011
CAPEX 2012
Stats SA collects CAPEX data from National, Provincial, District, Municipal public
entities; and public corporations.
Important source for empirical evidence on the implications of infrastructure
spending: does it contribute to growth in SA? Does it reduce poverty?
Data must be spatial referenced – location of spending.
SDFs must give direction to capital expenditure.
Municipal integrated geostatistical system
Provincial integrated geostatistical system
National
Municipal and provincial
Regions
Wards
Settlements
National integrated
geo-statistical
system
Dissemination
geographies with
key statistical
data
Small areas
Cadastre and addresses
Other core spatial datasets
Current data supply not
suitable for planning. Call
for innovative approaches
to provide the required
statistical data for planning.
Strong case for the spatial
management of municipal
financial data.
Implying integrated geostatistical information
systems, from National to
below the municipal level.
Framework geographies
with identifiers and
classifiers
Aligning policy will imply
standard geographical
boundaries.
Policy design and implementation
National priorities
more jobs, united state, more infrastructure,
better education and health, adequate housing
– better quality of life
Aligning policy will imply
mechanisms (like a small
spatial unit with regular key
statistical denominators)
that can aggregate to other
geographical levels
Having a national statistical
system that underpins
development planning: a
spatial expression of facts &
figures
Thank You
email: [email protected]
Acknowledgements - Danie, Herman, Amanda & Prof Geyer from CRUISE.
Slide 19
The reshaping of urban structure in
South Africa through municipal
capital investment:
Evidence from 3 municipalities
Sharthi Laldaparsad, EM Policy Research
Statistics South Africa
• Well known structural and morphological deficiencies of SA
cities
SETTLEMENT TYPE
City regions and cities (e.g CoJ,
CT, eThekwini, Nelson-Mandela Bay,
etc.)
Other towns and settlements
(excluding dispersed rural
settlements)
% POPULATION
% ECONOMY
2001
2011
(2007)
46.0
49.7
69
28.2
27.7
23
Source: Stats SA & CSIR, 2013; NUDF, 2009
• Importance
Continues to be the primary sites of population growth
Drivers of economic growth
Concentration of poverty, social and ecological challenges
• The RDP in 1994 introduced spatial planning concepts such as “the
need to break down the apartheid geography through land reform,
more compact cities and decent public transport” (1994:83) and
“densification and unification of the urban fabric” (1994:86).
• “Since 1994, densities have increased in some urban areas and there
has also been partial regeneration of inner cities, but, overall, little
progress has been made in reversing apartheid geography, and in
some cases the divides have been exacerbated” (NDP 2011: 238).
• For nearly 20 years, the concept of “restructuring South African cities”
remained at the top of the urban spatial planning agenda.
• Since 1994 several policies and legislative mechanisms were implemented to
transform the spatial landscape of SA.
• SDFs are regarded as the key spatial restructuring tool for local municipalities.
• Perhaps the most under-recognised instrument for spatial restructuring is the
municipal budget itself.
• The need has arose for a comprehensive spatial vision for the country.
• A strategic approach to capital investment is essential to enable spatial
transformation.
• Infrastructure planning more powerful in shaping the spatial structure of
cities than spatial planning (Todes, 2008).
• Aligning & integrating the two, effective restructuring mechanism for local
municipalities. To what extent is there alignment in the City of Jo’Burg, City of
Cape Town, & the Rustenburg Local Municipality.
The presentation looks at • the capital investment patterns in 3 municipalities of South Africa
over the five-year period, 2007/8 to 2011/12.
• whether municipal capital spending patterns have contributed to
reshaping the spatial structure of the municipalities.
• whether municipal capital investment follows the strategic vision
of the IDPs and the SDFs.
• the statistical and geographical frameworks underpinning such
planning.
Capital spending for the five-year period
Capital spending has largely
benefitted key historical economic
hubs. Other areas have benefited
but to a lesser extent.
CoJ
Capital
expenditure (% of
CoCT
RLM
Average
15
21.5
16.7
17.7
municipal budget)
Capital spending between 15-21% of
municipal budget. Over 80% spent
on basic services infrastructure.
Economic (%)
2.4
1.2
1.1
1.5
Social (%)
4.4
6.8
7.2
6.1
Given budget constraints more
motivation to align policies.
Housing (%)
10.2
8.1
3.1
7.1
Infrastructure (%)
81.1
81.4
86.6
83.0
The City of Jo’Burg
Economic spending:
south, south east parts
of the city (CBD, City
Deep, Devland); parts of
Soweto.
Social spending: parts of
Soweto; City Centre,
Cosmos City
Housing spending:
southern parts, eastwest corridor; also in
Cosmos City.
Infrastructure spending:
City Centre, Cosmos City,
Diepsloot area.
The City of Jo’Burg
Highest spending in the consolidation area (public transport, soccer infrastructure,
inner city regeneration), although SDF strategy mentions it should limit spending
there.
Spending for new housing development outside the densification priority area and
movement system of the city. Mixed-use and industrial nodes have attracted higher
levels of capital spending.
Central city areas have attracted high levels of capital spending, whilst
other public transport management areas have not.
The City of Cape Town
Economic spending: CBD, southeast parts of the City; urban
regeneration areas like Mfuleni,
Maccassar, Khayelitsha.
Social spending: CBD, southeast parts of the City like Langa,
Blue Downs, Khayelitsha.
Housing spending: southern &
south-east suburbs (Belhar,
Khayelitsha, Bellmont Park), far
north-western parts (Atlantis),
Kuilsrivier & Brackenfell areas.
Infrastructure spending: In and
around the CBD (Green Point,
Milnerton areas).
The City of Cape Town
Accessibility grid in and around the CBD have attracted high capital
spending.
IRT (phase 1) has influenced spending patterns. Areas in the far north, not
part of the accessibility grid, linked thro IRT.
Parts of the marginalised area in the SE of the city have received capital
spending, but much lower than the designated metropolitan nodes.
The Rustenburg LM
Economic spending:
north-western areas,
north of the central city,
later years eastern parts.
Social spending: higher
density low income
areas like Meriting,
Freedom Park, Phokeng.
Housing spending: new
housing development
close to central city, then
also to rural settlements.
Infrastructure spending:
in and around the central
city; also low income
residential areas like
Meriting.
Rustenburg Local Municipality
Areas where residential, industrial and commercial development nodes are
defined, have attracted higher levels of capital investment.
With the exception of the central areas, both the rapid bus transport system
and the development corridor did not attract substantial capital spending.
Concluding statements on the integration:
Some concepts of the SDF strategies did indeed influenced
capital spending patterns, however there is still significant
scope to improve on the integration and alignment.
All case-study municipalities identified measures to manage urban growth (urban
edge, compaction, densification, development corridors, viable nodes).
And to address connectivity (BRT, IRT, Rapid Bus Transport system).
Public transport corridors (focus areas for development & intensification) has high
levels of influence over investment in the City of Cape Town, but less pronounced
in the City of Jo’Burg & Rustenburg LM.
Areas identified as development nodes (residential, industrial, commercial)
generally attracted higher levels of capital spending.
There is evidence of capital spending directed towards marginalised areas,
although the central core is the main focus. Mainly due to urban renewal & the
main centre of the transport system.
There are evidence of integrated spending for housing projects & its infrastructure.
Although many housing projects are located outside the main development &
accessibility areas, municipalities are using expensive transport infrastructure
investment to connect fragmented settlements.
Government’s unique capacity to secure
consensus between public & private capital
investment, enabling the achievement of multiple
development aims such as economic
development, employment creation and service
delivery (UN-Habitat, 2008).
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Proportion of
persons
employed
2001
58.4
2011
63.3
Unemployment
rate (expanded)
24.0
18.4
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
CAPEX 2011
CAPEX 2012
CAPEX 2011
CAPEX 2012
Stats SA collects CAPEX data from National, Provincial, District, Municipal public
entities; and public corporations.
Important source for empirical evidence on the implications of infrastructure
spending: does it contribute to growth in SA? Does it reduce poverty?
Data must be spatial referenced – location of spending.
SDFs must give direction to capital expenditure.
Municipal integrated geostatistical system
Provincial integrated geostatistical system
National
Municipal and provincial
Regions
Wards
Settlements
National integrated
geo-statistical
system
Dissemination
geographies with
key statistical
data
Small areas
Cadastre and addresses
Other core spatial datasets
Current data supply not
suitable for planning. Call
for innovative approaches
to provide the required
statistical data for planning.
Strong case for the spatial
management of municipal
financial data.
Implying integrated geostatistical information
systems, from National to
below the municipal level.
Framework geographies
with identifiers and
classifiers
Aligning policy will imply
standard geographical
boundaries.
Policy design and implementation
National priorities
more jobs, united state, more infrastructure,
better education and health, adequate housing
– better quality of life
Aligning policy will imply
mechanisms (like a small
spatial unit with regular key
statistical denominators)
that can aggregate to other
geographical levels
Having a national statistical
system that underpins
development planning: a
spatial expression of facts &
figures
Thank You
email: [email protected]
Acknowledgements - Danie, Herman, Amanda & Prof Geyer from CRUISE.
Slide 20
The reshaping of urban structure in
South Africa through municipal
capital investment:
Evidence from 3 municipalities
Sharthi Laldaparsad, EM Policy Research
Statistics South Africa
• Well known structural and morphological deficiencies of SA
cities
SETTLEMENT TYPE
City regions and cities (e.g CoJ,
CT, eThekwini, Nelson-Mandela Bay,
etc.)
Other towns and settlements
(excluding dispersed rural
settlements)
% POPULATION
% ECONOMY
2001
2011
(2007)
46.0
49.7
69
28.2
27.7
23
Source: Stats SA & CSIR, 2013; NUDF, 2009
• Importance
Continues to be the primary sites of population growth
Drivers of economic growth
Concentration of poverty, social and ecological challenges
• The RDP in 1994 introduced spatial planning concepts such as “the
need to break down the apartheid geography through land reform,
more compact cities and decent public transport” (1994:83) and
“densification and unification of the urban fabric” (1994:86).
• “Since 1994, densities have increased in some urban areas and there
has also been partial regeneration of inner cities, but, overall, little
progress has been made in reversing apartheid geography, and in
some cases the divides have been exacerbated” (NDP 2011: 238).
• For nearly 20 years, the concept of “restructuring South African cities”
remained at the top of the urban spatial planning agenda.
• Since 1994 several policies and legislative mechanisms were implemented to
transform the spatial landscape of SA.
• SDFs are regarded as the key spatial restructuring tool for local municipalities.
• Perhaps the most under-recognised instrument for spatial restructuring is the
municipal budget itself.
• The need has arose for a comprehensive spatial vision for the country.
• A strategic approach to capital investment is essential to enable spatial
transformation.
• Infrastructure planning more powerful in shaping the spatial structure of
cities than spatial planning (Todes, 2008).
• Aligning & integrating the two, effective restructuring mechanism for local
municipalities. To what extent is there alignment in the City of Jo’Burg, City of
Cape Town, & the Rustenburg Local Municipality.
The presentation looks at • the capital investment patterns in 3 municipalities of South Africa
over the five-year period, 2007/8 to 2011/12.
• whether municipal capital spending patterns have contributed to
reshaping the spatial structure of the municipalities.
• whether municipal capital investment follows the strategic vision
of the IDPs and the SDFs.
• the statistical and geographical frameworks underpinning such
planning.
Capital spending for the five-year period
Capital spending has largely
benefitted key historical economic
hubs. Other areas have benefited
but to a lesser extent.
CoJ
Capital
expenditure (% of
CoCT
RLM
Average
15
21.5
16.7
17.7
municipal budget)
Capital spending between 15-21% of
municipal budget. Over 80% spent
on basic services infrastructure.
Economic (%)
2.4
1.2
1.1
1.5
Social (%)
4.4
6.8
7.2
6.1
Given budget constraints more
motivation to align policies.
Housing (%)
10.2
8.1
3.1
7.1
Infrastructure (%)
81.1
81.4
86.6
83.0
The City of Jo’Burg
Economic spending:
south, south east parts
of the city (CBD, City
Deep, Devland); parts of
Soweto.
Social spending: parts of
Soweto; City Centre,
Cosmos City
Housing spending:
southern parts, eastwest corridor; also in
Cosmos City.
Infrastructure spending:
City Centre, Cosmos City,
Diepsloot area.
The City of Jo’Burg
Highest spending in the consolidation area (public transport, soccer infrastructure,
inner city regeneration), although SDF strategy mentions it should limit spending
there.
Spending for new housing development outside the densification priority area and
movement system of the city. Mixed-use and industrial nodes have attracted higher
levels of capital spending.
Central city areas have attracted high levels of capital spending, whilst
other public transport management areas have not.
The City of Cape Town
Economic spending: CBD, southeast parts of the City; urban
regeneration areas like Mfuleni,
Maccassar, Khayelitsha.
Social spending: CBD, southeast parts of the City like Langa,
Blue Downs, Khayelitsha.
Housing spending: southern &
south-east suburbs (Belhar,
Khayelitsha, Bellmont Park), far
north-western parts (Atlantis),
Kuilsrivier & Brackenfell areas.
Infrastructure spending: In and
around the CBD (Green Point,
Milnerton areas).
The City of Cape Town
Accessibility grid in and around the CBD have attracted high capital
spending.
IRT (phase 1) has influenced spending patterns. Areas in the far north, not
part of the accessibility grid, linked thro IRT.
Parts of the marginalised area in the SE of the city have received capital
spending, but much lower than the designated metropolitan nodes.
The Rustenburg LM
Economic spending:
north-western areas,
north of the central city,
later years eastern parts.
Social spending: higher
density low income
areas like Meriting,
Freedom Park, Phokeng.
Housing spending: new
housing development
close to central city, then
also to rural settlements.
Infrastructure spending:
in and around the central
city; also low income
residential areas like
Meriting.
Rustenburg Local Municipality
Areas where residential, industrial and commercial development nodes are
defined, have attracted higher levels of capital investment.
With the exception of the central areas, both the rapid bus transport system
and the development corridor did not attract substantial capital spending.
Concluding statements on the integration:
Some concepts of the SDF strategies did indeed influenced
capital spending patterns, however there is still significant
scope to improve on the integration and alignment.
All case-study municipalities identified measures to manage urban growth (urban
edge, compaction, densification, development corridors, viable nodes).
And to address connectivity (BRT, IRT, Rapid Bus Transport system).
Public transport corridors (focus areas for development & intensification) has high
levels of influence over investment in the City of Cape Town, but less pronounced
in the City of Jo’Burg & Rustenburg LM.
Areas identified as development nodes (residential, industrial, commercial)
generally attracted higher levels of capital spending.
There is evidence of capital spending directed towards marginalised areas,
although the central core is the main focus. Mainly due to urban renewal & the
main centre of the transport system.
There are evidence of integrated spending for housing projects & its infrastructure.
Although many housing projects are located outside the main development &
accessibility areas, municipalities are using expensive transport infrastructure
investment to connect fragmented settlements.
Government’s unique capacity to secure
consensus between public & private capital
investment, enabling the achievement of multiple
development aims such as economic
development, employment creation and service
delivery (UN-Habitat, 2008).
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Proportion of
persons
employed
2001
58.4
2011
63.3
Unemployment
rate (expanded)
24.0
18.4
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
CAPEX 2011
CAPEX 2012
CAPEX 2011
CAPEX 2012
Stats SA collects CAPEX data from National, Provincial, District, Municipal public
entities; and public corporations.
Important source for empirical evidence on the implications of infrastructure
spending: does it contribute to growth in SA? Does it reduce poverty?
Data must be spatial referenced – location of spending.
SDFs must give direction to capital expenditure.
Municipal integrated geostatistical system
Provincial integrated geostatistical system
National
Municipal and provincial
Regions
Wards
Settlements
National integrated
geo-statistical
system
Dissemination
geographies with
key statistical
data
Small areas
Cadastre and addresses
Other core spatial datasets
Current data supply not
suitable for planning. Call
for innovative approaches
to provide the required
statistical data for planning.
Strong case for the spatial
management of municipal
financial data.
Implying integrated geostatistical information
systems, from National to
below the municipal level.
Framework geographies
with identifiers and
classifiers
Aligning policy will imply
standard geographical
boundaries.
Policy design and implementation
National priorities
more jobs, united state, more infrastructure,
better education and health, adequate housing
– better quality of life
Aligning policy will imply
mechanisms (like a small
spatial unit with regular key
statistical denominators)
that can aggregate to other
geographical levels
Having a national statistical
system that underpins
development planning: a
spatial expression of facts &
figures
Thank You
email: [email protected]
Acknowledgements - Danie, Herman, Amanda & Prof Geyer from CRUISE.
Slide 21
The reshaping of urban structure in
South Africa through municipal
capital investment:
Evidence from 3 municipalities
Sharthi Laldaparsad, EM Policy Research
Statistics South Africa
• Well known structural and morphological deficiencies of SA
cities
SETTLEMENT TYPE
City regions and cities (e.g CoJ,
CT, eThekwini, Nelson-Mandela Bay,
etc.)
Other towns and settlements
(excluding dispersed rural
settlements)
% POPULATION
% ECONOMY
2001
2011
(2007)
46.0
49.7
69
28.2
27.7
23
Source: Stats SA & CSIR, 2013; NUDF, 2009
• Importance
Continues to be the primary sites of population growth
Drivers of economic growth
Concentration of poverty, social and ecological challenges
• The RDP in 1994 introduced spatial planning concepts such as “the
need to break down the apartheid geography through land reform,
more compact cities and decent public transport” (1994:83) and
“densification and unification of the urban fabric” (1994:86).
• “Since 1994, densities have increased in some urban areas and there
has also been partial regeneration of inner cities, but, overall, little
progress has been made in reversing apartheid geography, and in
some cases the divides have been exacerbated” (NDP 2011: 238).
• For nearly 20 years, the concept of “restructuring South African cities”
remained at the top of the urban spatial planning agenda.
• Since 1994 several policies and legislative mechanisms were implemented to
transform the spatial landscape of SA.
• SDFs are regarded as the key spatial restructuring tool for local municipalities.
• Perhaps the most under-recognised instrument for spatial restructuring is the
municipal budget itself.
• The need has arose for a comprehensive spatial vision for the country.
• A strategic approach to capital investment is essential to enable spatial
transformation.
• Infrastructure planning more powerful in shaping the spatial structure of
cities than spatial planning (Todes, 2008).
• Aligning & integrating the two, effective restructuring mechanism for local
municipalities. To what extent is there alignment in the City of Jo’Burg, City of
Cape Town, & the Rustenburg Local Municipality.
The presentation looks at • the capital investment patterns in 3 municipalities of South Africa
over the five-year period, 2007/8 to 2011/12.
• whether municipal capital spending patterns have contributed to
reshaping the spatial structure of the municipalities.
• whether municipal capital investment follows the strategic vision
of the IDPs and the SDFs.
• the statistical and geographical frameworks underpinning such
planning.
Capital spending for the five-year period
Capital spending has largely
benefitted key historical economic
hubs. Other areas have benefited
but to a lesser extent.
CoJ
Capital
expenditure (% of
CoCT
RLM
Average
15
21.5
16.7
17.7
municipal budget)
Capital spending between 15-21% of
municipal budget. Over 80% spent
on basic services infrastructure.
Economic (%)
2.4
1.2
1.1
1.5
Social (%)
4.4
6.8
7.2
6.1
Given budget constraints more
motivation to align policies.
Housing (%)
10.2
8.1
3.1
7.1
Infrastructure (%)
81.1
81.4
86.6
83.0
The City of Jo’Burg
Economic spending:
south, south east parts
of the city (CBD, City
Deep, Devland); parts of
Soweto.
Social spending: parts of
Soweto; City Centre,
Cosmos City
Housing spending:
southern parts, eastwest corridor; also in
Cosmos City.
Infrastructure spending:
City Centre, Cosmos City,
Diepsloot area.
The City of Jo’Burg
Highest spending in the consolidation area (public transport, soccer infrastructure,
inner city regeneration), although SDF strategy mentions it should limit spending
there.
Spending for new housing development outside the densification priority area and
movement system of the city. Mixed-use and industrial nodes have attracted higher
levels of capital spending.
Central city areas have attracted high levels of capital spending, whilst
other public transport management areas have not.
The City of Cape Town
Economic spending: CBD, southeast parts of the City; urban
regeneration areas like Mfuleni,
Maccassar, Khayelitsha.
Social spending: CBD, southeast parts of the City like Langa,
Blue Downs, Khayelitsha.
Housing spending: southern &
south-east suburbs (Belhar,
Khayelitsha, Bellmont Park), far
north-western parts (Atlantis),
Kuilsrivier & Brackenfell areas.
Infrastructure spending: In and
around the CBD (Green Point,
Milnerton areas).
The City of Cape Town
Accessibility grid in and around the CBD have attracted high capital
spending.
IRT (phase 1) has influenced spending patterns. Areas in the far north, not
part of the accessibility grid, linked thro IRT.
Parts of the marginalised area in the SE of the city have received capital
spending, but much lower than the designated metropolitan nodes.
The Rustenburg LM
Economic spending:
north-western areas,
north of the central city,
later years eastern parts.
Social spending: higher
density low income
areas like Meriting,
Freedom Park, Phokeng.
Housing spending: new
housing development
close to central city, then
also to rural settlements.
Infrastructure spending:
in and around the central
city; also low income
residential areas like
Meriting.
Rustenburg Local Municipality
Areas where residential, industrial and commercial development nodes are
defined, have attracted higher levels of capital investment.
With the exception of the central areas, both the rapid bus transport system
and the development corridor did not attract substantial capital spending.
Concluding statements on the integration:
Some concepts of the SDF strategies did indeed influenced
capital spending patterns, however there is still significant
scope to improve on the integration and alignment.
All case-study municipalities identified measures to manage urban growth (urban
edge, compaction, densification, development corridors, viable nodes).
And to address connectivity (BRT, IRT, Rapid Bus Transport system).
Public transport corridors (focus areas for development & intensification) has high
levels of influence over investment in the City of Cape Town, but less pronounced
in the City of Jo’Burg & Rustenburg LM.
Areas identified as development nodes (residential, industrial, commercial)
generally attracted higher levels of capital spending.
There is evidence of capital spending directed towards marginalised areas,
although the central core is the main focus. Mainly due to urban renewal & the
main centre of the transport system.
There are evidence of integrated spending for housing projects & its infrastructure.
Although many housing projects are located outside the main development &
accessibility areas, municipalities are using expensive transport infrastructure
investment to connect fragmented settlements.
Government’s unique capacity to secure
consensus between public & private capital
investment, enabling the achievement of multiple
development aims such as economic
development, employment creation and service
delivery (UN-Habitat, 2008).
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Proportion of
persons
employed
2001
58.4
2011
63.3
Unemployment
rate (expanded)
24.0
18.4
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
CAPEX 2011
CAPEX 2012
CAPEX 2011
CAPEX 2012
Stats SA collects CAPEX data from National, Provincial, District, Municipal public
entities; and public corporations.
Important source for empirical evidence on the implications of infrastructure
spending: does it contribute to growth in SA? Does it reduce poverty?
Data must be spatial referenced – location of spending.
SDFs must give direction to capital expenditure.
Municipal integrated geostatistical system
Provincial integrated geostatistical system
National
Municipal and provincial
Regions
Wards
Settlements
National integrated
geo-statistical
system
Dissemination
geographies with
key statistical
data
Small areas
Cadastre and addresses
Other core spatial datasets
Current data supply not
suitable for planning. Call
for innovative approaches
to provide the required
statistical data for planning.
Strong case for the spatial
management of municipal
financial data.
Implying integrated geostatistical information
systems, from National to
below the municipal level.
Framework geographies
with identifiers and
classifiers
Aligning policy will imply
standard geographical
boundaries.
Policy design and implementation
National priorities
more jobs, united state, more infrastructure,
better education and health, adequate housing
– better quality of life
Aligning policy will imply
mechanisms (like a small
spatial unit with regular key
statistical denominators)
that can aggregate to other
geographical levels
Having a national statistical
system that underpins
development planning: a
spatial expression of facts &
figures
Thank You
email: [email protected]
Acknowledgements - Danie, Herman, Amanda & Prof Geyer from CRUISE.
Slide 22
The reshaping of urban structure in
South Africa through municipal
capital investment:
Evidence from 3 municipalities
Sharthi Laldaparsad, EM Policy Research
Statistics South Africa
• Well known structural and morphological deficiencies of SA
cities
SETTLEMENT TYPE
City regions and cities (e.g CoJ,
CT, eThekwini, Nelson-Mandela Bay,
etc.)
Other towns and settlements
(excluding dispersed rural
settlements)
% POPULATION
% ECONOMY
2001
2011
(2007)
46.0
49.7
69
28.2
27.7
23
Source: Stats SA & CSIR, 2013; NUDF, 2009
• Importance
Continues to be the primary sites of population growth
Drivers of economic growth
Concentration of poverty, social and ecological challenges
• The RDP in 1994 introduced spatial planning concepts such as “the
need to break down the apartheid geography through land reform,
more compact cities and decent public transport” (1994:83) and
“densification and unification of the urban fabric” (1994:86).
• “Since 1994, densities have increased in some urban areas and there
has also been partial regeneration of inner cities, but, overall, little
progress has been made in reversing apartheid geography, and in
some cases the divides have been exacerbated” (NDP 2011: 238).
• For nearly 20 years, the concept of “restructuring South African cities”
remained at the top of the urban spatial planning agenda.
• Since 1994 several policies and legislative mechanisms were implemented to
transform the spatial landscape of SA.
• SDFs are regarded as the key spatial restructuring tool for local municipalities.
• Perhaps the most under-recognised instrument for spatial restructuring is the
municipal budget itself.
• The need has arose for a comprehensive spatial vision for the country.
• A strategic approach to capital investment is essential to enable spatial
transformation.
• Infrastructure planning more powerful in shaping the spatial structure of
cities than spatial planning (Todes, 2008).
• Aligning & integrating the two, effective restructuring mechanism for local
municipalities. To what extent is there alignment in the City of Jo’Burg, City of
Cape Town, & the Rustenburg Local Municipality.
The presentation looks at • the capital investment patterns in 3 municipalities of South Africa
over the five-year period, 2007/8 to 2011/12.
• whether municipal capital spending patterns have contributed to
reshaping the spatial structure of the municipalities.
• whether municipal capital investment follows the strategic vision
of the IDPs and the SDFs.
• the statistical and geographical frameworks underpinning such
planning.
Capital spending for the five-year period
Capital spending has largely
benefitted key historical economic
hubs. Other areas have benefited
but to a lesser extent.
CoJ
Capital
expenditure (% of
CoCT
RLM
Average
15
21.5
16.7
17.7
municipal budget)
Capital spending between 15-21% of
municipal budget. Over 80% spent
on basic services infrastructure.
Economic (%)
2.4
1.2
1.1
1.5
Social (%)
4.4
6.8
7.2
6.1
Given budget constraints more
motivation to align policies.
Housing (%)
10.2
8.1
3.1
7.1
Infrastructure (%)
81.1
81.4
86.6
83.0
The City of Jo’Burg
Economic spending:
south, south east parts
of the city (CBD, City
Deep, Devland); parts of
Soweto.
Social spending: parts of
Soweto; City Centre,
Cosmos City
Housing spending:
southern parts, eastwest corridor; also in
Cosmos City.
Infrastructure spending:
City Centre, Cosmos City,
Diepsloot area.
The City of Jo’Burg
Highest spending in the consolidation area (public transport, soccer infrastructure,
inner city regeneration), although SDF strategy mentions it should limit spending
there.
Spending for new housing development outside the densification priority area and
movement system of the city. Mixed-use and industrial nodes have attracted higher
levels of capital spending.
Central city areas have attracted high levels of capital spending, whilst
other public transport management areas have not.
The City of Cape Town
Economic spending: CBD, southeast parts of the City; urban
regeneration areas like Mfuleni,
Maccassar, Khayelitsha.
Social spending: CBD, southeast parts of the City like Langa,
Blue Downs, Khayelitsha.
Housing spending: southern &
south-east suburbs (Belhar,
Khayelitsha, Bellmont Park), far
north-western parts (Atlantis),
Kuilsrivier & Brackenfell areas.
Infrastructure spending: In and
around the CBD (Green Point,
Milnerton areas).
The City of Cape Town
Accessibility grid in and around the CBD have attracted high capital
spending.
IRT (phase 1) has influenced spending patterns. Areas in the far north, not
part of the accessibility grid, linked thro IRT.
Parts of the marginalised area in the SE of the city have received capital
spending, but much lower than the designated metropolitan nodes.
The Rustenburg LM
Economic spending:
north-western areas,
north of the central city,
later years eastern parts.
Social spending: higher
density low income
areas like Meriting,
Freedom Park, Phokeng.
Housing spending: new
housing development
close to central city, then
also to rural settlements.
Infrastructure spending:
in and around the central
city; also low income
residential areas like
Meriting.
Rustenburg Local Municipality
Areas where residential, industrial and commercial development nodes are
defined, have attracted higher levels of capital investment.
With the exception of the central areas, both the rapid bus transport system
and the development corridor did not attract substantial capital spending.
Concluding statements on the integration:
Some concepts of the SDF strategies did indeed influenced
capital spending patterns, however there is still significant
scope to improve on the integration and alignment.
All case-study municipalities identified measures to manage urban growth (urban
edge, compaction, densification, development corridors, viable nodes).
And to address connectivity (BRT, IRT, Rapid Bus Transport system).
Public transport corridors (focus areas for development & intensification) has high
levels of influence over investment in the City of Cape Town, but less pronounced
in the City of Jo’Burg & Rustenburg LM.
Areas identified as development nodes (residential, industrial, commercial)
generally attracted higher levels of capital spending.
There is evidence of capital spending directed towards marginalised areas,
although the central core is the main focus. Mainly due to urban renewal & the
main centre of the transport system.
There are evidence of integrated spending for housing projects & its infrastructure.
Although many housing projects are located outside the main development &
accessibility areas, municipalities are using expensive transport infrastructure
investment to connect fragmented settlements.
Government’s unique capacity to secure
consensus between public & private capital
investment, enabling the achievement of multiple
development aims such as economic
development, employment creation and service
delivery (UN-Habitat, 2008).
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Proportion of
persons
employed
2001
58.4
2011
63.3
Unemployment
rate (expanded)
24.0
18.4
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
CAPEX 2011
CAPEX 2012
CAPEX 2011
CAPEX 2012
Stats SA collects CAPEX data from National, Provincial, District, Municipal public
entities; and public corporations.
Important source for empirical evidence on the implications of infrastructure
spending: does it contribute to growth in SA? Does it reduce poverty?
Data must be spatial referenced – location of spending.
SDFs must give direction to capital expenditure.
Municipal integrated geostatistical system
Provincial integrated geostatistical system
National
Municipal and provincial
Regions
Wards
Settlements
National integrated
geo-statistical
system
Dissemination
geographies with
key statistical
data
Small areas
Cadastre and addresses
Other core spatial datasets
Current data supply not
suitable for planning. Call
for innovative approaches
to provide the required
statistical data for planning.
Strong case for the spatial
management of municipal
financial data.
Implying integrated geostatistical information
systems, from National to
below the municipal level.
Framework geographies
with identifiers and
classifiers
Aligning policy will imply
standard geographical
boundaries.
Policy design and implementation
National priorities
more jobs, united state, more infrastructure,
better education and health, adequate housing
– better quality of life
Aligning policy will imply
mechanisms (like a small
spatial unit with regular key
statistical denominators)
that can aggregate to other
geographical levels
Having a national statistical
system that underpins
development planning: a
spatial expression of facts &
figures
Thank You
email: [email protected]
Acknowledgements - Danie, Herman, Amanda & Prof Geyer from CRUISE.
The reshaping of urban structure in
South Africa through municipal
capital investment:
Evidence from 3 municipalities
Sharthi Laldaparsad, EM Policy Research
Statistics South Africa
• Well known structural and morphological deficiencies of SA
cities
SETTLEMENT TYPE
City regions and cities (e.g CoJ,
CT, eThekwini, Nelson-Mandela Bay,
etc.)
Other towns and settlements
(excluding dispersed rural
settlements)
% POPULATION
% ECONOMY
2001
2011
(2007)
46.0
49.7
69
28.2
27.7
23
Source: Stats SA & CSIR, 2013; NUDF, 2009
• Importance
Continues to be the primary sites of population growth
Drivers of economic growth
Concentration of poverty, social and ecological challenges
• The RDP in 1994 introduced spatial planning concepts such as “the
need to break down the apartheid geography through land reform,
more compact cities and decent public transport” (1994:83) and
“densification and unification of the urban fabric” (1994:86).
• “Since 1994, densities have increased in some urban areas and there
has also been partial regeneration of inner cities, but, overall, little
progress has been made in reversing apartheid geography, and in
some cases the divides have been exacerbated” (NDP 2011: 238).
• For nearly 20 years, the concept of “restructuring South African cities”
remained at the top of the urban spatial planning agenda.
• Since 1994 several policies and legislative mechanisms were implemented to
transform the spatial landscape of SA.
• SDFs are regarded as the key spatial restructuring tool for local municipalities.
• Perhaps the most under-recognised instrument for spatial restructuring is the
municipal budget itself.
• The need has arose for a comprehensive spatial vision for the country.
• A strategic approach to capital investment is essential to enable spatial
transformation.
• Infrastructure planning more powerful in shaping the spatial structure of
cities than spatial planning (Todes, 2008).
• Aligning & integrating the two, effective restructuring mechanism for local
municipalities. To what extent is there alignment in the City of Jo’Burg, City of
Cape Town, & the Rustenburg Local Municipality.
The presentation looks at • the capital investment patterns in 3 municipalities of South Africa
over the five-year period, 2007/8 to 2011/12.
• whether municipal capital spending patterns have contributed to
reshaping the spatial structure of the municipalities.
• whether municipal capital investment follows the strategic vision
of the IDPs and the SDFs.
• the statistical and geographical frameworks underpinning such
planning.
Capital spending for the five-year period
Capital spending has largely
benefitted key historical economic
hubs. Other areas have benefited
but to a lesser extent.
CoJ
Capital
expenditure (% of
CoCT
RLM
Average
15
21.5
16.7
17.7
municipal budget)
Capital spending between 15-21% of
municipal budget. Over 80% spent
on basic services infrastructure.
Economic (%)
2.4
1.2
1.1
1.5
Social (%)
4.4
6.8
7.2
6.1
Given budget constraints more
motivation to align policies.
Housing (%)
10.2
8.1
3.1
7.1
Infrastructure (%)
81.1
81.4
86.6
83.0
The City of Jo’Burg
Economic spending:
south, south east parts
of the city (CBD, City
Deep, Devland); parts of
Soweto.
Social spending: parts of
Soweto; City Centre,
Cosmos City
Housing spending:
southern parts, eastwest corridor; also in
Cosmos City.
Infrastructure spending:
City Centre, Cosmos City,
Diepsloot area.
The City of Jo’Burg
Highest spending in the consolidation area (public transport, soccer infrastructure,
inner city regeneration), although SDF strategy mentions it should limit spending
there.
Spending for new housing development outside the densification priority area and
movement system of the city. Mixed-use and industrial nodes have attracted higher
levels of capital spending.
Central city areas have attracted high levels of capital spending, whilst
other public transport management areas have not.
The City of Cape Town
Economic spending: CBD, southeast parts of the City; urban
regeneration areas like Mfuleni,
Maccassar, Khayelitsha.
Social spending: CBD, southeast parts of the City like Langa,
Blue Downs, Khayelitsha.
Housing spending: southern &
south-east suburbs (Belhar,
Khayelitsha, Bellmont Park), far
north-western parts (Atlantis),
Kuilsrivier & Brackenfell areas.
Infrastructure spending: In and
around the CBD (Green Point,
Milnerton areas).
The City of Cape Town
Accessibility grid in and around the CBD have attracted high capital
spending.
IRT (phase 1) has influenced spending patterns. Areas in the far north, not
part of the accessibility grid, linked thro IRT.
Parts of the marginalised area in the SE of the city have received capital
spending, but much lower than the designated metropolitan nodes.
The Rustenburg LM
Economic spending:
north-western areas,
north of the central city,
later years eastern parts.
Social spending: higher
density low income
areas like Meriting,
Freedom Park, Phokeng.
Housing spending: new
housing development
close to central city, then
also to rural settlements.
Infrastructure spending:
in and around the central
city; also low income
residential areas like
Meriting.
Rustenburg Local Municipality
Areas where residential, industrial and commercial development nodes are
defined, have attracted higher levels of capital investment.
With the exception of the central areas, both the rapid bus transport system
and the development corridor did not attract substantial capital spending.
Concluding statements on the integration:
Some concepts of the SDF strategies did indeed influenced
capital spending patterns, however there is still significant
scope to improve on the integration and alignment.
All case-study municipalities identified measures to manage urban growth (urban
edge, compaction, densification, development corridors, viable nodes).
And to address connectivity (BRT, IRT, Rapid Bus Transport system).
Public transport corridors (focus areas for development & intensification) has high
levels of influence over investment in the City of Cape Town, but less pronounced
in the City of Jo’Burg & Rustenburg LM.
Areas identified as development nodes (residential, industrial, commercial)
generally attracted higher levels of capital spending.
There is evidence of capital spending directed towards marginalised areas,
although the central core is the main focus. Mainly due to urban renewal & the
main centre of the transport system.
There are evidence of integrated spending for housing projects & its infrastructure.
Although many housing projects are located outside the main development &
accessibility areas, municipalities are using expensive transport infrastructure
investment to connect fragmented settlements.
Government’s unique capacity to secure
consensus between public & private capital
investment, enabling the achievement of multiple
development aims such as economic
development, employment creation and service
delivery (UN-Habitat, 2008).
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Proportion of
persons
employed
2001
58.4
2011
63.3
Unemployment
rate (expanded)
24.0
18.4
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
CAPEX 2011
CAPEX 2012
CAPEX 2011
CAPEX 2012
Stats SA collects CAPEX data from National, Provincial, District, Municipal public
entities; and public corporations.
Important source for empirical evidence on the implications of infrastructure
spending: does it contribute to growth in SA? Does it reduce poverty?
Data must be spatial referenced – location of spending.
SDFs must give direction to capital expenditure.
Municipal integrated geostatistical system
Provincial integrated geostatistical system
National
Municipal and provincial
Regions
Wards
Settlements
National integrated
geo-statistical
system
Dissemination
geographies with
key statistical
data
Small areas
Cadastre and addresses
Other core spatial datasets
Current data supply not
suitable for planning. Call
for innovative approaches
to provide the required
statistical data for planning.
Strong case for the spatial
management of municipal
financial data.
Implying integrated geostatistical information
systems, from National to
below the municipal level.
Framework geographies
with identifiers and
classifiers
Aligning policy will imply
standard geographical
boundaries.
Policy design and implementation
National priorities
more jobs, united state, more infrastructure,
better education and health, adequate housing
– better quality of life
Aligning policy will imply
mechanisms (like a small
spatial unit with regular key
statistical denominators)
that can aggregate to other
geographical levels
Having a national statistical
system that underpins
development planning: a
spatial expression of facts &
figures
Thank You
email: [email protected]
Acknowledgements - Danie, Herman, Amanda & Prof Geyer from CRUISE.
Slide 2
The reshaping of urban structure in
South Africa through municipal
capital investment:
Evidence from 3 municipalities
Sharthi Laldaparsad, EM Policy Research
Statistics South Africa
• Well known structural and morphological deficiencies of SA
cities
SETTLEMENT TYPE
City regions and cities (e.g CoJ,
CT, eThekwini, Nelson-Mandela Bay,
etc.)
Other towns and settlements
(excluding dispersed rural
settlements)
% POPULATION
% ECONOMY
2001
2011
(2007)
46.0
49.7
69
28.2
27.7
23
Source: Stats SA & CSIR, 2013; NUDF, 2009
• Importance
Continues to be the primary sites of population growth
Drivers of economic growth
Concentration of poverty, social and ecological challenges
• The RDP in 1994 introduced spatial planning concepts such as “the
need to break down the apartheid geography through land reform,
more compact cities and decent public transport” (1994:83) and
“densification and unification of the urban fabric” (1994:86).
• “Since 1994, densities have increased in some urban areas and there
has also been partial regeneration of inner cities, but, overall, little
progress has been made in reversing apartheid geography, and in
some cases the divides have been exacerbated” (NDP 2011: 238).
• For nearly 20 years, the concept of “restructuring South African cities”
remained at the top of the urban spatial planning agenda.
• Since 1994 several policies and legislative mechanisms were implemented to
transform the spatial landscape of SA.
• SDFs are regarded as the key spatial restructuring tool for local municipalities.
• Perhaps the most under-recognised instrument for spatial restructuring is the
municipal budget itself.
• The need has arose for a comprehensive spatial vision for the country.
• A strategic approach to capital investment is essential to enable spatial
transformation.
• Infrastructure planning more powerful in shaping the spatial structure of
cities than spatial planning (Todes, 2008).
• Aligning & integrating the two, effective restructuring mechanism for local
municipalities. To what extent is there alignment in the City of Jo’Burg, City of
Cape Town, & the Rustenburg Local Municipality.
The presentation looks at • the capital investment patterns in 3 municipalities of South Africa
over the five-year period, 2007/8 to 2011/12.
• whether municipal capital spending patterns have contributed to
reshaping the spatial structure of the municipalities.
• whether municipal capital investment follows the strategic vision
of the IDPs and the SDFs.
• the statistical and geographical frameworks underpinning such
planning.
Capital spending for the five-year period
Capital spending has largely
benefitted key historical economic
hubs. Other areas have benefited
but to a lesser extent.
CoJ
Capital
expenditure (% of
CoCT
RLM
Average
15
21.5
16.7
17.7
municipal budget)
Capital spending between 15-21% of
municipal budget. Over 80% spent
on basic services infrastructure.
Economic (%)
2.4
1.2
1.1
1.5
Social (%)
4.4
6.8
7.2
6.1
Given budget constraints more
motivation to align policies.
Housing (%)
10.2
8.1
3.1
7.1
Infrastructure (%)
81.1
81.4
86.6
83.0
The City of Jo’Burg
Economic spending:
south, south east parts
of the city (CBD, City
Deep, Devland); parts of
Soweto.
Social spending: parts of
Soweto; City Centre,
Cosmos City
Housing spending:
southern parts, eastwest corridor; also in
Cosmos City.
Infrastructure spending:
City Centre, Cosmos City,
Diepsloot area.
The City of Jo’Burg
Highest spending in the consolidation area (public transport, soccer infrastructure,
inner city regeneration), although SDF strategy mentions it should limit spending
there.
Spending for new housing development outside the densification priority area and
movement system of the city. Mixed-use and industrial nodes have attracted higher
levels of capital spending.
Central city areas have attracted high levels of capital spending, whilst
other public transport management areas have not.
The City of Cape Town
Economic spending: CBD, southeast parts of the City; urban
regeneration areas like Mfuleni,
Maccassar, Khayelitsha.
Social spending: CBD, southeast parts of the City like Langa,
Blue Downs, Khayelitsha.
Housing spending: southern &
south-east suburbs (Belhar,
Khayelitsha, Bellmont Park), far
north-western parts (Atlantis),
Kuilsrivier & Brackenfell areas.
Infrastructure spending: In and
around the CBD (Green Point,
Milnerton areas).
The City of Cape Town
Accessibility grid in and around the CBD have attracted high capital
spending.
IRT (phase 1) has influenced spending patterns. Areas in the far north, not
part of the accessibility grid, linked thro IRT.
Parts of the marginalised area in the SE of the city have received capital
spending, but much lower than the designated metropolitan nodes.
The Rustenburg LM
Economic spending:
north-western areas,
north of the central city,
later years eastern parts.
Social spending: higher
density low income
areas like Meriting,
Freedom Park, Phokeng.
Housing spending: new
housing development
close to central city, then
also to rural settlements.
Infrastructure spending:
in and around the central
city; also low income
residential areas like
Meriting.
Rustenburg Local Municipality
Areas where residential, industrial and commercial development nodes are
defined, have attracted higher levels of capital investment.
With the exception of the central areas, both the rapid bus transport system
and the development corridor did not attract substantial capital spending.
Concluding statements on the integration:
Some concepts of the SDF strategies did indeed influenced
capital spending patterns, however there is still significant
scope to improve on the integration and alignment.
All case-study municipalities identified measures to manage urban growth (urban
edge, compaction, densification, development corridors, viable nodes).
And to address connectivity (BRT, IRT, Rapid Bus Transport system).
Public transport corridors (focus areas for development & intensification) has high
levels of influence over investment in the City of Cape Town, but less pronounced
in the City of Jo’Burg & Rustenburg LM.
Areas identified as development nodes (residential, industrial, commercial)
generally attracted higher levels of capital spending.
There is evidence of capital spending directed towards marginalised areas,
although the central core is the main focus. Mainly due to urban renewal & the
main centre of the transport system.
There are evidence of integrated spending for housing projects & its infrastructure.
Although many housing projects are located outside the main development &
accessibility areas, municipalities are using expensive transport infrastructure
investment to connect fragmented settlements.
Government’s unique capacity to secure
consensus between public & private capital
investment, enabling the achievement of multiple
development aims such as economic
development, employment creation and service
delivery (UN-Habitat, 2008).
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Proportion of
persons
employed
2001
58.4
2011
63.3
Unemployment
rate (expanded)
24.0
18.4
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
CAPEX 2011
CAPEX 2012
CAPEX 2011
CAPEX 2012
Stats SA collects CAPEX data from National, Provincial, District, Municipal public
entities; and public corporations.
Important source for empirical evidence on the implications of infrastructure
spending: does it contribute to growth in SA? Does it reduce poverty?
Data must be spatial referenced – location of spending.
SDFs must give direction to capital expenditure.
Municipal integrated geostatistical system
Provincial integrated geostatistical system
National
Municipal and provincial
Regions
Wards
Settlements
National integrated
geo-statistical
system
Dissemination
geographies with
key statistical
data
Small areas
Cadastre and addresses
Other core spatial datasets
Current data supply not
suitable for planning. Call
for innovative approaches
to provide the required
statistical data for planning.
Strong case for the spatial
management of municipal
financial data.
Implying integrated geostatistical information
systems, from National to
below the municipal level.
Framework geographies
with identifiers and
classifiers
Aligning policy will imply
standard geographical
boundaries.
Policy design and implementation
National priorities
more jobs, united state, more infrastructure,
better education and health, adequate housing
– better quality of life
Aligning policy will imply
mechanisms (like a small
spatial unit with regular key
statistical denominators)
that can aggregate to other
geographical levels
Having a national statistical
system that underpins
development planning: a
spatial expression of facts &
figures
Thank You
email: [email protected]
Acknowledgements - Danie, Herman, Amanda & Prof Geyer from CRUISE.
Slide 3
The reshaping of urban structure in
South Africa through municipal
capital investment:
Evidence from 3 municipalities
Sharthi Laldaparsad, EM Policy Research
Statistics South Africa
• Well known structural and morphological deficiencies of SA
cities
SETTLEMENT TYPE
City regions and cities (e.g CoJ,
CT, eThekwini, Nelson-Mandela Bay,
etc.)
Other towns and settlements
(excluding dispersed rural
settlements)
% POPULATION
% ECONOMY
2001
2011
(2007)
46.0
49.7
69
28.2
27.7
23
Source: Stats SA & CSIR, 2013; NUDF, 2009
• Importance
Continues to be the primary sites of population growth
Drivers of economic growth
Concentration of poverty, social and ecological challenges
• The RDP in 1994 introduced spatial planning concepts such as “the
need to break down the apartheid geography through land reform,
more compact cities and decent public transport” (1994:83) and
“densification and unification of the urban fabric” (1994:86).
• “Since 1994, densities have increased in some urban areas and there
has also been partial regeneration of inner cities, but, overall, little
progress has been made in reversing apartheid geography, and in
some cases the divides have been exacerbated” (NDP 2011: 238).
• For nearly 20 years, the concept of “restructuring South African cities”
remained at the top of the urban spatial planning agenda.
• Since 1994 several policies and legislative mechanisms were implemented to
transform the spatial landscape of SA.
• SDFs are regarded as the key spatial restructuring tool for local municipalities.
• Perhaps the most under-recognised instrument for spatial restructuring is the
municipal budget itself.
• The need has arose for a comprehensive spatial vision for the country.
• A strategic approach to capital investment is essential to enable spatial
transformation.
• Infrastructure planning more powerful in shaping the spatial structure of
cities than spatial planning (Todes, 2008).
• Aligning & integrating the two, effective restructuring mechanism for local
municipalities. To what extent is there alignment in the City of Jo’Burg, City of
Cape Town, & the Rustenburg Local Municipality.
The presentation looks at • the capital investment patterns in 3 municipalities of South Africa
over the five-year period, 2007/8 to 2011/12.
• whether municipal capital spending patterns have contributed to
reshaping the spatial structure of the municipalities.
• whether municipal capital investment follows the strategic vision
of the IDPs and the SDFs.
• the statistical and geographical frameworks underpinning such
planning.
Capital spending for the five-year period
Capital spending has largely
benefitted key historical economic
hubs. Other areas have benefited
but to a lesser extent.
CoJ
Capital
expenditure (% of
CoCT
RLM
Average
15
21.5
16.7
17.7
municipal budget)
Capital spending between 15-21% of
municipal budget. Over 80% spent
on basic services infrastructure.
Economic (%)
2.4
1.2
1.1
1.5
Social (%)
4.4
6.8
7.2
6.1
Given budget constraints more
motivation to align policies.
Housing (%)
10.2
8.1
3.1
7.1
Infrastructure (%)
81.1
81.4
86.6
83.0
The City of Jo’Burg
Economic spending:
south, south east parts
of the city (CBD, City
Deep, Devland); parts of
Soweto.
Social spending: parts of
Soweto; City Centre,
Cosmos City
Housing spending:
southern parts, eastwest corridor; also in
Cosmos City.
Infrastructure spending:
City Centre, Cosmos City,
Diepsloot area.
The City of Jo’Burg
Highest spending in the consolidation area (public transport, soccer infrastructure,
inner city regeneration), although SDF strategy mentions it should limit spending
there.
Spending for new housing development outside the densification priority area and
movement system of the city. Mixed-use and industrial nodes have attracted higher
levels of capital spending.
Central city areas have attracted high levels of capital spending, whilst
other public transport management areas have not.
The City of Cape Town
Economic spending: CBD, southeast parts of the City; urban
regeneration areas like Mfuleni,
Maccassar, Khayelitsha.
Social spending: CBD, southeast parts of the City like Langa,
Blue Downs, Khayelitsha.
Housing spending: southern &
south-east suburbs (Belhar,
Khayelitsha, Bellmont Park), far
north-western parts (Atlantis),
Kuilsrivier & Brackenfell areas.
Infrastructure spending: In and
around the CBD (Green Point,
Milnerton areas).
The City of Cape Town
Accessibility grid in and around the CBD have attracted high capital
spending.
IRT (phase 1) has influenced spending patterns. Areas in the far north, not
part of the accessibility grid, linked thro IRT.
Parts of the marginalised area in the SE of the city have received capital
spending, but much lower than the designated metropolitan nodes.
The Rustenburg LM
Economic spending:
north-western areas,
north of the central city,
later years eastern parts.
Social spending: higher
density low income
areas like Meriting,
Freedom Park, Phokeng.
Housing spending: new
housing development
close to central city, then
also to rural settlements.
Infrastructure spending:
in and around the central
city; also low income
residential areas like
Meriting.
Rustenburg Local Municipality
Areas where residential, industrial and commercial development nodes are
defined, have attracted higher levels of capital investment.
With the exception of the central areas, both the rapid bus transport system
and the development corridor did not attract substantial capital spending.
Concluding statements on the integration:
Some concepts of the SDF strategies did indeed influenced
capital spending patterns, however there is still significant
scope to improve on the integration and alignment.
All case-study municipalities identified measures to manage urban growth (urban
edge, compaction, densification, development corridors, viable nodes).
And to address connectivity (BRT, IRT, Rapid Bus Transport system).
Public transport corridors (focus areas for development & intensification) has high
levels of influence over investment in the City of Cape Town, but less pronounced
in the City of Jo’Burg & Rustenburg LM.
Areas identified as development nodes (residential, industrial, commercial)
generally attracted higher levels of capital spending.
There is evidence of capital spending directed towards marginalised areas,
although the central core is the main focus. Mainly due to urban renewal & the
main centre of the transport system.
There are evidence of integrated spending for housing projects & its infrastructure.
Although many housing projects are located outside the main development &
accessibility areas, municipalities are using expensive transport infrastructure
investment to connect fragmented settlements.
Government’s unique capacity to secure
consensus between public & private capital
investment, enabling the achievement of multiple
development aims such as economic
development, employment creation and service
delivery (UN-Habitat, 2008).
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Proportion of
persons
employed
2001
58.4
2011
63.3
Unemployment
rate (expanded)
24.0
18.4
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
CAPEX 2011
CAPEX 2012
CAPEX 2011
CAPEX 2012
Stats SA collects CAPEX data from National, Provincial, District, Municipal public
entities; and public corporations.
Important source for empirical evidence on the implications of infrastructure
spending: does it contribute to growth in SA? Does it reduce poverty?
Data must be spatial referenced – location of spending.
SDFs must give direction to capital expenditure.
Municipal integrated geostatistical system
Provincial integrated geostatistical system
National
Municipal and provincial
Regions
Wards
Settlements
National integrated
geo-statistical
system
Dissemination
geographies with
key statistical
data
Small areas
Cadastre and addresses
Other core spatial datasets
Current data supply not
suitable for planning. Call
for innovative approaches
to provide the required
statistical data for planning.
Strong case for the spatial
management of municipal
financial data.
Implying integrated geostatistical information
systems, from National to
below the municipal level.
Framework geographies
with identifiers and
classifiers
Aligning policy will imply
standard geographical
boundaries.
Policy design and implementation
National priorities
more jobs, united state, more infrastructure,
better education and health, adequate housing
– better quality of life
Aligning policy will imply
mechanisms (like a small
spatial unit with regular key
statistical denominators)
that can aggregate to other
geographical levels
Having a national statistical
system that underpins
development planning: a
spatial expression of facts &
figures
Thank You
email: [email protected]
Acknowledgements - Danie, Herman, Amanda & Prof Geyer from CRUISE.
Slide 4
The reshaping of urban structure in
South Africa through municipal
capital investment:
Evidence from 3 municipalities
Sharthi Laldaparsad, EM Policy Research
Statistics South Africa
• Well known structural and morphological deficiencies of SA
cities
SETTLEMENT TYPE
City regions and cities (e.g CoJ,
CT, eThekwini, Nelson-Mandela Bay,
etc.)
Other towns and settlements
(excluding dispersed rural
settlements)
% POPULATION
% ECONOMY
2001
2011
(2007)
46.0
49.7
69
28.2
27.7
23
Source: Stats SA & CSIR, 2013; NUDF, 2009
• Importance
Continues to be the primary sites of population growth
Drivers of economic growth
Concentration of poverty, social and ecological challenges
• The RDP in 1994 introduced spatial planning concepts such as “the
need to break down the apartheid geography through land reform,
more compact cities and decent public transport” (1994:83) and
“densification and unification of the urban fabric” (1994:86).
• “Since 1994, densities have increased in some urban areas and there
has also been partial regeneration of inner cities, but, overall, little
progress has been made in reversing apartheid geography, and in
some cases the divides have been exacerbated” (NDP 2011: 238).
• For nearly 20 years, the concept of “restructuring South African cities”
remained at the top of the urban spatial planning agenda.
• Since 1994 several policies and legislative mechanisms were implemented to
transform the spatial landscape of SA.
• SDFs are regarded as the key spatial restructuring tool for local municipalities.
• Perhaps the most under-recognised instrument for spatial restructuring is the
municipal budget itself.
• The need has arose for a comprehensive spatial vision for the country.
• A strategic approach to capital investment is essential to enable spatial
transformation.
• Infrastructure planning more powerful in shaping the spatial structure of
cities than spatial planning (Todes, 2008).
• Aligning & integrating the two, effective restructuring mechanism for local
municipalities. To what extent is there alignment in the City of Jo’Burg, City of
Cape Town, & the Rustenburg Local Municipality.
The presentation looks at • the capital investment patterns in 3 municipalities of South Africa
over the five-year period, 2007/8 to 2011/12.
• whether municipal capital spending patterns have contributed to
reshaping the spatial structure of the municipalities.
• whether municipal capital investment follows the strategic vision
of the IDPs and the SDFs.
• the statistical and geographical frameworks underpinning such
planning.
Capital spending for the five-year period
Capital spending has largely
benefitted key historical economic
hubs. Other areas have benefited
but to a lesser extent.
CoJ
Capital
expenditure (% of
CoCT
RLM
Average
15
21.5
16.7
17.7
municipal budget)
Capital spending between 15-21% of
municipal budget. Over 80% spent
on basic services infrastructure.
Economic (%)
2.4
1.2
1.1
1.5
Social (%)
4.4
6.8
7.2
6.1
Given budget constraints more
motivation to align policies.
Housing (%)
10.2
8.1
3.1
7.1
Infrastructure (%)
81.1
81.4
86.6
83.0
The City of Jo’Burg
Economic spending:
south, south east parts
of the city (CBD, City
Deep, Devland); parts of
Soweto.
Social spending: parts of
Soweto; City Centre,
Cosmos City
Housing spending:
southern parts, eastwest corridor; also in
Cosmos City.
Infrastructure spending:
City Centre, Cosmos City,
Diepsloot area.
The City of Jo’Burg
Highest spending in the consolidation area (public transport, soccer infrastructure,
inner city regeneration), although SDF strategy mentions it should limit spending
there.
Spending for new housing development outside the densification priority area and
movement system of the city. Mixed-use and industrial nodes have attracted higher
levels of capital spending.
Central city areas have attracted high levels of capital spending, whilst
other public transport management areas have not.
The City of Cape Town
Economic spending: CBD, southeast parts of the City; urban
regeneration areas like Mfuleni,
Maccassar, Khayelitsha.
Social spending: CBD, southeast parts of the City like Langa,
Blue Downs, Khayelitsha.
Housing spending: southern &
south-east suburbs (Belhar,
Khayelitsha, Bellmont Park), far
north-western parts (Atlantis),
Kuilsrivier & Brackenfell areas.
Infrastructure spending: In and
around the CBD (Green Point,
Milnerton areas).
The City of Cape Town
Accessibility grid in and around the CBD have attracted high capital
spending.
IRT (phase 1) has influenced spending patterns. Areas in the far north, not
part of the accessibility grid, linked thro IRT.
Parts of the marginalised area in the SE of the city have received capital
spending, but much lower than the designated metropolitan nodes.
The Rustenburg LM
Economic spending:
north-western areas,
north of the central city,
later years eastern parts.
Social spending: higher
density low income
areas like Meriting,
Freedom Park, Phokeng.
Housing spending: new
housing development
close to central city, then
also to rural settlements.
Infrastructure spending:
in and around the central
city; also low income
residential areas like
Meriting.
Rustenburg Local Municipality
Areas where residential, industrial and commercial development nodes are
defined, have attracted higher levels of capital investment.
With the exception of the central areas, both the rapid bus transport system
and the development corridor did not attract substantial capital spending.
Concluding statements on the integration:
Some concepts of the SDF strategies did indeed influenced
capital spending patterns, however there is still significant
scope to improve on the integration and alignment.
All case-study municipalities identified measures to manage urban growth (urban
edge, compaction, densification, development corridors, viable nodes).
And to address connectivity (BRT, IRT, Rapid Bus Transport system).
Public transport corridors (focus areas for development & intensification) has high
levels of influence over investment in the City of Cape Town, but less pronounced
in the City of Jo’Burg & Rustenburg LM.
Areas identified as development nodes (residential, industrial, commercial)
generally attracted higher levels of capital spending.
There is evidence of capital spending directed towards marginalised areas,
although the central core is the main focus. Mainly due to urban renewal & the
main centre of the transport system.
There are evidence of integrated spending for housing projects & its infrastructure.
Although many housing projects are located outside the main development &
accessibility areas, municipalities are using expensive transport infrastructure
investment to connect fragmented settlements.
Government’s unique capacity to secure
consensus between public & private capital
investment, enabling the achievement of multiple
development aims such as economic
development, employment creation and service
delivery (UN-Habitat, 2008).
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Proportion of
persons
employed
2001
58.4
2011
63.3
Unemployment
rate (expanded)
24.0
18.4
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
CAPEX 2011
CAPEX 2012
CAPEX 2011
CAPEX 2012
Stats SA collects CAPEX data from National, Provincial, District, Municipal public
entities; and public corporations.
Important source for empirical evidence on the implications of infrastructure
spending: does it contribute to growth in SA? Does it reduce poverty?
Data must be spatial referenced – location of spending.
SDFs must give direction to capital expenditure.
Municipal integrated geostatistical system
Provincial integrated geostatistical system
National
Municipal and provincial
Regions
Wards
Settlements
National integrated
geo-statistical
system
Dissemination
geographies with
key statistical
data
Small areas
Cadastre and addresses
Other core spatial datasets
Current data supply not
suitable for planning. Call
for innovative approaches
to provide the required
statistical data for planning.
Strong case for the spatial
management of municipal
financial data.
Implying integrated geostatistical information
systems, from National to
below the municipal level.
Framework geographies
with identifiers and
classifiers
Aligning policy will imply
standard geographical
boundaries.
Policy design and implementation
National priorities
more jobs, united state, more infrastructure,
better education and health, adequate housing
– better quality of life
Aligning policy will imply
mechanisms (like a small
spatial unit with regular key
statistical denominators)
that can aggregate to other
geographical levels
Having a national statistical
system that underpins
development planning: a
spatial expression of facts &
figures
Thank You
email: [email protected]
Acknowledgements - Danie, Herman, Amanda & Prof Geyer from CRUISE.
Slide 5
The reshaping of urban structure in
South Africa through municipal
capital investment:
Evidence from 3 municipalities
Sharthi Laldaparsad, EM Policy Research
Statistics South Africa
• Well known structural and morphological deficiencies of SA
cities
SETTLEMENT TYPE
City regions and cities (e.g CoJ,
CT, eThekwini, Nelson-Mandela Bay,
etc.)
Other towns and settlements
(excluding dispersed rural
settlements)
% POPULATION
% ECONOMY
2001
2011
(2007)
46.0
49.7
69
28.2
27.7
23
Source: Stats SA & CSIR, 2013; NUDF, 2009
• Importance
Continues to be the primary sites of population growth
Drivers of economic growth
Concentration of poverty, social and ecological challenges
• The RDP in 1994 introduced spatial planning concepts such as “the
need to break down the apartheid geography through land reform,
more compact cities and decent public transport” (1994:83) and
“densification and unification of the urban fabric” (1994:86).
• “Since 1994, densities have increased in some urban areas and there
has also been partial regeneration of inner cities, but, overall, little
progress has been made in reversing apartheid geography, and in
some cases the divides have been exacerbated” (NDP 2011: 238).
• For nearly 20 years, the concept of “restructuring South African cities”
remained at the top of the urban spatial planning agenda.
• Since 1994 several policies and legislative mechanisms were implemented to
transform the spatial landscape of SA.
• SDFs are regarded as the key spatial restructuring tool for local municipalities.
• Perhaps the most under-recognised instrument for spatial restructuring is the
municipal budget itself.
• The need has arose for a comprehensive spatial vision for the country.
• A strategic approach to capital investment is essential to enable spatial
transformation.
• Infrastructure planning more powerful in shaping the spatial structure of
cities than spatial planning (Todes, 2008).
• Aligning & integrating the two, effective restructuring mechanism for local
municipalities. To what extent is there alignment in the City of Jo’Burg, City of
Cape Town, & the Rustenburg Local Municipality.
The presentation looks at • the capital investment patterns in 3 municipalities of South Africa
over the five-year period, 2007/8 to 2011/12.
• whether municipal capital spending patterns have contributed to
reshaping the spatial structure of the municipalities.
• whether municipal capital investment follows the strategic vision
of the IDPs and the SDFs.
• the statistical and geographical frameworks underpinning such
planning.
Capital spending for the five-year period
Capital spending has largely
benefitted key historical economic
hubs. Other areas have benefited
but to a lesser extent.
CoJ
Capital
expenditure (% of
CoCT
RLM
Average
15
21.5
16.7
17.7
municipal budget)
Capital spending between 15-21% of
municipal budget. Over 80% spent
on basic services infrastructure.
Economic (%)
2.4
1.2
1.1
1.5
Social (%)
4.4
6.8
7.2
6.1
Given budget constraints more
motivation to align policies.
Housing (%)
10.2
8.1
3.1
7.1
Infrastructure (%)
81.1
81.4
86.6
83.0
The City of Jo’Burg
Economic spending:
south, south east parts
of the city (CBD, City
Deep, Devland); parts of
Soweto.
Social spending: parts of
Soweto; City Centre,
Cosmos City
Housing spending:
southern parts, eastwest corridor; also in
Cosmos City.
Infrastructure spending:
City Centre, Cosmos City,
Diepsloot area.
The City of Jo’Burg
Highest spending in the consolidation area (public transport, soccer infrastructure,
inner city regeneration), although SDF strategy mentions it should limit spending
there.
Spending for new housing development outside the densification priority area and
movement system of the city. Mixed-use and industrial nodes have attracted higher
levels of capital spending.
Central city areas have attracted high levels of capital spending, whilst
other public transport management areas have not.
The City of Cape Town
Economic spending: CBD, southeast parts of the City; urban
regeneration areas like Mfuleni,
Maccassar, Khayelitsha.
Social spending: CBD, southeast parts of the City like Langa,
Blue Downs, Khayelitsha.
Housing spending: southern &
south-east suburbs (Belhar,
Khayelitsha, Bellmont Park), far
north-western parts (Atlantis),
Kuilsrivier & Brackenfell areas.
Infrastructure spending: In and
around the CBD (Green Point,
Milnerton areas).
The City of Cape Town
Accessibility grid in and around the CBD have attracted high capital
spending.
IRT (phase 1) has influenced spending patterns. Areas in the far north, not
part of the accessibility grid, linked thro IRT.
Parts of the marginalised area in the SE of the city have received capital
spending, but much lower than the designated metropolitan nodes.
The Rustenburg LM
Economic spending:
north-western areas,
north of the central city,
later years eastern parts.
Social spending: higher
density low income
areas like Meriting,
Freedom Park, Phokeng.
Housing spending: new
housing development
close to central city, then
also to rural settlements.
Infrastructure spending:
in and around the central
city; also low income
residential areas like
Meriting.
Rustenburg Local Municipality
Areas where residential, industrial and commercial development nodes are
defined, have attracted higher levels of capital investment.
With the exception of the central areas, both the rapid bus transport system
and the development corridor did not attract substantial capital spending.
Concluding statements on the integration:
Some concepts of the SDF strategies did indeed influenced
capital spending patterns, however there is still significant
scope to improve on the integration and alignment.
All case-study municipalities identified measures to manage urban growth (urban
edge, compaction, densification, development corridors, viable nodes).
And to address connectivity (BRT, IRT, Rapid Bus Transport system).
Public transport corridors (focus areas for development & intensification) has high
levels of influence over investment in the City of Cape Town, but less pronounced
in the City of Jo’Burg & Rustenburg LM.
Areas identified as development nodes (residential, industrial, commercial)
generally attracted higher levels of capital spending.
There is evidence of capital spending directed towards marginalised areas,
although the central core is the main focus. Mainly due to urban renewal & the
main centre of the transport system.
There are evidence of integrated spending for housing projects & its infrastructure.
Although many housing projects are located outside the main development &
accessibility areas, municipalities are using expensive transport infrastructure
investment to connect fragmented settlements.
Government’s unique capacity to secure
consensus between public & private capital
investment, enabling the achievement of multiple
development aims such as economic
development, employment creation and service
delivery (UN-Habitat, 2008).
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Proportion of
persons
employed
2001
58.4
2011
63.3
Unemployment
rate (expanded)
24.0
18.4
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
CAPEX 2011
CAPEX 2012
CAPEX 2011
CAPEX 2012
Stats SA collects CAPEX data from National, Provincial, District, Municipal public
entities; and public corporations.
Important source for empirical evidence on the implications of infrastructure
spending: does it contribute to growth in SA? Does it reduce poverty?
Data must be spatial referenced – location of spending.
SDFs must give direction to capital expenditure.
Municipal integrated geostatistical system
Provincial integrated geostatistical system
National
Municipal and provincial
Regions
Wards
Settlements
National integrated
geo-statistical
system
Dissemination
geographies with
key statistical
data
Small areas
Cadastre and addresses
Other core spatial datasets
Current data supply not
suitable for planning. Call
for innovative approaches
to provide the required
statistical data for planning.
Strong case for the spatial
management of municipal
financial data.
Implying integrated geostatistical information
systems, from National to
below the municipal level.
Framework geographies
with identifiers and
classifiers
Aligning policy will imply
standard geographical
boundaries.
Policy design and implementation
National priorities
more jobs, united state, more infrastructure,
better education and health, adequate housing
– better quality of life
Aligning policy will imply
mechanisms (like a small
spatial unit with regular key
statistical denominators)
that can aggregate to other
geographical levels
Having a national statistical
system that underpins
development planning: a
spatial expression of facts &
figures
Thank You
email: [email protected]
Acknowledgements - Danie, Herman, Amanda & Prof Geyer from CRUISE.
Slide 6
The reshaping of urban structure in
South Africa through municipal
capital investment:
Evidence from 3 municipalities
Sharthi Laldaparsad, EM Policy Research
Statistics South Africa
• Well known structural and morphological deficiencies of SA
cities
SETTLEMENT TYPE
City regions and cities (e.g CoJ,
CT, eThekwini, Nelson-Mandela Bay,
etc.)
Other towns and settlements
(excluding dispersed rural
settlements)
% POPULATION
% ECONOMY
2001
2011
(2007)
46.0
49.7
69
28.2
27.7
23
Source: Stats SA & CSIR, 2013; NUDF, 2009
• Importance
Continues to be the primary sites of population growth
Drivers of economic growth
Concentration of poverty, social and ecological challenges
• The RDP in 1994 introduced spatial planning concepts such as “the
need to break down the apartheid geography through land reform,
more compact cities and decent public transport” (1994:83) and
“densification and unification of the urban fabric” (1994:86).
• “Since 1994, densities have increased in some urban areas and there
has also been partial regeneration of inner cities, but, overall, little
progress has been made in reversing apartheid geography, and in
some cases the divides have been exacerbated” (NDP 2011: 238).
• For nearly 20 years, the concept of “restructuring South African cities”
remained at the top of the urban spatial planning agenda.
• Since 1994 several policies and legislative mechanisms were implemented to
transform the spatial landscape of SA.
• SDFs are regarded as the key spatial restructuring tool for local municipalities.
• Perhaps the most under-recognised instrument for spatial restructuring is the
municipal budget itself.
• The need has arose for a comprehensive spatial vision for the country.
• A strategic approach to capital investment is essential to enable spatial
transformation.
• Infrastructure planning more powerful in shaping the spatial structure of
cities than spatial planning (Todes, 2008).
• Aligning & integrating the two, effective restructuring mechanism for local
municipalities. To what extent is there alignment in the City of Jo’Burg, City of
Cape Town, & the Rustenburg Local Municipality.
The presentation looks at • the capital investment patterns in 3 municipalities of South Africa
over the five-year period, 2007/8 to 2011/12.
• whether municipal capital spending patterns have contributed to
reshaping the spatial structure of the municipalities.
• whether municipal capital investment follows the strategic vision
of the IDPs and the SDFs.
• the statistical and geographical frameworks underpinning such
planning.
Capital spending for the five-year period
Capital spending has largely
benefitted key historical economic
hubs. Other areas have benefited
but to a lesser extent.
CoJ
Capital
expenditure (% of
CoCT
RLM
Average
15
21.5
16.7
17.7
municipal budget)
Capital spending between 15-21% of
municipal budget. Over 80% spent
on basic services infrastructure.
Economic (%)
2.4
1.2
1.1
1.5
Social (%)
4.4
6.8
7.2
6.1
Given budget constraints more
motivation to align policies.
Housing (%)
10.2
8.1
3.1
7.1
Infrastructure (%)
81.1
81.4
86.6
83.0
The City of Jo’Burg
Economic spending:
south, south east parts
of the city (CBD, City
Deep, Devland); parts of
Soweto.
Social spending: parts of
Soweto; City Centre,
Cosmos City
Housing spending:
southern parts, eastwest corridor; also in
Cosmos City.
Infrastructure spending:
City Centre, Cosmos City,
Diepsloot area.
The City of Jo’Burg
Highest spending in the consolidation area (public transport, soccer infrastructure,
inner city regeneration), although SDF strategy mentions it should limit spending
there.
Spending for new housing development outside the densification priority area and
movement system of the city. Mixed-use and industrial nodes have attracted higher
levels of capital spending.
Central city areas have attracted high levels of capital spending, whilst
other public transport management areas have not.
The City of Cape Town
Economic spending: CBD, southeast parts of the City; urban
regeneration areas like Mfuleni,
Maccassar, Khayelitsha.
Social spending: CBD, southeast parts of the City like Langa,
Blue Downs, Khayelitsha.
Housing spending: southern &
south-east suburbs (Belhar,
Khayelitsha, Bellmont Park), far
north-western parts (Atlantis),
Kuilsrivier & Brackenfell areas.
Infrastructure spending: In and
around the CBD (Green Point,
Milnerton areas).
The City of Cape Town
Accessibility grid in and around the CBD have attracted high capital
spending.
IRT (phase 1) has influenced spending patterns. Areas in the far north, not
part of the accessibility grid, linked thro IRT.
Parts of the marginalised area in the SE of the city have received capital
spending, but much lower than the designated metropolitan nodes.
The Rustenburg LM
Economic spending:
north-western areas,
north of the central city,
later years eastern parts.
Social spending: higher
density low income
areas like Meriting,
Freedom Park, Phokeng.
Housing spending: new
housing development
close to central city, then
also to rural settlements.
Infrastructure spending:
in and around the central
city; also low income
residential areas like
Meriting.
Rustenburg Local Municipality
Areas where residential, industrial and commercial development nodes are
defined, have attracted higher levels of capital investment.
With the exception of the central areas, both the rapid bus transport system
and the development corridor did not attract substantial capital spending.
Concluding statements on the integration:
Some concepts of the SDF strategies did indeed influenced
capital spending patterns, however there is still significant
scope to improve on the integration and alignment.
All case-study municipalities identified measures to manage urban growth (urban
edge, compaction, densification, development corridors, viable nodes).
And to address connectivity (BRT, IRT, Rapid Bus Transport system).
Public transport corridors (focus areas for development & intensification) has high
levels of influence over investment in the City of Cape Town, but less pronounced
in the City of Jo’Burg & Rustenburg LM.
Areas identified as development nodes (residential, industrial, commercial)
generally attracted higher levels of capital spending.
There is evidence of capital spending directed towards marginalised areas,
although the central core is the main focus. Mainly due to urban renewal & the
main centre of the transport system.
There are evidence of integrated spending for housing projects & its infrastructure.
Although many housing projects are located outside the main development &
accessibility areas, municipalities are using expensive transport infrastructure
investment to connect fragmented settlements.
Government’s unique capacity to secure
consensus between public & private capital
investment, enabling the achievement of multiple
development aims such as economic
development, employment creation and service
delivery (UN-Habitat, 2008).
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Proportion of
persons
employed
2001
58.4
2011
63.3
Unemployment
rate (expanded)
24.0
18.4
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
CAPEX 2011
CAPEX 2012
CAPEX 2011
CAPEX 2012
Stats SA collects CAPEX data from National, Provincial, District, Municipal public
entities; and public corporations.
Important source for empirical evidence on the implications of infrastructure
spending: does it contribute to growth in SA? Does it reduce poverty?
Data must be spatial referenced – location of spending.
SDFs must give direction to capital expenditure.
Municipal integrated geostatistical system
Provincial integrated geostatistical system
National
Municipal and provincial
Regions
Wards
Settlements
National integrated
geo-statistical
system
Dissemination
geographies with
key statistical
data
Small areas
Cadastre and addresses
Other core spatial datasets
Current data supply not
suitable for planning. Call
for innovative approaches
to provide the required
statistical data for planning.
Strong case for the spatial
management of municipal
financial data.
Implying integrated geostatistical information
systems, from National to
below the municipal level.
Framework geographies
with identifiers and
classifiers
Aligning policy will imply
standard geographical
boundaries.
Policy design and implementation
National priorities
more jobs, united state, more infrastructure,
better education and health, adequate housing
– better quality of life
Aligning policy will imply
mechanisms (like a small
spatial unit with regular key
statistical denominators)
that can aggregate to other
geographical levels
Having a national statistical
system that underpins
development planning: a
spatial expression of facts &
figures
Thank You
email: [email protected]
Acknowledgements - Danie, Herman, Amanda & Prof Geyer from CRUISE.
Slide 7
The reshaping of urban structure in
South Africa through municipal
capital investment:
Evidence from 3 municipalities
Sharthi Laldaparsad, EM Policy Research
Statistics South Africa
• Well known structural and morphological deficiencies of SA
cities
SETTLEMENT TYPE
City regions and cities (e.g CoJ,
CT, eThekwini, Nelson-Mandela Bay,
etc.)
Other towns and settlements
(excluding dispersed rural
settlements)
% POPULATION
% ECONOMY
2001
2011
(2007)
46.0
49.7
69
28.2
27.7
23
Source: Stats SA & CSIR, 2013; NUDF, 2009
• Importance
Continues to be the primary sites of population growth
Drivers of economic growth
Concentration of poverty, social and ecological challenges
• The RDP in 1994 introduced spatial planning concepts such as “the
need to break down the apartheid geography through land reform,
more compact cities and decent public transport” (1994:83) and
“densification and unification of the urban fabric” (1994:86).
• “Since 1994, densities have increased in some urban areas and there
has also been partial regeneration of inner cities, but, overall, little
progress has been made in reversing apartheid geography, and in
some cases the divides have been exacerbated” (NDP 2011: 238).
• For nearly 20 years, the concept of “restructuring South African cities”
remained at the top of the urban spatial planning agenda.
• Since 1994 several policies and legislative mechanisms were implemented to
transform the spatial landscape of SA.
• SDFs are regarded as the key spatial restructuring tool for local municipalities.
• Perhaps the most under-recognised instrument for spatial restructuring is the
municipal budget itself.
• The need has arose for a comprehensive spatial vision for the country.
• A strategic approach to capital investment is essential to enable spatial
transformation.
• Infrastructure planning more powerful in shaping the spatial structure of
cities than spatial planning (Todes, 2008).
• Aligning & integrating the two, effective restructuring mechanism for local
municipalities. To what extent is there alignment in the City of Jo’Burg, City of
Cape Town, & the Rustenburg Local Municipality.
The presentation looks at • the capital investment patterns in 3 municipalities of South Africa
over the five-year period, 2007/8 to 2011/12.
• whether municipal capital spending patterns have contributed to
reshaping the spatial structure of the municipalities.
• whether municipal capital investment follows the strategic vision
of the IDPs and the SDFs.
• the statistical and geographical frameworks underpinning such
planning.
Capital spending for the five-year period
Capital spending has largely
benefitted key historical economic
hubs. Other areas have benefited
but to a lesser extent.
CoJ
Capital
expenditure (% of
CoCT
RLM
Average
15
21.5
16.7
17.7
municipal budget)
Capital spending between 15-21% of
municipal budget. Over 80% spent
on basic services infrastructure.
Economic (%)
2.4
1.2
1.1
1.5
Social (%)
4.4
6.8
7.2
6.1
Given budget constraints more
motivation to align policies.
Housing (%)
10.2
8.1
3.1
7.1
Infrastructure (%)
81.1
81.4
86.6
83.0
The City of Jo’Burg
Economic spending:
south, south east parts
of the city (CBD, City
Deep, Devland); parts of
Soweto.
Social spending: parts of
Soweto; City Centre,
Cosmos City
Housing spending:
southern parts, eastwest corridor; also in
Cosmos City.
Infrastructure spending:
City Centre, Cosmos City,
Diepsloot area.
The City of Jo’Burg
Highest spending in the consolidation area (public transport, soccer infrastructure,
inner city regeneration), although SDF strategy mentions it should limit spending
there.
Spending for new housing development outside the densification priority area and
movement system of the city. Mixed-use and industrial nodes have attracted higher
levels of capital spending.
Central city areas have attracted high levels of capital spending, whilst
other public transport management areas have not.
The City of Cape Town
Economic spending: CBD, southeast parts of the City; urban
regeneration areas like Mfuleni,
Maccassar, Khayelitsha.
Social spending: CBD, southeast parts of the City like Langa,
Blue Downs, Khayelitsha.
Housing spending: southern &
south-east suburbs (Belhar,
Khayelitsha, Bellmont Park), far
north-western parts (Atlantis),
Kuilsrivier & Brackenfell areas.
Infrastructure spending: In and
around the CBD (Green Point,
Milnerton areas).
The City of Cape Town
Accessibility grid in and around the CBD have attracted high capital
spending.
IRT (phase 1) has influenced spending patterns. Areas in the far north, not
part of the accessibility grid, linked thro IRT.
Parts of the marginalised area in the SE of the city have received capital
spending, but much lower than the designated metropolitan nodes.
The Rustenburg LM
Economic spending:
north-western areas,
north of the central city,
later years eastern parts.
Social spending: higher
density low income
areas like Meriting,
Freedom Park, Phokeng.
Housing spending: new
housing development
close to central city, then
also to rural settlements.
Infrastructure spending:
in and around the central
city; also low income
residential areas like
Meriting.
Rustenburg Local Municipality
Areas where residential, industrial and commercial development nodes are
defined, have attracted higher levels of capital investment.
With the exception of the central areas, both the rapid bus transport system
and the development corridor did not attract substantial capital spending.
Concluding statements on the integration:
Some concepts of the SDF strategies did indeed influenced
capital spending patterns, however there is still significant
scope to improve on the integration and alignment.
All case-study municipalities identified measures to manage urban growth (urban
edge, compaction, densification, development corridors, viable nodes).
And to address connectivity (BRT, IRT, Rapid Bus Transport system).
Public transport corridors (focus areas for development & intensification) has high
levels of influence over investment in the City of Cape Town, but less pronounced
in the City of Jo’Burg & Rustenburg LM.
Areas identified as development nodes (residential, industrial, commercial)
generally attracted higher levels of capital spending.
There is evidence of capital spending directed towards marginalised areas,
although the central core is the main focus. Mainly due to urban renewal & the
main centre of the transport system.
There are evidence of integrated spending for housing projects & its infrastructure.
Although many housing projects are located outside the main development &
accessibility areas, municipalities are using expensive transport infrastructure
investment to connect fragmented settlements.
Government’s unique capacity to secure
consensus between public & private capital
investment, enabling the achievement of multiple
development aims such as economic
development, employment creation and service
delivery (UN-Habitat, 2008).
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Proportion of
persons
employed
2001
58.4
2011
63.3
Unemployment
rate (expanded)
24.0
18.4
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
CAPEX 2011
CAPEX 2012
CAPEX 2011
CAPEX 2012
Stats SA collects CAPEX data from National, Provincial, District, Municipal public
entities; and public corporations.
Important source for empirical evidence on the implications of infrastructure
spending: does it contribute to growth in SA? Does it reduce poverty?
Data must be spatial referenced – location of spending.
SDFs must give direction to capital expenditure.
Municipal integrated geostatistical system
Provincial integrated geostatistical system
National
Municipal and provincial
Regions
Wards
Settlements
National integrated
geo-statistical
system
Dissemination
geographies with
key statistical
data
Small areas
Cadastre and addresses
Other core spatial datasets
Current data supply not
suitable for planning. Call
for innovative approaches
to provide the required
statistical data for planning.
Strong case for the spatial
management of municipal
financial data.
Implying integrated geostatistical information
systems, from National to
below the municipal level.
Framework geographies
with identifiers and
classifiers
Aligning policy will imply
standard geographical
boundaries.
Policy design and implementation
National priorities
more jobs, united state, more infrastructure,
better education and health, adequate housing
– better quality of life
Aligning policy will imply
mechanisms (like a small
spatial unit with regular key
statistical denominators)
that can aggregate to other
geographical levels
Having a national statistical
system that underpins
development planning: a
spatial expression of facts &
figures
Thank You
email: [email protected]
Acknowledgements - Danie, Herman, Amanda & Prof Geyer from CRUISE.
Slide 8
The reshaping of urban structure in
South Africa through municipal
capital investment:
Evidence from 3 municipalities
Sharthi Laldaparsad, EM Policy Research
Statistics South Africa
• Well known structural and morphological deficiencies of SA
cities
SETTLEMENT TYPE
City regions and cities (e.g CoJ,
CT, eThekwini, Nelson-Mandela Bay,
etc.)
Other towns and settlements
(excluding dispersed rural
settlements)
% POPULATION
% ECONOMY
2001
2011
(2007)
46.0
49.7
69
28.2
27.7
23
Source: Stats SA & CSIR, 2013; NUDF, 2009
• Importance
Continues to be the primary sites of population growth
Drivers of economic growth
Concentration of poverty, social and ecological challenges
• The RDP in 1994 introduced spatial planning concepts such as “the
need to break down the apartheid geography through land reform,
more compact cities and decent public transport” (1994:83) and
“densification and unification of the urban fabric” (1994:86).
• “Since 1994, densities have increased in some urban areas and there
has also been partial regeneration of inner cities, but, overall, little
progress has been made in reversing apartheid geography, and in
some cases the divides have been exacerbated” (NDP 2011: 238).
• For nearly 20 years, the concept of “restructuring South African cities”
remained at the top of the urban spatial planning agenda.
• Since 1994 several policies and legislative mechanisms were implemented to
transform the spatial landscape of SA.
• SDFs are regarded as the key spatial restructuring tool for local municipalities.
• Perhaps the most under-recognised instrument for spatial restructuring is the
municipal budget itself.
• The need has arose for a comprehensive spatial vision for the country.
• A strategic approach to capital investment is essential to enable spatial
transformation.
• Infrastructure planning more powerful in shaping the spatial structure of
cities than spatial planning (Todes, 2008).
• Aligning & integrating the two, effective restructuring mechanism for local
municipalities. To what extent is there alignment in the City of Jo’Burg, City of
Cape Town, & the Rustenburg Local Municipality.
The presentation looks at • the capital investment patterns in 3 municipalities of South Africa
over the five-year period, 2007/8 to 2011/12.
• whether municipal capital spending patterns have contributed to
reshaping the spatial structure of the municipalities.
• whether municipal capital investment follows the strategic vision
of the IDPs and the SDFs.
• the statistical and geographical frameworks underpinning such
planning.
Capital spending for the five-year period
Capital spending has largely
benefitted key historical economic
hubs. Other areas have benefited
but to a lesser extent.
CoJ
Capital
expenditure (% of
CoCT
RLM
Average
15
21.5
16.7
17.7
municipal budget)
Capital spending between 15-21% of
municipal budget. Over 80% spent
on basic services infrastructure.
Economic (%)
2.4
1.2
1.1
1.5
Social (%)
4.4
6.8
7.2
6.1
Given budget constraints more
motivation to align policies.
Housing (%)
10.2
8.1
3.1
7.1
Infrastructure (%)
81.1
81.4
86.6
83.0
The City of Jo’Burg
Economic spending:
south, south east parts
of the city (CBD, City
Deep, Devland); parts of
Soweto.
Social spending: parts of
Soweto; City Centre,
Cosmos City
Housing spending:
southern parts, eastwest corridor; also in
Cosmos City.
Infrastructure spending:
City Centre, Cosmos City,
Diepsloot area.
The City of Jo’Burg
Highest spending in the consolidation area (public transport, soccer infrastructure,
inner city regeneration), although SDF strategy mentions it should limit spending
there.
Spending for new housing development outside the densification priority area and
movement system of the city. Mixed-use and industrial nodes have attracted higher
levels of capital spending.
Central city areas have attracted high levels of capital spending, whilst
other public transport management areas have not.
The City of Cape Town
Economic spending: CBD, southeast parts of the City; urban
regeneration areas like Mfuleni,
Maccassar, Khayelitsha.
Social spending: CBD, southeast parts of the City like Langa,
Blue Downs, Khayelitsha.
Housing spending: southern &
south-east suburbs (Belhar,
Khayelitsha, Bellmont Park), far
north-western parts (Atlantis),
Kuilsrivier & Brackenfell areas.
Infrastructure spending: In and
around the CBD (Green Point,
Milnerton areas).
The City of Cape Town
Accessibility grid in and around the CBD have attracted high capital
spending.
IRT (phase 1) has influenced spending patterns. Areas in the far north, not
part of the accessibility grid, linked thro IRT.
Parts of the marginalised area in the SE of the city have received capital
spending, but much lower than the designated metropolitan nodes.
The Rustenburg LM
Economic spending:
north-western areas,
north of the central city,
later years eastern parts.
Social spending: higher
density low income
areas like Meriting,
Freedom Park, Phokeng.
Housing spending: new
housing development
close to central city, then
also to rural settlements.
Infrastructure spending:
in and around the central
city; also low income
residential areas like
Meriting.
Rustenburg Local Municipality
Areas where residential, industrial and commercial development nodes are
defined, have attracted higher levels of capital investment.
With the exception of the central areas, both the rapid bus transport system
and the development corridor did not attract substantial capital spending.
Concluding statements on the integration:
Some concepts of the SDF strategies did indeed influenced
capital spending patterns, however there is still significant
scope to improve on the integration and alignment.
All case-study municipalities identified measures to manage urban growth (urban
edge, compaction, densification, development corridors, viable nodes).
And to address connectivity (BRT, IRT, Rapid Bus Transport system).
Public transport corridors (focus areas for development & intensification) has high
levels of influence over investment in the City of Cape Town, but less pronounced
in the City of Jo’Burg & Rustenburg LM.
Areas identified as development nodes (residential, industrial, commercial)
generally attracted higher levels of capital spending.
There is evidence of capital spending directed towards marginalised areas,
although the central core is the main focus. Mainly due to urban renewal & the
main centre of the transport system.
There are evidence of integrated spending for housing projects & its infrastructure.
Although many housing projects are located outside the main development &
accessibility areas, municipalities are using expensive transport infrastructure
investment to connect fragmented settlements.
Government’s unique capacity to secure
consensus between public & private capital
investment, enabling the achievement of multiple
development aims such as economic
development, employment creation and service
delivery (UN-Habitat, 2008).
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Proportion of
persons
employed
2001
58.4
2011
63.3
Unemployment
rate (expanded)
24.0
18.4
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
CAPEX 2011
CAPEX 2012
CAPEX 2011
CAPEX 2012
Stats SA collects CAPEX data from National, Provincial, District, Municipal public
entities; and public corporations.
Important source for empirical evidence on the implications of infrastructure
spending: does it contribute to growth in SA? Does it reduce poverty?
Data must be spatial referenced – location of spending.
SDFs must give direction to capital expenditure.
Municipal integrated geostatistical system
Provincial integrated geostatistical system
National
Municipal and provincial
Regions
Wards
Settlements
National integrated
geo-statistical
system
Dissemination
geographies with
key statistical
data
Small areas
Cadastre and addresses
Other core spatial datasets
Current data supply not
suitable for planning. Call
for innovative approaches
to provide the required
statistical data for planning.
Strong case for the spatial
management of municipal
financial data.
Implying integrated geostatistical information
systems, from National to
below the municipal level.
Framework geographies
with identifiers and
classifiers
Aligning policy will imply
standard geographical
boundaries.
Policy design and implementation
National priorities
more jobs, united state, more infrastructure,
better education and health, adequate housing
– better quality of life
Aligning policy will imply
mechanisms (like a small
spatial unit with regular key
statistical denominators)
that can aggregate to other
geographical levels
Having a national statistical
system that underpins
development planning: a
spatial expression of facts &
figures
Thank You
email: [email protected]
Acknowledgements - Danie, Herman, Amanda & Prof Geyer from CRUISE.
Slide 9
The reshaping of urban structure in
South Africa through municipal
capital investment:
Evidence from 3 municipalities
Sharthi Laldaparsad, EM Policy Research
Statistics South Africa
• Well known structural and morphological deficiencies of SA
cities
SETTLEMENT TYPE
City regions and cities (e.g CoJ,
CT, eThekwini, Nelson-Mandela Bay,
etc.)
Other towns and settlements
(excluding dispersed rural
settlements)
% POPULATION
% ECONOMY
2001
2011
(2007)
46.0
49.7
69
28.2
27.7
23
Source: Stats SA & CSIR, 2013; NUDF, 2009
• Importance
Continues to be the primary sites of population growth
Drivers of economic growth
Concentration of poverty, social and ecological challenges
• The RDP in 1994 introduced spatial planning concepts such as “the
need to break down the apartheid geography through land reform,
more compact cities and decent public transport” (1994:83) and
“densification and unification of the urban fabric” (1994:86).
• “Since 1994, densities have increased in some urban areas and there
has also been partial regeneration of inner cities, but, overall, little
progress has been made in reversing apartheid geography, and in
some cases the divides have been exacerbated” (NDP 2011: 238).
• For nearly 20 years, the concept of “restructuring South African cities”
remained at the top of the urban spatial planning agenda.
• Since 1994 several policies and legislative mechanisms were implemented to
transform the spatial landscape of SA.
• SDFs are regarded as the key spatial restructuring tool for local municipalities.
• Perhaps the most under-recognised instrument for spatial restructuring is the
municipal budget itself.
• The need has arose for a comprehensive spatial vision for the country.
• A strategic approach to capital investment is essential to enable spatial
transformation.
• Infrastructure planning more powerful in shaping the spatial structure of
cities than spatial planning (Todes, 2008).
• Aligning & integrating the two, effective restructuring mechanism for local
municipalities. To what extent is there alignment in the City of Jo’Burg, City of
Cape Town, & the Rustenburg Local Municipality.
The presentation looks at • the capital investment patterns in 3 municipalities of South Africa
over the five-year period, 2007/8 to 2011/12.
• whether municipal capital spending patterns have contributed to
reshaping the spatial structure of the municipalities.
• whether municipal capital investment follows the strategic vision
of the IDPs and the SDFs.
• the statistical and geographical frameworks underpinning such
planning.
Capital spending for the five-year period
Capital spending has largely
benefitted key historical economic
hubs. Other areas have benefited
but to a lesser extent.
CoJ
Capital
expenditure (% of
CoCT
RLM
Average
15
21.5
16.7
17.7
municipal budget)
Capital spending between 15-21% of
municipal budget. Over 80% spent
on basic services infrastructure.
Economic (%)
2.4
1.2
1.1
1.5
Social (%)
4.4
6.8
7.2
6.1
Given budget constraints more
motivation to align policies.
Housing (%)
10.2
8.1
3.1
7.1
Infrastructure (%)
81.1
81.4
86.6
83.0
The City of Jo’Burg
Economic spending:
south, south east parts
of the city (CBD, City
Deep, Devland); parts of
Soweto.
Social spending: parts of
Soweto; City Centre,
Cosmos City
Housing spending:
southern parts, eastwest corridor; also in
Cosmos City.
Infrastructure spending:
City Centre, Cosmos City,
Diepsloot area.
The City of Jo’Burg
Highest spending in the consolidation area (public transport, soccer infrastructure,
inner city regeneration), although SDF strategy mentions it should limit spending
there.
Spending for new housing development outside the densification priority area and
movement system of the city. Mixed-use and industrial nodes have attracted higher
levels of capital spending.
Central city areas have attracted high levels of capital spending, whilst
other public transport management areas have not.
The City of Cape Town
Economic spending: CBD, southeast parts of the City; urban
regeneration areas like Mfuleni,
Maccassar, Khayelitsha.
Social spending: CBD, southeast parts of the City like Langa,
Blue Downs, Khayelitsha.
Housing spending: southern &
south-east suburbs (Belhar,
Khayelitsha, Bellmont Park), far
north-western parts (Atlantis),
Kuilsrivier & Brackenfell areas.
Infrastructure spending: In and
around the CBD (Green Point,
Milnerton areas).
The City of Cape Town
Accessibility grid in and around the CBD have attracted high capital
spending.
IRT (phase 1) has influenced spending patterns. Areas in the far north, not
part of the accessibility grid, linked thro IRT.
Parts of the marginalised area in the SE of the city have received capital
spending, but much lower than the designated metropolitan nodes.
The Rustenburg LM
Economic spending:
north-western areas,
north of the central city,
later years eastern parts.
Social spending: higher
density low income
areas like Meriting,
Freedom Park, Phokeng.
Housing spending: new
housing development
close to central city, then
also to rural settlements.
Infrastructure spending:
in and around the central
city; also low income
residential areas like
Meriting.
Rustenburg Local Municipality
Areas where residential, industrial and commercial development nodes are
defined, have attracted higher levels of capital investment.
With the exception of the central areas, both the rapid bus transport system
and the development corridor did not attract substantial capital spending.
Concluding statements on the integration:
Some concepts of the SDF strategies did indeed influenced
capital spending patterns, however there is still significant
scope to improve on the integration and alignment.
All case-study municipalities identified measures to manage urban growth (urban
edge, compaction, densification, development corridors, viable nodes).
And to address connectivity (BRT, IRT, Rapid Bus Transport system).
Public transport corridors (focus areas for development & intensification) has high
levels of influence over investment in the City of Cape Town, but less pronounced
in the City of Jo’Burg & Rustenburg LM.
Areas identified as development nodes (residential, industrial, commercial)
generally attracted higher levels of capital spending.
There is evidence of capital spending directed towards marginalised areas,
although the central core is the main focus. Mainly due to urban renewal & the
main centre of the transport system.
There are evidence of integrated spending for housing projects & its infrastructure.
Although many housing projects are located outside the main development &
accessibility areas, municipalities are using expensive transport infrastructure
investment to connect fragmented settlements.
Government’s unique capacity to secure
consensus between public & private capital
investment, enabling the achievement of multiple
development aims such as economic
development, employment creation and service
delivery (UN-Habitat, 2008).
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Proportion of
persons
employed
2001
58.4
2011
63.3
Unemployment
rate (expanded)
24.0
18.4
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
CAPEX 2011
CAPEX 2012
CAPEX 2011
CAPEX 2012
Stats SA collects CAPEX data from National, Provincial, District, Municipal public
entities; and public corporations.
Important source for empirical evidence on the implications of infrastructure
spending: does it contribute to growth in SA? Does it reduce poverty?
Data must be spatial referenced – location of spending.
SDFs must give direction to capital expenditure.
Municipal integrated geostatistical system
Provincial integrated geostatistical system
National
Municipal and provincial
Regions
Wards
Settlements
National integrated
geo-statistical
system
Dissemination
geographies with
key statistical
data
Small areas
Cadastre and addresses
Other core spatial datasets
Current data supply not
suitable for planning. Call
for innovative approaches
to provide the required
statistical data for planning.
Strong case for the spatial
management of municipal
financial data.
Implying integrated geostatistical information
systems, from National to
below the municipal level.
Framework geographies
with identifiers and
classifiers
Aligning policy will imply
standard geographical
boundaries.
Policy design and implementation
National priorities
more jobs, united state, more infrastructure,
better education and health, adequate housing
– better quality of life
Aligning policy will imply
mechanisms (like a small
spatial unit with regular key
statistical denominators)
that can aggregate to other
geographical levels
Having a national statistical
system that underpins
development planning: a
spatial expression of facts &
figures
Thank You
email: [email protected]
Acknowledgements - Danie, Herman, Amanda & Prof Geyer from CRUISE.
Slide 10
The reshaping of urban structure in
South Africa through municipal
capital investment:
Evidence from 3 municipalities
Sharthi Laldaparsad, EM Policy Research
Statistics South Africa
• Well known structural and morphological deficiencies of SA
cities
SETTLEMENT TYPE
City regions and cities (e.g CoJ,
CT, eThekwini, Nelson-Mandela Bay,
etc.)
Other towns and settlements
(excluding dispersed rural
settlements)
% POPULATION
% ECONOMY
2001
2011
(2007)
46.0
49.7
69
28.2
27.7
23
Source: Stats SA & CSIR, 2013; NUDF, 2009
• Importance
Continues to be the primary sites of population growth
Drivers of economic growth
Concentration of poverty, social and ecological challenges
• The RDP in 1994 introduced spatial planning concepts such as “the
need to break down the apartheid geography through land reform,
more compact cities and decent public transport” (1994:83) and
“densification and unification of the urban fabric” (1994:86).
• “Since 1994, densities have increased in some urban areas and there
has also been partial regeneration of inner cities, but, overall, little
progress has been made in reversing apartheid geography, and in
some cases the divides have been exacerbated” (NDP 2011: 238).
• For nearly 20 years, the concept of “restructuring South African cities”
remained at the top of the urban spatial planning agenda.
• Since 1994 several policies and legislative mechanisms were implemented to
transform the spatial landscape of SA.
• SDFs are regarded as the key spatial restructuring tool for local municipalities.
• Perhaps the most under-recognised instrument for spatial restructuring is the
municipal budget itself.
• The need has arose for a comprehensive spatial vision for the country.
• A strategic approach to capital investment is essential to enable spatial
transformation.
• Infrastructure planning more powerful in shaping the spatial structure of
cities than spatial planning (Todes, 2008).
• Aligning & integrating the two, effective restructuring mechanism for local
municipalities. To what extent is there alignment in the City of Jo’Burg, City of
Cape Town, & the Rustenburg Local Municipality.
The presentation looks at • the capital investment patterns in 3 municipalities of South Africa
over the five-year period, 2007/8 to 2011/12.
• whether municipal capital spending patterns have contributed to
reshaping the spatial structure of the municipalities.
• whether municipal capital investment follows the strategic vision
of the IDPs and the SDFs.
• the statistical and geographical frameworks underpinning such
planning.
Capital spending for the five-year period
Capital spending has largely
benefitted key historical economic
hubs. Other areas have benefited
but to a lesser extent.
CoJ
Capital
expenditure (% of
CoCT
RLM
Average
15
21.5
16.7
17.7
municipal budget)
Capital spending between 15-21% of
municipal budget. Over 80% spent
on basic services infrastructure.
Economic (%)
2.4
1.2
1.1
1.5
Social (%)
4.4
6.8
7.2
6.1
Given budget constraints more
motivation to align policies.
Housing (%)
10.2
8.1
3.1
7.1
Infrastructure (%)
81.1
81.4
86.6
83.0
The City of Jo’Burg
Economic spending:
south, south east parts
of the city (CBD, City
Deep, Devland); parts of
Soweto.
Social spending: parts of
Soweto; City Centre,
Cosmos City
Housing spending:
southern parts, eastwest corridor; also in
Cosmos City.
Infrastructure spending:
City Centre, Cosmos City,
Diepsloot area.
The City of Jo’Burg
Highest spending in the consolidation area (public transport, soccer infrastructure,
inner city regeneration), although SDF strategy mentions it should limit spending
there.
Spending for new housing development outside the densification priority area and
movement system of the city. Mixed-use and industrial nodes have attracted higher
levels of capital spending.
Central city areas have attracted high levels of capital spending, whilst
other public transport management areas have not.
The City of Cape Town
Economic spending: CBD, southeast parts of the City; urban
regeneration areas like Mfuleni,
Maccassar, Khayelitsha.
Social spending: CBD, southeast parts of the City like Langa,
Blue Downs, Khayelitsha.
Housing spending: southern &
south-east suburbs (Belhar,
Khayelitsha, Bellmont Park), far
north-western parts (Atlantis),
Kuilsrivier & Brackenfell areas.
Infrastructure spending: In and
around the CBD (Green Point,
Milnerton areas).
The City of Cape Town
Accessibility grid in and around the CBD have attracted high capital
spending.
IRT (phase 1) has influenced spending patterns. Areas in the far north, not
part of the accessibility grid, linked thro IRT.
Parts of the marginalised area in the SE of the city have received capital
spending, but much lower than the designated metropolitan nodes.
The Rustenburg LM
Economic spending:
north-western areas,
north of the central city,
later years eastern parts.
Social spending: higher
density low income
areas like Meriting,
Freedom Park, Phokeng.
Housing spending: new
housing development
close to central city, then
also to rural settlements.
Infrastructure spending:
in and around the central
city; also low income
residential areas like
Meriting.
Rustenburg Local Municipality
Areas where residential, industrial and commercial development nodes are
defined, have attracted higher levels of capital investment.
With the exception of the central areas, both the rapid bus transport system
and the development corridor did not attract substantial capital spending.
Concluding statements on the integration:
Some concepts of the SDF strategies did indeed influenced
capital spending patterns, however there is still significant
scope to improve on the integration and alignment.
All case-study municipalities identified measures to manage urban growth (urban
edge, compaction, densification, development corridors, viable nodes).
And to address connectivity (BRT, IRT, Rapid Bus Transport system).
Public transport corridors (focus areas for development & intensification) has high
levels of influence over investment in the City of Cape Town, but less pronounced
in the City of Jo’Burg & Rustenburg LM.
Areas identified as development nodes (residential, industrial, commercial)
generally attracted higher levels of capital spending.
There is evidence of capital spending directed towards marginalised areas,
although the central core is the main focus. Mainly due to urban renewal & the
main centre of the transport system.
There are evidence of integrated spending for housing projects & its infrastructure.
Although many housing projects are located outside the main development &
accessibility areas, municipalities are using expensive transport infrastructure
investment to connect fragmented settlements.
Government’s unique capacity to secure
consensus between public & private capital
investment, enabling the achievement of multiple
development aims such as economic
development, employment creation and service
delivery (UN-Habitat, 2008).
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Proportion of
persons
employed
2001
58.4
2011
63.3
Unemployment
rate (expanded)
24.0
18.4
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
CAPEX 2011
CAPEX 2012
CAPEX 2011
CAPEX 2012
Stats SA collects CAPEX data from National, Provincial, District, Municipal public
entities; and public corporations.
Important source for empirical evidence on the implications of infrastructure
spending: does it contribute to growth in SA? Does it reduce poverty?
Data must be spatial referenced – location of spending.
SDFs must give direction to capital expenditure.
Municipal integrated geostatistical system
Provincial integrated geostatistical system
National
Municipal and provincial
Regions
Wards
Settlements
National integrated
geo-statistical
system
Dissemination
geographies with
key statistical
data
Small areas
Cadastre and addresses
Other core spatial datasets
Current data supply not
suitable for planning. Call
for innovative approaches
to provide the required
statistical data for planning.
Strong case for the spatial
management of municipal
financial data.
Implying integrated geostatistical information
systems, from National to
below the municipal level.
Framework geographies
with identifiers and
classifiers
Aligning policy will imply
standard geographical
boundaries.
Policy design and implementation
National priorities
more jobs, united state, more infrastructure,
better education and health, adequate housing
– better quality of life
Aligning policy will imply
mechanisms (like a small
spatial unit with regular key
statistical denominators)
that can aggregate to other
geographical levels
Having a national statistical
system that underpins
development planning: a
spatial expression of facts &
figures
Thank You
email: [email protected]
Acknowledgements - Danie, Herman, Amanda & Prof Geyer from CRUISE.
Slide 11
The reshaping of urban structure in
South Africa through municipal
capital investment:
Evidence from 3 municipalities
Sharthi Laldaparsad, EM Policy Research
Statistics South Africa
• Well known structural and morphological deficiencies of SA
cities
SETTLEMENT TYPE
City regions and cities (e.g CoJ,
CT, eThekwini, Nelson-Mandela Bay,
etc.)
Other towns and settlements
(excluding dispersed rural
settlements)
% POPULATION
% ECONOMY
2001
2011
(2007)
46.0
49.7
69
28.2
27.7
23
Source: Stats SA & CSIR, 2013; NUDF, 2009
• Importance
Continues to be the primary sites of population growth
Drivers of economic growth
Concentration of poverty, social and ecological challenges
• The RDP in 1994 introduced spatial planning concepts such as “the
need to break down the apartheid geography through land reform,
more compact cities and decent public transport” (1994:83) and
“densification and unification of the urban fabric” (1994:86).
• “Since 1994, densities have increased in some urban areas and there
has also been partial regeneration of inner cities, but, overall, little
progress has been made in reversing apartheid geography, and in
some cases the divides have been exacerbated” (NDP 2011: 238).
• For nearly 20 years, the concept of “restructuring South African cities”
remained at the top of the urban spatial planning agenda.
• Since 1994 several policies and legislative mechanisms were implemented to
transform the spatial landscape of SA.
• SDFs are regarded as the key spatial restructuring tool for local municipalities.
• Perhaps the most under-recognised instrument for spatial restructuring is the
municipal budget itself.
• The need has arose for a comprehensive spatial vision for the country.
• A strategic approach to capital investment is essential to enable spatial
transformation.
• Infrastructure planning more powerful in shaping the spatial structure of
cities than spatial planning (Todes, 2008).
• Aligning & integrating the two, effective restructuring mechanism for local
municipalities. To what extent is there alignment in the City of Jo’Burg, City of
Cape Town, & the Rustenburg Local Municipality.
The presentation looks at • the capital investment patterns in 3 municipalities of South Africa
over the five-year period, 2007/8 to 2011/12.
• whether municipal capital spending patterns have contributed to
reshaping the spatial structure of the municipalities.
• whether municipal capital investment follows the strategic vision
of the IDPs and the SDFs.
• the statistical and geographical frameworks underpinning such
planning.
Capital spending for the five-year period
Capital spending has largely
benefitted key historical economic
hubs. Other areas have benefited
but to a lesser extent.
CoJ
Capital
expenditure (% of
CoCT
RLM
Average
15
21.5
16.7
17.7
municipal budget)
Capital spending between 15-21% of
municipal budget. Over 80% spent
on basic services infrastructure.
Economic (%)
2.4
1.2
1.1
1.5
Social (%)
4.4
6.8
7.2
6.1
Given budget constraints more
motivation to align policies.
Housing (%)
10.2
8.1
3.1
7.1
Infrastructure (%)
81.1
81.4
86.6
83.0
The City of Jo’Burg
Economic spending:
south, south east parts
of the city (CBD, City
Deep, Devland); parts of
Soweto.
Social spending: parts of
Soweto; City Centre,
Cosmos City
Housing spending:
southern parts, eastwest corridor; also in
Cosmos City.
Infrastructure spending:
City Centre, Cosmos City,
Diepsloot area.
The City of Jo’Burg
Highest spending in the consolidation area (public transport, soccer infrastructure,
inner city regeneration), although SDF strategy mentions it should limit spending
there.
Spending for new housing development outside the densification priority area and
movement system of the city. Mixed-use and industrial nodes have attracted higher
levels of capital spending.
Central city areas have attracted high levels of capital spending, whilst
other public transport management areas have not.
The City of Cape Town
Economic spending: CBD, southeast parts of the City; urban
regeneration areas like Mfuleni,
Maccassar, Khayelitsha.
Social spending: CBD, southeast parts of the City like Langa,
Blue Downs, Khayelitsha.
Housing spending: southern &
south-east suburbs (Belhar,
Khayelitsha, Bellmont Park), far
north-western parts (Atlantis),
Kuilsrivier & Brackenfell areas.
Infrastructure spending: In and
around the CBD (Green Point,
Milnerton areas).
The City of Cape Town
Accessibility grid in and around the CBD have attracted high capital
spending.
IRT (phase 1) has influenced spending patterns. Areas in the far north, not
part of the accessibility grid, linked thro IRT.
Parts of the marginalised area in the SE of the city have received capital
spending, but much lower than the designated metropolitan nodes.
The Rustenburg LM
Economic spending:
north-western areas,
north of the central city,
later years eastern parts.
Social spending: higher
density low income
areas like Meriting,
Freedom Park, Phokeng.
Housing spending: new
housing development
close to central city, then
also to rural settlements.
Infrastructure spending:
in and around the central
city; also low income
residential areas like
Meriting.
Rustenburg Local Municipality
Areas where residential, industrial and commercial development nodes are
defined, have attracted higher levels of capital investment.
With the exception of the central areas, both the rapid bus transport system
and the development corridor did not attract substantial capital spending.
Concluding statements on the integration:
Some concepts of the SDF strategies did indeed influenced
capital spending patterns, however there is still significant
scope to improve on the integration and alignment.
All case-study municipalities identified measures to manage urban growth (urban
edge, compaction, densification, development corridors, viable nodes).
And to address connectivity (BRT, IRT, Rapid Bus Transport system).
Public transport corridors (focus areas for development & intensification) has high
levels of influence over investment in the City of Cape Town, but less pronounced
in the City of Jo’Burg & Rustenburg LM.
Areas identified as development nodes (residential, industrial, commercial)
generally attracted higher levels of capital spending.
There is evidence of capital spending directed towards marginalised areas,
although the central core is the main focus. Mainly due to urban renewal & the
main centre of the transport system.
There are evidence of integrated spending for housing projects & its infrastructure.
Although many housing projects are located outside the main development &
accessibility areas, municipalities are using expensive transport infrastructure
investment to connect fragmented settlements.
Government’s unique capacity to secure
consensus between public & private capital
investment, enabling the achievement of multiple
development aims such as economic
development, employment creation and service
delivery (UN-Habitat, 2008).
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Proportion of
persons
employed
2001
58.4
2011
63.3
Unemployment
rate (expanded)
24.0
18.4
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
CAPEX 2011
CAPEX 2012
CAPEX 2011
CAPEX 2012
Stats SA collects CAPEX data from National, Provincial, District, Municipal public
entities; and public corporations.
Important source for empirical evidence on the implications of infrastructure
spending: does it contribute to growth in SA? Does it reduce poverty?
Data must be spatial referenced – location of spending.
SDFs must give direction to capital expenditure.
Municipal integrated geostatistical system
Provincial integrated geostatistical system
National
Municipal and provincial
Regions
Wards
Settlements
National integrated
geo-statistical
system
Dissemination
geographies with
key statistical
data
Small areas
Cadastre and addresses
Other core spatial datasets
Current data supply not
suitable for planning. Call
for innovative approaches
to provide the required
statistical data for planning.
Strong case for the spatial
management of municipal
financial data.
Implying integrated geostatistical information
systems, from National to
below the municipal level.
Framework geographies
with identifiers and
classifiers
Aligning policy will imply
standard geographical
boundaries.
Policy design and implementation
National priorities
more jobs, united state, more infrastructure,
better education and health, adequate housing
– better quality of life
Aligning policy will imply
mechanisms (like a small
spatial unit with regular key
statistical denominators)
that can aggregate to other
geographical levels
Having a national statistical
system that underpins
development planning: a
spatial expression of facts &
figures
Thank You
email: [email protected]
Acknowledgements - Danie, Herman, Amanda & Prof Geyer from CRUISE.
Slide 12
The reshaping of urban structure in
South Africa through municipal
capital investment:
Evidence from 3 municipalities
Sharthi Laldaparsad, EM Policy Research
Statistics South Africa
• Well known structural and morphological deficiencies of SA
cities
SETTLEMENT TYPE
City regions and cities (e.g CoJ,
CT, eThekwini, Nelson-Mandela Bay,
etc.)
Other towns and settlements
(excluding dispersed rural
settlements)
% POPULATION
% ECONOMY
2001
2011
(2007)
46.0
49.7
69
28.2
27.7
23
Source: Stats SA & CSIR, 2013; NUDF, 2009
• Importance
Continues to be the primary sites of population growth
Drivers of economic growth
Concentration of poverty, social and ecological challenges
• The RDP in 1994 introduced spatial planning concepts such as “the
need to break down the apartheid geography through land reform,
more compact cities and decent public transport” (1994:83) and
“densification and unification of the urban fabric” (1994:86).
• “Since 1994, densities have increased in some urban areas and there
has also been partial regeneration of inner cities, but, overall, little
progress has been made in reversing apartheid geography, and in
some cases the divides have been exacerbated” (NDP 2011: 238).
• For nearly 20 years, the concept of “restructuring South African cities”
remained at the top of the urban spatial planning agenda.
• Since 1994 several policies and legislative mechanisms were implemented to
transform the spatial landscape of SA.
• SDFs are regarded as the key spatial restructuring tool for local municipalities.
• Perhaps the most under-recognised instrument for spatial restructuring is the
municipal budget itself.
• The need has arose for a comprehensive spatial vision for the country.
• A strategic approach to capital investment is essential to enable spatial
transformation.
• Infrastructure planning more powerful in shaping the spatial structure of
cities than spatial planning (Todes, 2008).
• Aligning & integrating the two, effective restructuring mechanism for local
municipalities. To what extent is there alignment in the City of Jo’Burg, City of
Cape Town, & the Rustenburg Local Municipality.
The presentation looks at • the capital investment patterns in 3 municipalities of South Africa
over the five-year period, 2007/8 to 2011/12.
• whether municipal capital spending patterns have contributed to
reshaping the spatial structure of the municipalities.
• whether municipal capital investment follows the strategic vision
of the IDPs and the SDFs.
• the statistical and geographical frameworks underpinning such
planning.
Capital spending for the five-year period
Capital spending has largely
benefitted key historical economic
hubs. Other areas have benefited
but to a lesser extent.
CoJ
Capital
expenditure (% of
CoCT
RLM
Average
15
21.5
16.7
17.7
municipal budget)
Capital spending between 15-21% of
municipal budget. Over 80% spent
on basic services infrastructure.
Economic (%)
2.4
1.2
1.1
1.5
Social (%)
4.4
6.8
7.2
6.1
Given budget constraints more
motivation to align policies.
Housing (%)
10.2
8.1
3.1
7.1
Infrastructure (%)
81.1
81.4
86.6
83.0
The City of Jo’Burg
Economic spending:
south, south east parts
of the city (CBD, City
Deep, Devland); parts of
Soweto.
Social spending: parts of
Soweto; City Centre,
Cosmos City
Housing spending:
southern parts, eastwest corridor; also in
Cosmos City.
Infrastructure spending:
City Centre, Cosmos City,
Diepsloot area.
The City of Jo’Burg
Highest spending in the consolidation area (public transport, soccer infrastructure,
inner city regeneration), although SDF strategy mentions it should limit spending
there.
Spending for new housing development outside the densification priority area and
movement system of the city. Mixed-use and industrial nodes have attracted higher
levels of capital spending.
Central city areas have attracted high levels of capital spending, whilst
other public transport management areas have not.
The City of Cape Town
Economic spending: CBD, southeast parts of the City; urban
regeneration areas like Mfuleni,
Maccassar, Khayelitsha.
Social spending: CBD, southeast parts of the City like Langa,
Blue Downs, Khayelitsha.
Housing spending: southern &
south-east suburbs (Belhar,
Khayelitsha, Bellmont Park), far
north-western parts (Atlantis),
Kuilsrivier & Brackenfell areas.
Infrastructure spending: In and
around the CBD (Green Point,
Milnerton areas).
The City of Cape Town
Accessibility grid in and around the CBD have attracted high capital
spending.
IRT (phase 1) has influenced spending patterns. Areas in the far north, not
part of the accessibility grid, linked thro IRT.
Parts of the marginalised area in the SE of the city have received capital
spending, but much lower than the designated metropolitan nodes.
The Rustenburg LM
Economic spending:
north-western areas,
north of the central city,
later years eastern parts.
Social spending: higher
density low income
areas like Meriting,
Freedom Park, Phokeng.
Housing spending: new
housing development
close to central city, then
also to rural settlements.
Infrastructure spending:
in and around the central
city; also low income
residential areas like
Meriting.
Rustenburg Local Municipality
Areas where residential, industrial and commercial development nodes are
defined, have attracted higher levels of capital investment.
With the exception of the central areas, both the rapid bus transport system
and the development corridor did not attract substantial capital spending.
Concluding statements on the integration:
Some concepts of the SDF strategies did indeed influenced
capital spending patterns, however there is still significant
scope to improve on the integration and alignment.
All case-study municipalities identified measures to manage urban growth (urban
edge, compaction, densification, development corridors, viable nodes).
And to address connectivity (BRT, IRT, Rapid Bus Transport system).
Public transport corridors (focus areas for development & intensification) has high
levels of influence over investment in the City of Cape Town, but less pronounced
in the City of Jo’Burg & Rustenburg LM.
Areas identified as development nodes (residential, industrial, commercial)
generally attracted higher levels of capital spending.
There is evidence of capital spending directed towards marginalised areas,
although the central core is the main focus. Mainly due to urban renewal & the
main centre of the transport system.
There are evidence of integrated spending for housing projects & its infrastructure.
Although many housing projects are located outside the main development &
accessibility areas, municipalities are using expensive transport infrastructure
investment to connect fragmented settlements.
Government’s unique capacity to secure
consensus between public & private capital
investment, enabling the achievement of multiple
development aims such as economic
development, employment creation and service
delivery (UN-Habitat, 2008).
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Proportion of
persons
employed
2001
58.4
2011
63.3
Unemployment
rate (expanded)
24.0
18.4
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
CAPEX 2011
CAPEX 2012
CAPEX 2011
CAPEX 2012
Stats SA collects CAPEX data from National, Provincial, District, Municipal public
entities; and public corporations.
Important source for empirical evidence on the implications of infrastructure
spending: does it contribute to growth in SA? Does it reduce poverty?
Data must be spatial referenced – location of spending.
SDFs must give direction to capital expenditure.
Municipal integrated geostatistical system
Provincial integrated geostatistical system
National
Municipal and provincial
Regions
Wards
Settlements
National integrated
geo-statistical
system
Dissemination
geographies with
key statistical
data
Small areas
Cadastre and addresses
Other core spatial datasets
Current data supply not
suitable for planning. Call
for innovative approaches
to provide the required
statistical data for planning.
Strong case for the spatial
management of municipal
financial data.
Implying integrated geostatistical information
systems, from National to
below the municipal level.
Framework geographies
with identifiers and
classifiers
Aligning policy will imply
standard geographical
boundaries.
Policy design and implementation
National priorities
more jobs, united state, more infrastructure,
better education and health, adequate housing
– better quality of life
Aligning policy will imply
mechanisms (like a small
spatial unit with regular key
statistical denominators)
that can aggregate to other
geographical levels
Having a national statistical
system that underpins
development planning: a
spatial expression of facts &
figures
Thank You
email: [email protected]
Acknowledgements - Danie, Herman, Amanda & Prof Geyer from CRUISE.
Slide 13
The reshaping of urban structure in
South Africa through municipal
capital investment:
Evidence from 3 municipalities
Sharthi Laldaparsad, EM Policy Research
Statistics South Africa
• Well known structural and morphological deficiencies of SA
cities
SETTLEMENT TYPE
City regions and cities (e.g CoJ,
CT, eThekwini, Nelson-Mandela Bay,
etc.)
Other towns and settlements
(excluding dispersed rural
settlements)
% POPULATION
% ECONOMY
2001
2011
(2007)
46.0
49.7
69
28.2
27.7
23
Source: Stats SA & CSIR, 2013; NUDF, 2009
• Importance
Continues to be the primary sites of population growth
Drivers of economic growth
Concentration of poverty, social and ecological challenges
• The RDP in 1994 introduced spatial planning concepts such as “the
need to break down the apartheid geography through land reform,
more compact cities and decent public transport” (1994:83) and
“densification and unification of the urban fabric” (1994:86).
• “Since 1994, densities have increased in some urban areas and there
has also been partial regeneration of inner cities, but, overall, little
progress has been made in reversing apartheid geography, and in
some cases the divides have been exacerbated” (NDP 2011: 238).
• For nearly 20 years, the concept of “restructuring South African cities”
remained at the top of the urban spatial planning agenda.
• Since 1994 several policies and legislative mechanisms were implemented to
transform the spatial landscape of SA.
• SDFs are regarded as the key spatial restructuring tool for local municipalities.
• Perhaps the most under-recognised instrument for spatial restructuring is the
municipal budget itself.
• The need has arose for a comprehensive spatial vision for the country.
• A strategic approach to capital investment is essential to enable spatial
transformation.
• Infrastructure planning more powerful in shaping the spatial structure of
cities than spatial planning (Todes, 2008).
• Aligning & integrating the two, effective restructuring mechanism for local
municipalities. To what extent is there alignment in the City of Jo’Burg, City of
Cape Town, & the Rustenburg Local Municipality.
The presentation looks at • the capital investment patterns in 3 municipalities of South Africa
over the five-year period, 2007/8 to 2011/12.
• whether municipal capital spending patterns have contributed to
reshaping the spatial structure of the municipalities.
• whether municipal capital investment follows the strategic vision
of the IDPs and the SDFs.
• the statistical and geographical frameworks underpinning such
planning.
Capital spending for the five-year period
Capital spending has largely
benefitted key historical economic
hubs. Other areas have benefited
but to a lesser extent.
CoJ
Capital
expenditure (% of
CoCT
RLM
Average
15
21.5
16.7
17.7
municipal budget)
Capital spending between 15-21% of
municipal budget. Over 80% spent
on basic services infrastructure.
Economic (%)
2.4
1.2
1.1
1.5
Social (%)
4.4
6.8
7.2
6.1
Given budget constraints more
motivation to align policies.
Housing (%)
10.2
8.1
3.1
7.1
Infrastructure (%)
81.1
81.4
86.6
83.0
The City of Jo’Burg
Economic spending:
south, south east parts
of the city (CBD, City
Deep, Devland); parts of
Soweto.
Social spending: parts of
Soweto; City Centre,
Cosmos City
Housing spending:
southern parts, eastwest corridor; also in
Cosmos City.
Infrastructure spending:
City Centre, Cosmos City,
Diepsloot area.
The City of Jo’Burg
Highest spending in the consolidation area (public transport, soccer infrastructure,
inner city regeneration), although SDF strategy mentions it should limit spending
there.
Spending for new housing development outside the densification priority area and
movement system of the city. Mixed-use and industrial nodes have attracted higher
levels of capital spending.
Central city areas have attracted high levels of capital spending, whilst
other public transport management areas have not.
The City of Cape Town
Economic spending: CBD, southeast parts of the City; urban
regeneration areas like Mfuleni,
Maccassar, Khayelitsha.
Social spending: CBD, southeast parts of the City like Langa,
Blue Downs, Khayelitsha.
Housing spending: southern &
south-east suburbs (Belhar,
Khayelitsha, Bellmont Park), far
north-western parts (Atlantis),
Kuilsrivier & Brackenfell areas.
Infrastructure spending: In and
around the CBD (Green Point,
Milnerton areas).
The City of Cape Town
Accessibility grid in and around the CBD have attracted high capital
spending.
IRT (phase 1) has influenced spending patterns. Areas in the far north, not
part of the accessibility grid, linked thro IRT.
Parts of the marginalised area in the SE of the city have received capital
spending, but much lower than the designated metropolitan nodes.
The Rustenburg LM
Economic spending:
north-western areas,
north of the central city,
later years eastern parts.
Social spending: higher
density low income
areas like Meriting,
Freedom Park, Phokeng.
Housing spending: new
housing development
close to central city, then
also to rural settlements.
Infrastructure spending:
in and around the central
city; also low income
residential areas like
Meriting.
Rustenburg Local Municipality
Areas where residential, industrial and commercial development nodes are
defined, have attracted higher levels of capital investment.
With the exception of the central areas, both the rapid bus transport system
and the development corridor did not attract substantial capital spending.
Concluding statements on the integration:
Some concepts of the SDF strategies did indeed influenced
capital spending patterns, however there is still significant
scope to improve on the integration and alignment.
All case-study municipalities identified measures to manage urban growth (urban
edge, compaction, densification, development corridors, viable nodes).
And to address connectivity (BRT, IRT, Rapid Bus Transport system).
Public transport corridors (focus areas for development & intensification) has high
levels of influence over investment in the City of Cape Town, but less pronounced
in the City of Jo’Burg & Rustenburg LM.
Areas identified as development nodes (residential, industrial, commercial)
generally attracted higher levels of capital spending.
There is evidence of capital spending directed towards marginalised areas,
although the central core is the main focus. Mainly due to urban renewal & the
main centre of the transport system.
There are evidence of integrated spending for housing projects & its infrastructure.
Although many housing projects are located outside the main development &
accessibility areas, municipalities are using expensive transport infrastructure
investment to connect fragmented settlements.
Government’s unique capacity to secure
consensus between public & private capital
investment, enabling the achievement of multiple
development aims such as economic
development, employment creation and service
delivery (UN-Habitat, 2008).
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Proportion of
persons
employed
2001
58.4
2011
63.3
Unemployment
rate (expanded)
24.0
18.4
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
CAPEX 2011
CAPEX 2012
CAPEX 2011
CAPEX 2012
Stats SA collects CAPEX data from National, Provincial, District, Municipal public
entities; and public corporations.
Important source for empirical evidence on the implications of infrastructure
spending: does it contribute to growth in SA? Does it reduce poverty?
Data must be spatial referenced – location of spending.
SDFs must give direction to capital expenditure.
Municipal integrated geostatistical system
Provincial integrated geostatistical system
National
Municipal and provincial
Regions
Wards
Settlements
National integrated
geo-statistical
system
Dissemination
geographies with
key statistical
data
Small areas
Cadastre and addresses
Other core spatial datasets
Current data supply not
suitable for planning. Call
for innovative approaches
to provide the required
statistical data for planning.
Strong case for the spatial
management of municipal
financial data.
Implying integrated geostatistical information
systems, from National to
below the municipal level.
Framework geographies
with identifiers and
classifiers
Aligning policy will imply
standard geographical
boundaries.
Policy design and implementation
National priorities
more jobs, united state, more infrastructure,
better education and health, adequate housing
– better quality of life
Aligning policy will imply
mechanisms (like a small
spatial unit with regular key
statistical denominators)
that can aggregate to other
geographical levels
Having a national statistical
system that underpins
development planning: a
spatial expression of facts &
figures
Thank You
email: [email protected]
Acknowledgements - Danie, Herman, Amanda & Prof Geyer from CRUISE.
Slide 14
The reshaping of urban structure in
South Africa through municipal
capital investment:
Evidence from 3 municipalities
Sharthi Laldaparsad, EM Policy Research
Statistics South Africa
• Well known structural and morphological deficiencies of SA
cities
SETTLEMENT TYPE
City regions and cities (e.g CoJ,
CT, eThekwini, Nelson-Mandela Bay,
etc.)
Other towns and settlements
(excluding dispersed rural
settlements)
% POPULATION
% ECONOMY
2001
2011
(2007)
46.0
49.7
69
28.2
27.7
23
Source: Stats SA & CSIR, 2013; NUDF, 2009
• Importance
Continues to be the primary sites of population growth
Drivers of economic growth
Concentration of poverty, social and ecological challenges
• The RDP in 1994 introduced spatial planning concepts such as “the
need to break down the apartheid geography through land reform,
more compact cities and decent public transport” (1994:83) and
“densification and unification of the urban fabric” (1994:86).
• “Since 1994, densities have increased in some urban areas and there
has also been partial regeneration of inner cities, but, overall, little
progress has been made in reversing apartheid geography, and in
some cases the divides have been exacerbated” (NDP 2011: 238).
• For nearly 20 years, the concept of “restructuring South African cities”
remained at the top of the urban spatial planning agenda.
• Since 1994 several policies and legislative mechanisms were implemented to
transform the spatial landscape of SA.
• SDFs are regarded as the key spatial restructuring tool for local municipalities.
• Perhaps the most under-recognised instrument for spatial restructuring is the
municipal budget itself.
• The need has arose for a comprehensive spatial vision for the country.
• A strategic approach to capital investment is essential to enable spatial
transformation.
• Infrastructure planning more powerful in shaping the spatial structure of
cities than spatial planning (Todes, 2008).
• Aligning & integrating the two, effective restructuring mechanism for local
municipalities. To what extent is there alignment in the City of Jo’Burg, City of
Cape Town, & the Rustenburg Local Municipality.
The presentation looks at • the capital investment patterns in 3 municipalities of South Africa
over the five-year period, 2007/8 to 2011/12.
• whether municipal capital spending patterns have contributed to
reshaping the spatial structure of the municipalities.
• whether municipal capital investment follows the strategic vision
of the IDPs and the SDFs.
• the statistical and geographical frameworks underpinning such
planning.
Capital spending for the five-year period
Capital spending has largely
benefitted key historical economic
hubs. Other areas have benefited
but to a lesser extent.
CoJ
Capital
expenditure (% of
CoCT
RLM
Average
15
21.5
16.7
17.7
municipal budget)
Capital spending between 15-21% of
municipal budget. Over 80% spent
on basic services infrastructure.
Economic (%)
2.4
1.2
1.1
1.5
Social (%)
4.4
6.8
7.2
6.1
Given budget constraints more
motivation to align policies.
Housing (%)
10.2
8.1
3.1
7.1
Infrastructure (%)
81.1
81.4
86.6
83.0
The City of Jo’Burg
Economic spending:
south, south east parts
of the city (CBD, City
Deep, Devland); parts of
Soweto.
Social spending: parts of
Soweto; City Centre,
Cosmos City
Housing spending:
southern parts, eastwest corridor; also in
Cosmos City.
Infrastructure spending:
City Centre, Cosmos City,
Diepsloot area.
The City of Jo’Burg
Highest spending in the consolidation area (public transport, soccer infrastructure,
inner city regeneration), although SDF strategy mentions it should limit spending
there.
Spending for new housing development outside the densification priority area and
movement system of the city. Mixed-use and industrial nodes have attracted higher
levels of capital spending.
Central city areas have attracted high levels of capital spending, whilst
other public transport management areas have not.
The City of Cape Town
Economic spending: CBD, southeast parts of the City; urban
regeneration areas like Mfuleni,
Maccassar, Khayelitsha.
Social spending: CBD, southeast parts of the City like Langa,
Blue Downs, Khayelitsha.
Housing spending: southern &
south-east suburbs (Belhar,
Khayelitsha, Bellmont Park), far
north-western parts (Atlantis),
Kuilsrivier & Brackenfell areas.
Infrastructure spending: In and
around the CBD (Green Point,
Milnerton areas).
The City of Cape Town
Accessibility grid in and around the CBD have attracted high capital
spending.
IRT (phase 1) has influenced spending patterns. Areas in the far north, not
part of the accessibility grid, linked thro IRT.
Parts of the marginalised area in the SE of the city have received capital
spending, but much lower than the designated metropolitan nodes.
The Rustenburg LM
Economic spending:
north-western areas,
north of the central city,
later years eastern parts.
Social spending: higher
density low income
areas like Meriting,
Freedom Park, Phokeng.
Housing spending: new
housing development
close to central city, then
also to rural settlements.
Infrastructure spending:
in and around the central
city; also low income
residential areas like
Meriting.
Rustenburg Local Municipality
Areas where residential, industrial and commercial development nodes are
defined, have attracted higher levels of capital investment.
With the exception of the central areas, both the rapid bus transport system
and the development corridor did not attract substantial capital spending.
Concluding statements on the integration:
Some concepts of the SDF strategies did indeed influenced
capital spending patterns, however there is still significant
scope to improve on the integration and alignment.
All case-study municipalities identified measures to manage urban growth (urban
edge, compaction, densification, development corridors, viable nodes).
And to address connectivity (BRT, IRT, Rapid Bus Transport system).
Public transport corridors (focus areas for development & intensification) has high
levels of influence over investment in the City of Cape Town, but less pronounced
in the City of Jo’Burg & Rustenburg LM.
Areas identified as development nodes (residential, industrial, commercial)
generally attracted higher levels of capital spending.
There is evidence of capital spending directed towards marginalised areas,
although the central core is the main focus. Mainly due to urban renewal & the
main centre of the transport system.
There are evidence of integrated spending for housing projects & its infrastructure.
Although many housing projects are located outside the main development &
accessibility areas, municipalities are using expensive transport infrastructure
investment to connect fragmented settlements.
Government’s unique capacity to secure
consensus between public & private capital
investment, enabling the achievement of multiple
development aims such as economic
development, employment creation and service
delivery (UN-Habitat, 2008).
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Proportion of
persons
employed
2001
58.4
2011
63.3
Unemployment
rate (expanded)
24.0
18.4
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
CAPEX 2011
CAPEX 2012
CAPEX 2011
CAPEX 2012
Stats SA collects CAPEX data from National, Provincial, District, Municipal public
entities; and public corporations.
Important source for empirical evidence on the implications of infrastructure
spending: does it contribute to growth in SA? Does it reduce poverty?
Data must be spatial referenced – location of spending.
SDFs must give direction to capital expenditure.
Municipal integrated geostatistical system
Provincial integrated geostatistical system
National
Municipal and provincial
Regions
Wards
Settlements
National integrated
geo-statistical
system
Dissemination
geographies with
key statistical
data
Small areas
Cadastre and addresses
Other core spatial datasets
Current data supply not
suitable for planning. Call
for innovative approaches
to provide the required
statistical data for planning.
Strong case for the spatial
management of municipal
financial data.
Implying integrated geostatistical information
systems, from National to
below the municipal level.
Framework geographies
with identifiers and
classifiers
Aligning policy will imply
standard geographical
boundaries.
Policy design and implementation
National priorities
more jobs, united state, more infrastructure,
better education and health, adequate housing
– better quality of life
Aligning policy will imply
mechanisms (like a small
spatial unit with regular key
statistical denominators)
that can aggregate to other
geographical levels
Having a national statistical
system that underpins
development planning: a
spatial expression of facts &
figures
Thank You
email: [email protected]
Acknowledgements - Danie, Herman, Amanda & Prof Geyer from CRUISE.
Slide 15
The reshaping of urban structure in
South Africa through municipal
capital investment:
Evidence from 3 municipalities
Sharthi Laldaparsad, EM Policy Research
Statistics South Africa
• Well known structural and morphological deficiencies of SA
cities
SETTLEMENT TYPE
City regions and cities (e.g CoJ,
CT, eThekwini, Nelson-Mandela Bay,
etc.)
Other towns and settlements
(excluding dispersed rural
settlements)
% POPULATION
% ECONOMY
2001
2011
(2007)
46.0
49.7
69
28.2
27.7
23
Source: Stats SA & CSIR, 2013; NUDF, 2009
• Importance
Continues to be the primary sites of population growth
Drivers of economic growth
Concentration of poverty, social and ecological challenges
• The RDP in 1994 introduced spatial planning concepts such as “the
need to break down the apartheid geography through land reform,
more compact cities and decent public transport” (1994:83) and
“densification and unification of the urban fabric” (1994:86).
• “Since 1994, densities have increased in some urban areas and there
has also been partial regeneration of inner cities, but, overall, little
progress has been made in reversing apartheid geography, and in
some cases the divides have been exacerbated” (NDP 2011: 238).
• For nearly 20 years, the concept of “restructuring South African cities”
remained at the top of the urban spatial planning agenda.
• Since 1994 several policies and legislative mechanisms were implemented to
transform the spatial landscape of SA.
• SDFs are regarded as the key spatial restructuring tool for local municipalities.
• Perhaps the most under-recognised instrument for spatial restructuring is the
municipal budget itself.
• The need has arose for a comprehensive spatial vision for the country.
• A strategic approach to capital investment is essential to enable spatial
transformation.
• Infrastructure planning more powerful in shaping the spatial structure of
cities than spatial planning (Todes, 2008).
• Aligning & integrating the two, effective restructuring mechanism for local
municipalities. To what extent is there alignment in the City of Jo’Burg, City of
Cape Town, & the Rustenburg Local Municipality.
The presentation looks at • the capital investment patterns in 3 municipalities of South Africa
over the five-year period, 2007/8 to 2011/12.
• whether municipal capital spending patterns have contributed to
reshaping the spatial structure of the municipalities.
• whether municipal capital investment follows the strategic vision
of the IDPs and the SDFs.
• the statistical and geographical frameworks underpinning such
planning.
Capital spending for the five-year period
Capital spending has largely
benefitted key historical economic
hubs. Other areas have benefited
but to a lesser extent.
CoJ
Capital
expenditure (% of
CoCT
RLM
Average
15
21.5
16.7
17.7
municipal budget)
Capital spending between 15-21% of
municipal budget. Over 80% spent
on basic services infrastructure.
Economic (%)
2.4
1.2
1.1
1.5
Social (%)
4.4
6.8
7.2
6.1
Given budget constraints more
motivation to align policies.
Housing (%)
10.2
8.1
3.1
7.1
Infrastructure (%)
81.1
81.4
86.6
83.0
The City of Jo’Burg
Economic spending:
south, south east parts
of the city (CBD, City
Deep, Devland); parts of
Soweto.
Social spending: parts of
Soweto; City Centre,
Cosmos City
Housing spending:
southern parts, eastwest corridor; also in
Cosmos City.
Infrastructure spending:
City Centre, Cosmos City,
Diepsloot area.
The City of Jo’Burg
Highest spending in the consolidation area (public transport, soccer infrastructure,
inner city regeneration), although SDF strategy mentions it should limit spending
there.
Spending for new housing development outside the densification priority area and
movement system of the city. Mixed-use and industrial nodes have attracted higher
levels of capital spending.
Central city areas have attracted high levels of capital spending, whilst
other public transport management areas have not.
The City of Cape Town
Economic spending: CBD, southeast parts of the City; urban
regeneration areas like Mfuleni,
Maccassar, Khayelitsha.
Social spending: CBD, southeast parts of the City like Langa,
Blue Downs, Khayelitsha.
Housing spending: southern &
south-east suburbs (Belhar,
Khayelitsha, Bellmont Park), far
north-western parts (Atlantis),
Kuilsrivier & Brackenfell areas.
Infrastructure spending: In and
around the CBD (Green Point,
Milnerton areas).
The City of Cape Town
Accessibility grid in and around the CBD have attracted high capital
spending.
IRT (phase 1) has influenced spending patterns. Areas in the far north, not
part of the accessibility grid, linked thro IRT.
Parts of the marginalised area in the SE of the city have received capital
spending, but much lower than the designated metropolitan nodes.
The Rustenburg LM
Economic spending:
north-western areas,
north of the central city,
later years eastern parts.
Social spending: higher
density low income
areas like Meriting,
Freedom Park, Phokeng.
Housing spending: new
housing development
close to central city, then
also to rural settlements.
Infrastructure spending:
in and around the central
city; also low income
residential areas like
Meriting.
Rustenburg Local Municipality
Areas where residential, industrial and commercial development nodes are
defined, have attracted higher levels of capital investment.
With the exception of the central areas, both the rapid bus transport system
and the development corridor did not attract substantial capital spending.
Concluding statements on the integration:
Some concepts of the SDF strategies did indeed influenced
capital spending patterns, however there is still significant
scope to improve on the integration and alignment.
All case-study municipalities identified measures to manage urban growth (urban
edge, compaction, densification, development corridors, viable nodes).
And to address connectivity (BRT, IRT, Rapid Bus Transport system).
Public transport corridors (focus areas for development & intensification) has high
levels of influence over investment in the City of Cape Town, but less pronounced
in the City of Jo’Burg & Rustenburg LM.
Areas identified as development nodes (residential, industrial, commercial)
generally attracted higher levels of capital spending.
There is evidence of capital spending directed towards marginalised areas,
although the central core is the main focus. Mainly due to urban renewal & the
main centre of the transport system.
There are evidence of integrated spending for housing projects & its infrastructure.
Although many housing projects are located outside the main development &
accessibility areas, municipalities are using expensive transport infrastructure
investment to connect fragmented settlements.
Government’s unique capacity to secure
consensus between public & private capital
investment, enabling the achievement of multiple
development aims such as economic
development, employment creation and service
delivery (UN-Habitat, 2008).
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Proportion of
persons
employed
2001
58.4
2011
63.3
Unemployment
rate (expanded)
24.0
18.4
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
CAPEX 2011
CAPEX 2012
CAPEX 2011
CAPEX 2012
Stats SA collects CAPEX data from National, Provincial, District, Municipal public
entities; and public corporations.
Important source for empirical evidence on the implications of infrastructure
spending: does it contribute to growth in SA? Does it reduce poverty?
Data must be spatial referenced – location of spending.
SDFs must give direction to capital expenditure.
Municipal integrated geostatistical system
Provincial integrated geostatistical system
National
Municipal and provincial
Regions
Wards
Settlements
National integrated
geo-statistical
system
Dissemination
geographies with
key statistical
data
Small areas
Cadastre and addresses
Other core spatial datasets
Current data supply not
suitable for planning. Call
for innovative approaches
to provide the required
statistical data for planning.
Strong case for the spatial
management of municipal
financial data.
Implying integrated geostatistical information
systems, from National to
below the municipal level.
Framework geographies
with identifiers and
classifiers
Aligning policy will imply
standard geographical
boundaries.
Policy design and implementation
National priorities
more jobs, united state, more infrastructure,
better education and health, adequate housing
– better quality of life
Aligning policy will imply
mechanisms (like a small
spatial unit with regular key
statistical denominators)
that can aggregate to other
geographical levels
Having a national statistical
system that underpins
development planning: a
spatial expression of facts &
figures
Thank You
email: [email protected]
Acknowledgements - Danie, Herman, Amanda & Prof Geyer from CRUISE.
Slide 16
The reshaping of urban structure in
South Africa through municipal
capital investment:
Evidence from 3 municipalities
Sharthi Laldaparsad, EM Policy Research
Statistics South Africa
• Well known structural and morphological deficiencies of SA
cities
SETTLEMENT TYPE
City regions and cities (e.g CoJ,
CT, eThekwini, Nelson-Mandela Bay,
etc.)
Other towns and settlements
(excluding dispersed rural
settlements)
% POPULATION
% ECONOMY
2001
2011
(2007)
46.0
49.7
69
28.2
27.7
23
Source: Stats SA & CSIR, 2013; NUDF, 2009
• Importance
Continues to be the primary sites of population growth
Drivers of economic growth
Concentration of poverty, social and ecological challenges
• The RDP in 1994 introduced spatial planning concepts such as “the
need to break down the apartheid geography through land reform,
more compact cities and decent public transport” (1994:83) and
“densification and unification of the urban fabric” (1994:86).
• “Since 1994, densities have increased in some urban areas and there
has also been partial regeneration of inner cities, but, overall, little
progress has been made in reversing apartheid geography, and in
some cases the divides have been exacerbated” (NDP 2011: 238).
• For nearly 20 years, the concept of “restructuring South African cities”
remained at the top of the urban spatial planning agenda.
• Since 1994 several policies and legislative mechanisms were implemented to
transform the spatial landscape of SA.
• SDFs are regarded as the key spatial restructuring tool for local municipalities.
• Perhaps the most under-recognised instrument for spatial restructuring is the
municipal budget itself.
• The need has arose for a comprehensive spatial vision for the country.
• A strategic approach to capital investment is essential to enable spatial
transformation.
• Infrastructure planning more powerful in shaping the spatial structure of
cities than spatial planning (Todes, 2008).
• Aligning & integrating the two, effective restructuring mechanism for local
municipalities. To what extent is there alignment in the City of Jo’Burg, City of
Cape Town, & the Rustenburg Local Municipality.
The presentation looks at • the capital investment patterns in 3 municipalities of South Africa
over the five-year period, 2007/8 to 2011/12.
• whether municipal capital spending patterns have contributed to
reshaping the spatial structure of the municipalities.
• whether municipal capital investment follows the strategic vision
of the IDPs and the SDFs.
• the statistical and geographical frameworks underpinning such
planning.
Capital spending for the five-year period
Capital spending has largely
benefitted key historical economic
hubs. Other areas have benefited
but to a lesser extent.
CoJ
Capital
expenditure (% of
CoCT
RLM
Average
15
21.5
16.7
17.7
municipal budget)
Capital spending between 15-21% of
municipal budget. Over 80% spent
on basic services infrastructure.
Economic (%)
2.4
1.2
1.1
1.5
Social (%)
4.4
6.8
7.2
6.1
Given budget constraints more
motivation to align policies.
Housing (%)
10.2
8.1
3.1
7.1
Infrastructure (%)
81.1
81.4
86.6
83.0
The City of Jo’Burg
Economic spending:
south, south east parts
of the city (CBD, City
Deep, Devland); parts of
Soweto.
Social spending: parts of
Soweto; City Centre,
Cosmos City
Housing spending:
southern parts, eastwest corridor; also in
Cosmos City.
Infrastructure spending:
City Centre, Cosmos City,
Diepsloot area.
The City of Jo’Burg
Highest spending in the consolidation area (public transport, soccer infrastructure,
inner city regeneration), although SDF strategy mentions it should limit spending
there.
Spending for new housing development outside the densification priority area and
movement system of the city. Mixed-use and industrial nodes have attracted higher
levels of capital spending.
Central city areas have attracted high levels of capital spending, whilst
other public transport management areas have not.
The City of Cape Town
Economic spending: CBD, southeast parts of the City; urban
regeneration areas like Mfuleni,
Maccassar, Khayelitsha.
Social spending: CBD, southeast parts of the City like Langa,
Blue Downs, Khayelitsha.
Housing spending: southern &
south-east suburbs (Belhar,
Khayelitsha, Bellmont Park), far
north-western parts (Atlantis),
Kuilsrivier & Brackenfell areas.
Infrastructure spending: In and
around the CBD (Green Point,
Milnerton areas).
The City of Cape Town
Accessibility grid in and around the CBD have attracted high capital
spending.
IRT (phase 1) has influenced spending patterns. Areas in the far north, not
part of the accessibility grid, linked thro IRT.
Parts of the marginalised area in the SE of the city have received capital
spending, but much lower than the designated metropolitan nodes.
The Rustenburg LM
Economic spending:
north-western areas,
north of the central city,
later years eastern parts.
Social spending: higher
density low income
areas like Meriting,
Freedom Park, Phokeng.
Housing spending: new
housing development
close to central city, then
also to rural settlements.
Infrastructure spending:
in and around the central
city; also low income
residential areas like
Meriting.
Rustenburg Local Municipality
Areas where residential, industrial and commercial development nodes are
defined, have attracted higher levels of capital investment.
With the exception of the central areas, both the rapid bus transport system
and the development corridor did not attract substantial capital spending.
Concluding statements on the integration:
Some concepts of the SDF strategies did indeed influenced
capital spending patterns, however there is still significant
scope to improve on the integration and alignment.
All case-study municipalities identified measures to manage urban growth (urban
edge, compaction, densification, development corridors, viable nodes).
And to address connectivity (BRT, IRT, Rapid Bus Transport system).
Public transport corridors (focus areas for development & intensification) has high
levels of influence over investment in the City of Cape Town, but less pronounced
in the City of Jo’Burg & Rustenburg LM.
Areas identified as development nodes (residential, industrial, commercial)
generally attracted higher levels of capital spending.
There is evidence of capital spending directed towards marginalised areas,
although the central core is the main focus. Mainly due to urban renewal & the
main centre of the transport system.
There are evidence of integrated spending for housing projects & its infrastructure.
Although many housing projects are located outside the main development &
accessibility areas, municipalities are using expensive transport infrastructure
investment to connect fragmented settlements.
Government’s unique capacity to secure
consensus between public & private capital
investment, enabling the achievement of multiple
development aims such as economic
development, employment creation and service
delivery (UN-Habitat, 2008).
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Proportion of
persons
employed
2001
58.4
2011
63.3
Unemployment
rate (expanded)
24.0
18.4
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
CAPEX 2011
CAPEX 2012
CAPEX 2011
CAPEX 2012
Stats SA collects CAPEX data from National, Provincial, District, Municipal public
entities; and public corporations.
Important source for empirical evidence on the implications of infrastructure
spending: does it contribute to growth in SA? Does it reduce poverty?
Data must be spatial referenced – location of spending.
SDFs must give direction to capital expenditure.
Municipal integrated geostatistical system
Provincial integrated geostatistical system
National
Municipal and provincial
Regions
Wards
Settlements
National integrated
geo-statistical
system
Dissemination
geographies with
key statistical
data
Small areas
Cadastre and addresses
Other core spatial datasets
Current data supply not
suitable for planning. Call
for innovative approaches
to provide the required
statistical data for planning.
Strong case for the spatial
management of municipal
financial data.
Implying integrated geostatistical information
systems, from National to
below the municipal level.
Framework geographies
with identifiers and
classifiers
Aligning policy will imply
standard geographical
boundaries.
Policy design and implementation
National priorities
more jobs, united state, more infrastructure,
better education and health, adequate housing
– better quality of life
Aligning policy will imply
mechanisms (like a small
spatial unit with regular key
statistical denominators)
that can aggregate to other
geographical levels
Having a national statistical
system that underpins
development planning: a
spatial expression of facts &
figures
Thank You
email: [email protected]
Acknowledgements - Danie, Herman, Amanda & Prof Geyer from CRUISE.
Slide 17
The reshaping of urban structure in
South Africa through municipal
capital investment:
Evidence from 3 municipalities
Sharthi Laldaparsad, EM Policy Research
Statistics South Africa
• Well known structural and morphological deficiencies of SA
cities
SETTLEMENT TYPE
City regions and cities (e.g CoJ,
CT, eThekwini, Nelson-Mandela Bay,
etc.)
Other towns and settlements
(excluding dispersed rural
settlements)
% POPULATION
% ECONOMY
2001
2011
(2007)
46.0
49.7
69
28.2
27.7
23
Source: Stats SA & CSIR, 2013; NUDF, 2009
• Importance
Continues to be the primary sites of population growth
Drivers of economic growth
Concentration of poverty, social and ecological challenges
• The RDP in 1994 introduced spatial planning concepts such as “the
need to break down the apartheid geography through land reform,
more compact cities and decent public transport” (1994:83) and
“densification and unification of the urban fabric” (1994:86).
• “Since 1994, densities have increased in some urban areas and there
has also been partial regeneration of inner cities, but, overall, little
progress has been made in reversing apartheid geography, and in
some cases the divides have been exacerbated” (NDP 2011: 238).
• For nearly 20 years, the concept of “restructuring South African cities”
remained at the top of the urban spatial planning agenda.
• Since 1994 several policies and legislative mechanisms were implemented to
transform the spatial landscape of SA.
• SDFs are regarded as the key spatial restructuring tool for local municipalities.
• Perhaps the most under-recognised instrument for spatial restructuring is the
municipal budget itself.
• The need has arose for a comprehensive spatial vision for the country.
• A strategic approach to capital investment is essential to enable spatial
transformation.
• Infrastructure planning more powerful in shaping the spatial structure of
cities than spatial planning (Todes, 2008).
• Aligning & integrating the two, effective restructuring mechanism for local
municipalities. To what extent is there alignment in the City of Jo’Burg, City of
Cape Town, & the Rustenburg Local Municipality.
The presentation looks at • the capital investment patterns in 3 municipalities of South Africa
over the five-year period, 2007/8 to 2011/12.
• whether municipal capital spending patterns have contributed to
reshaping the spatial structure of the municipalities.
• whether municipal capital investment follows the strategic vision
of the IDPs and the SDFs.
• the statistical and geographical frameworks underpinning such
planning.
Capital spending for the five-year period
Capital spending has largely
benefitted key historical economic
hubs. Other areas have benefited
but to a lesser extent.
CoJ
Capital
expenditure (% of
CoCT
RLM
Average
15
21.5
16.7
17.7
municipal budget)
Capital spending between 15-21% of
municipal budget. Over 80% spent
on basic services infrastructure.
Economic (%)
2.4
1.2
1.1
1.5
Social (%)
4.4
6.8
7.2
6.1
Given budget constraints more
motivation to align policies.
Housing (%)
10.2
8.1
3.1
7.1
Infrastructure (%)
81.1
81.4
86.6
83.0
The City of Jo’Burg
Economic spending:
south, south east parts
of the city (CBD, City
Deep, Devland); parts of
Soweto.
Social spending: parts of
Soweto; City Centre,
Cosmos City
Housing spending:
southern parts, eastwest corridor; also in
Cosmos City.
Infrastructure spending:
City Centre, Cosmos City,
Diepsloot area.
The City of Jo’Burg
Highest spending in the consolidation area (public transport, soccer infrastructure,
inner city regeneration), although SDF strategy mentions it should limit spending
there.
Spending for new housing development outside the densification priority area and
movement system of the city. Mixed-use and industrial nodes have attracted higher
levels of capital spending.
Central city areas have attracted high levels of capital spending, whilst
other public transport management areas have not.
The City of Cape Town
Economic spending: CBD, southeast parts of the City; urban
regeneration areas like Mfuleni,
Maccassar, Khayelitsha.
Social spending: CBD, southeast parts of the City like Langa,
Blue Downs, Khayelitsha.
Housing spending: southern &
south-east suburbs (Belhar,
Khayelitsha, Bellmont Park), far
north-western parts (Atlantis),
Kuilsrivier & Brackenfell areas.
Infrastructure spending: In and
around the CBD (Green Point,
Milnerton areas).
The City of Cape Town
Accessibility grid in and around the CBD have attracted high capital
spending.
IRT (phase 1) has influenced spending patterns. Areas in the far north, not
part of the accessibility grid, linked thro IRT.
Parts of the marginalised area in the SE of the city have received capital
spending, but much lower than the designated metropolitan nodes.
The Rustenburg LM
Economic spending:
north-western areas,
north of the central city,
later years eastern parts.
Social spending: higher
density low income
areas like Meriting,
Freedom Park, Phokeng.
Housing spending: new
housing development
close to central city, then
also to rural settlements.
Infrastructure spending:
in and around the central
city; also low income
residential areas like
Meriting.
Rustenburg Local Municipality
Areas where residential, industrial and commercial development nodes are
defined, have attracted higher levels of capital investment.
With the exception of the central areas, both the rapid bus transport system
and the development corridor did not attract substantial capital spending.
Concluding statements on the integration:
Some concepts of the SDF strategies did indeed influenced
capital spending patterns, however there is still significant
scope to improve on the integration and alignment.
All case-study municipalities identified measures to manage urban growth (urban
edge, compaction, densification, development corridors, viable nodes).
And to address connectivity (BRT, IRT, Rapid Bus Transport system).
Public transport corridors (focus areas for development & intensification) has high
levels of influence over investment in the City of Cape Town, but less pronounced
in the City of Jo’Burg & Rustenburg LM.
Areas identified as development nodes (residential, industrial, commercial)
generally attracted higher levels of capital spending.
There is evidence of capital spending directed towards marginalised areas,
although the central core is the main focus. Mainly due to urban renewal & the
main centre of the transport system.
There are evidence of integrated spending for housing projects & its infrastructure.
Although many housing projects are located outside the main development &
accessibility areas, municipalities are using expensive transport infrastructure
investment to connect fragmented settlements.
Government’s unique capacity to secure
consensus between public & private capital
investment, enabling the achievement of multiple
development aims such as economic
development, employment creation and service
delivery (UN-Habitat, 2008).
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Proportion of
persons
employed
2001
58.4
2011
63.3
Unemployment
rate (expanded)
24.0
18.4
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
CAPEX 2011
CAPEX 2012
CAPEX 2011
CAPEX 2012
Stats SA collects CAPEX data from National, Provincial, District, Municipal public
entities; and public corporations.
Important source for empirical evidence on the implications of infrastructure
spending: does it contribute to growth in SA? Does it reduce poverty?
Data must be spatial referenced – location of spending.
SDFs must give direction to capital expenditure.
Municipal integrated geostatistical system
Provincial integrated geostatistical system
National
Municipal and provincial
Regions
Wards
Settlements
National integrated
geo-statistical
system
Dissemination
geographies with
key statistical
data
Small areas
Cadastre and addresses
Other core spatial datasets
Current data supply not
suitable for planning. Call
for innovative approaches
to provide the required
statistical data for planning.
Strong case for the spatial
management of municipal
financial data.
Implying integrated geostatistical information
systems, from National to
below the municipal level.
Framework geographies
with identifiers and
classifiers
Aligning policy will imply
standard geographical
boundaries.
Policy design and implementation
National priorities
more jobs, united state, more infrastructure,
better education and health, adequate housing
– better quality of life
Aligning policy will imply
mechanisms (like a small
spatial unit with regular key
statistical denominators)
that can aggregate to other
geographical levels
Having a national statistical
system that underpins
development planning: a
spatial expression of facts &
figures
Thank You
email: [email protected]
Acknowledgements - Danie, Herman, Amanda & Prof Geyer from CRUISE.
Slide 18
The reshaping of urban structure in
South Africa through municipal
capital investment:
Evidence from 3 municipalities
Sharthi Laldaparsad, EM Policy Research
Statistics South Africa
• Well known structural and morphological deficiencies of SA
cities
SETTLEMENT TYPE
City regions and cities (e.g CoJ,
CT, eThekwini, Nelson-Mandela Bay,
etc.)
Other towns and settlements
(excluding dispersed rural
settlements)
% POPULATION
% ECONOMY
2001
2011
(2007)
46.0
49.7
69
28.2
27.7
23
Source: Stats SA & CSIR, 2013; NUDF, 2009
• Importance
Continues to be the primary sites of population growth
Drivers of economic growth
Concentration of poverty, social and ecological challenges
• The RDP in 1994 introduced spatial planning concepts such as “the
need to break down the apartheid geography through land reform,
more compact cities and decent public transport” (1994:83) and
“densification and unification of the urban fabric” (1994:86).
• “Since 1994, densities have increased in some urban areas and there
has also been partial regeneration of inner cities, but, overall, little
progress has been made in reversing apartheid geography, and in
some cases the divides have been exacerbated” (NDP 2011: 238).
• For nearly 20 years, the concept of “restructuring South African cities”
remained at the top of the urban spatial planning agenda.
• Since 1994 several policies and legislative mechanisms were implemented to
transform the spatial landscape of SA.
• SDFs are regarded as the key spatial restructuring tool for local municipalities.
• Perhaps the most under-recognised instrument for spatial restructuring is the
municipal budget itself.
• The need has arose for a comprehensive spatial vision for the country.
• A strategic approach to capital investment is essential to enable spatial
transformation.
• Infrastructure planning more powerful in shaping the spatial structure of
cities than spatial planning (Todes, 2008).
• Aligning & integrating the two, effective restructuring mechanism for local
municipalities. To what extent is there alignment in the City of Jo’Burg, City of
Cape Town, & the Rustenburg Local Municipality.
The presentation looks at • the capital investment patterns in 3 municipalities of South Africa
over the five-year period, 2007/8 to 2011/12.
• whether municipal capital spending patterns have contributed to
reshaping the spatial structure of the municipalities.
• whether municipal capital investment follows the strategic vision
of the IDPs and the SDFs.
• the statistical and geographical frameworks underpinning such
planning.
Capital spending for the five-year period
Capital spending has largely
benefitted key historical economic
hubs. Other areas have benefited
but to a lesser extent.
CoJ
Capital
expenditure (% of
CoCT
RLM
Average
15
21.5
16.7
17.7
municipal budget)
Capital spending between 15-21% of
municipal budget. Over 80% spent
on basic services infrastructure.
Economic (%)
2.4
1.2
1.1
1.5
Social (%)
4.4
6.8
7.2
6.1
Given budget constraints more
motivation to align policies.
Housing (%)
10.2
8.1
3.1
7.1
Infrastructure (%)
81.1
81.4
86.6
83.0
The City of Jo’Burg
Economic spending:
south, south east parts
of the city (CBD, City
Deep, Devland); parts of
Soweto.
Social spending: parts of
Soweto; City Centre,
Cosmos City
Housing spending:
southern parts, eastwest corridor; also in
Cosmos City.
Infrastructure spending:
City Centre, Cosmos City,
Diepsloot area.
The City of Jo’Burg
Highest spending in the consolidation area (public transport, soccer infrastructure,
inner city regeneration), although SDF strategy mentions it should limit spending
there.
Spending for new housing development outside the densification priority area and
movement system of the city. Mixed-use and industrial nodes have attracted higher
levels of capital spending.
Central city areas have attracted high levels of capital spending, whilst
other public transport management areas have not.
The City of Cape Town
Economic spending: CBD, southeast parts of the City; urban
regeneration areas like Mfuleni,
Maccassar, Khayelitsha.
Social spending: CBD, southeast parts of the City like Langa,
Blue Downs, Khayelitsha.
Housing spending: southern &
south-east suburbs (Belhar,
Khayelitsha, Bellmont Park), far
north-western parts (Atlantis),
Kuilsrivier & Brackenfell areas.
Infrastructure spending: In and
around the CBD (Green Point,
Milnerton areas).
The City of Cape Town
Accessibility grid in and around the CBD have attracted high capital
spending.
IRT (phase 1) has influenced spending patterns. Areas in the far north, not
part of the accessibility grid, linked thro IRT.
Parts of the marginalised area in the SE of the city have received capital
spending, but much lower than the designated metropolitan nodes.
The Rustenburg LM
Economic spending:
north-western areas,
north of the central city,
later years eastern parts.
Social spending: higher
density low income
areas like Meriting,
Freedom Park, Phokeng.
Housing spending: new
housing development
close to central city, then
also to rural settlements.
Infrastructure spending:
in and around the central
city; also low income
residential areas like
Meriting.
Rustenburg Local Municipality
Areas where residential, industrial and commercial development nodes are
defined, have attracted higher levels of capital investment.
With the exception of the central areas, both the rapid bus transport system
and the development corridor did not attract substantial capital spending.
Concluding statements on the integration:
Some concepts of the SDF strategies did indeed influenced
capital spending patterns, however there is still significant
scope to improve on the integration and alignment.
All case-study municipalities identified measures to manage urban growth (urban
edge, compaction, densification, development corridors, viable nodes).
And to address connectivity (BRT, IRT, Rapid Bus Transport system).
Public transport corridors (focus areas for development & intensification) has high
levels of influence over investment in the City of Cape Town, but less pronounced
in the City of Jo’Burg & Rustenburg LM.
Areas identified as development nodes (residential, industrial, commercial)
generally attracted higher levels of capital spending.
There is evidence of capital spending directed towards marginalised areas,
although the central core is the main focus. Mainly due to urban renewal & the
main centre of the transport system.
There are evidence of integrated spending for housing projects & its infrastructure.
Although many housing projects are located outside the main development &
accessibility areas, municipalities are using expensive transport infrastructure
investment to connect fragmented settlements.
Government’s unique capacity to secure
consensus between public & private capital
investment, enabling the achievement of multiple
development aims such as economic
development, employment creation and service
delivery (UN-Habitat, 2008).
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Proportion of
persons
employed
2001
58.4
2011
63.3
Unemployment
rate (expanded)
24.0
18.4
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
CAPEX 2011
CAPEX 2012
CAPEX 2011
CAPEX 2012
Stats SA collects CAPEX data from National, Provincial, District, Municipal public
entities; and public corporations.
Important source for empirical evidence on the implications of infrastructure
spending: does it contribute to growth in SA? Does it reduce poverty?
Data must be spatial referenced – location of spending.
SDFs must give direction to capital expenditure.
Municipal integrated geostatistical system
Provincial integrated geostatistical system
National
Municipal and provincial
Regions
Wards
Settlements
National integrated
geo-statistical
system
Dissemination
geographies with
key statistical
data
Small areas
Cadastre and addresses
Other core spatial datasets
Current data supply not
suitable for planning. Call
for innovative approaches
to provide the required
statistical data for planning.
Strong case for the spatial
management of municipal
financial data.
Implying integrated geostatistical information
systems, from National to
below the municipal level.
Framework geographies
with identifiers and
classifiers
Aligning policy will imply
standard geographical
boundaries.
Policy design and implementation
National priorities
more jobs, united state, more infrastructure,
better education and health, adequate housing
– better quality of life
Aligning policy will imply
mechanisms (like a small
spatial unit with regular key
statistical denominators)
that can aggregate to other
geographical levels
Having a national statistical
system that underpins
development planning: a
spatial expression of facts &
figures
Thank You
email: [email protected]
Acknowledgements - Danie, Herman, Amanda & Prof Geyer from CRUISE.
Slide 19
The reshaping of urban structure in
South Africa through municipal
capital investment:
Evidence from 3 municipalities
Sharthi Laldaparsad, EM Policy Research
Statistics South Africa
• Well known structural and morphological deficiencies of SA
cities
SETTLEMENT TYPE
City regions and cities (e.g CoJ,
CT, eThekwini, Nelson-Mandela Bay,
etc.)
Other towns and settlements
(excluding dispersed rural
settlements)
% POPULATION
% ECONOMY
2001
2011
(2007)
46.0
49.7
69
28.2
27.7
23
Source: Stats SA & CSIR, 2013; NUDF, 2009
• Importance
Continues to be the primary sites of population growth
Drivers of economic growth
Concentration of poverty, social and ecological challenges
• The RDP in 1994 introduced spatial planning concepts such as “the
need to break down the apartheid geography through land reform,
more compact cities and decent public transport” (1994:83) and
“densification and unification of the urban fabric” (1994:86).
• “Since 1994, densities have increased in some urban areas and there
has also been partial regeneration of inner cities, but, overall, little
progress has been made in reversing apartheid geography, and in
some cases the divides have been exacerbated” (NDP 2011: 238).
• For nearly 20 years, the concept of “restructuring South African cities”
remained at the top of the urban spatial planning agenda.
• Since 1994 several policies and legislative mechanisms were implemented to
transform the spatial landscape of SA.
• SDFs are regarded as the key spatial restructuring tool for local municipalities.
• Perhaps the most under-recognised instrument for spatial restructuring is the
municipal budget itself.
• The need has arose for a comprehensive spatial vision for the country.
• A strategic approach to capital investment is essential to enable spatial
transformation.
• Infrastructure planning more powerful in shaping the spatial structure of
cities than spatial planning (Todes, 2008).
• Aligning & integrating the two, effective restructuring mechanism for local
municipalities. To what extent is there alignment in the City of Jo’Burg, City of
Cape Town, & the Rustenburg Local Municipality.
The presentation looks at • the capital investment patterns in 3 municipalities of South Africa
over the five-year period, 2007/8 to 2011/12.
• whether municipal capital spending patterns have contributed to
reshaping the spatial structure of the municipalities.
• whether municipal capital investment follows the strategic vision
of the IDPs and the SDFs.
• the statistical and geographical frameworks underpinning such
planning.
Capital spending for the five-year period
Capital spending has largely
benefitted key historical economic
hubs. Other areas have benefited
but to a lesser extent.
CoJ
Capital
expenditure (% of
CoCT
RLM
Average
15
21.5
16.7
17.7
municipal budget)
Capital spending between 15-21% of
municipal budget. Over 80% spent
on basic services infrastructure.
Economic (%)
2.4
1.2
1.1
1.5
Social (%)
4.4
6.8
7.2
6.1
Given budget constraints more
motivation to align policies.
Housing (%)
10.2
8.1
3.1
7.1
Infrastructure (%)
81.1
81.4
86.6
83.0
The City of Jo’Burg
Economic spending:
south, south east parts
of the city (CBD, City
Deep, Devland); parts of
Soweto.
Social spending: parts of
Soweto; City Centre,
Cosmos City
Housing spending:
southern parts, eastwest corridor; also in
Cosmos City.
Infrastructure spending:
City Centre, Cosmos City,
Diepsloot area.
The City of Jo’Burg
Highest spending in the consolidation area (public transport, soccer infrastructure,
inner city regeneration), although SDF strategy mentions it should limit spending
there.
Spending for new housing development outside the densification priority area and
movement system of the city. Mixed-use and industrial nodes have attracted higher
levels of capital spending.
Central city areas have attracted high levels of capital spending, whilst
other public transport management areas have not.
The City of Cape Town
Economic spending: CBD, southeast parts of the City; urban
regeneration areas like Mfuleni,
Maccassar, Khayelitsha.
Social spending: CBD, southeast parts of the City like Langa,
Blue Downs, Khayelitsha.
Housing spending: southern &
south-east suburbs (Belhar,
Khayelitsha, Bellmont Park), far
north-western parts (Atlantis),
Kuilsrivier & Brackenfell areas.
Infrastructure spending: In and
around the CBD (Green Point,
Milnerton areas).
The City of Cape Town
Accessibility grid in and around the CBD have attracted high capital
spending.
IRT (phase 1) has influenced spending patterns. Areas in the far north, not
part of the accessibility grid, linked thro IRT.
Parts of the marginalised area in the SE of the city have received capital
spending, but much lower than the designated metropolitan nodes.
The Rustenburg LM
Economic spending:
north-western areas,
north of the central city,
later years eastern parts.
Social spending: higher
density low income
areas like Meriting,
Freedom Park, Phokeng.
Housing spending: new
housing development
close to central city, then
also to rural settlements.
Infrastructure spending:
in and around the central
city; also low income
residential areas like
Meriting.
Rustenburg Local Municipality
Areas where residential, industrial and commercial development nodes are
defined, have attracted higher levels of capital investment.
With the exception of the central areas, both the rapid bus transport system
and the development corridor did not attract substantial capital spending.
Concluding statements on the integration:
Some concepts of the SDF strategies did indeed influenced
capital spending patterns, however there is still significant
scope to improve on the integration and alignment.
All case-study municipalities identified measures to manage urban growth (urban
edge, compaction, densification, development corridors, viable nodes).
And to address connectivity (BRT, IRT, Rapid Bus Transport system).
Public transport corridors (focus areas for development & intensification) has high
levels of influence over investment in the City of Cape Town, but less pronounced
in the City of Jo’Burg & Rustenburg LM.
Areas identified as development nodes (residential, industrial, commercial)
generally attracted higher levels of capital spending.
There is evidence of capital spending directed towards marginalised areas,
although the central core is the main focus. Mainly due to urban renewal & the
main centre of the transport system.
There are evidence of integrated spending for housing projects & its infrastructure.
Although many housing projects are located outside the main development &
accessibility areas, municipalities are using expensive transport infrastructure
investment to connect fragmented settlements.
Government’s unique capacity to secure
consensus between public & private capital
investment, enabling the achievement of multiple
development aims such as economic
development, employment creation and service
delivery (UN-Habitat, 2008).
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Proportion of
persons
employed
2001
58.4
2011
63.3
Unemployment
rate (expanded)
24.0
18.4
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
CAPEX 2011
CAPEX 2012
CAPEX 2011
CAPEX 2012
Stats SA collects CAPEX data from National, Provincial, District, Municipal public
entities; and public corporations.
Important source for empirical evidence on the implications of infrastructure
spending: does it contribute to growth in SA? Does it reduce poverty?
Data must be spatial referenced – location of spending.
SDFs must give direction to capital expenditure.
Municipal integrated geostatistical system
Provincial integrated geostatistical system
National
Municipal and provincial
Regions
Wards
Settlements
National integrated
geo-statistical
system
Dissemination
geographies with
key statistical
data
Small areas
Cadastre and addresses
Other core spatial datasets
Current data supply not
suitable for planning. Call
for innovative approaches
to provide the required
statistical data for planning.
Strong case for the spatial
management of municipal
financial data.
Implying integrated geostatistical information
systems, from National to
below the municipal level.
Framework geographies
with identifiers and
classifiers
Aligning policy will imply
standard geographical
boundaries.
Policy design and implementation
National priorities
more jobs, united state, more infrastructure,
better education and health, adequate housing
– better quality of life
Aligning policy will imply
mechanisms (like a small
spatial unit with regular key
statistical denominators)
that can aggregate to other
geographical levels
Having a national statistical
system that underpins
development planning: a
spatial expression of facts &
figures
Thank You
email: [email protected]
Acknowledgements - Danie, Herman, Amanda & Prof Geyer from CRUISE.
Slide 20
The reshaping of urban structure in
South Africa through municipal
capital investment:
Evidence from 3 municipalities
Sharthi Laldaparsad, EM Policy Research
Statistics South Africa
• Well known structural and morphological deficiencies of SA
cities
SETTLEMENT TYPE
City regions and cities (e.g CoJ,
CT, eThekwini, Nelson-Mandela Bay,
etc.)
Other towns and settlements
(excluding dispersed rural
settlements)
% POPULATION
% ECONOMY
2001
2011
(2007)
46.0
49.7
69
28.2
27.7
23
Source: Stats SA & CSIR, 2013; NUDF, 2009
• Importance
Continues to be the primary sites of population growth
Drivers of economic growth
Concentration of poverty, social and ecological challenges
• The RDP in 1994 introduced spatial planning concepts such as “the
need to break down the apartheid geography through land reform,
more compact cities and decent public transport” (1994:83) and
“densification and unification of the urban fabric” (1994:86).
• “Since 1994, densities have increased in some urban areas and there
has also been partial regeneration of inner cities, but, overall, little
progress has been made in reversing apartheid geography, and in
some cases the divides have been exacerbated” (NDP 2011: 238).
• For nearly 20 years, the concept of “restructuring South African cities”
remained at the top of the urban spatial planning agenda.
• Since 1994 several policies and legislative mechanisms were implemented to
transform the spatial landscape of SA.
• SDFs are regarded as the key spatial restructuring tool for local municipalities.
• Perhaps the most under-recognised instrument for spatial restructuring is the
municipal budget itself.
• The need has arose for a comprehensive spatial vision for the country.
• A strategic approach to capital investment is essential to enable spatial
transformation.
• Infrastructure planning more powerful in shaping the spatial structure of
cities than spatial planning (Todes, 2008).
• Aligning & integrating the two, effective restructuring mechanism for local
municipalities. To what extent is there alignment in the City of Jo’Burg, City of
Cape Town, & the Rustenburg Local Municipality.
The presentation looks at • the capital investment patterns in 3 municipalities of South Africa
over the five-year period, 2007/8 to 2011/12.
• whether municipal capital spending patterns have contributed to
reshaping the spatial structure of the municipalities.
• whether municipal capital investment follows the strategic vision
of the IDPs and the SDFs.
• the statistical and geographical frameworks underpinning such
planning.
Capital spending for the five-year period
Capital spending has largely
benefitted key historical economic
hubs. Other areas have benefited
but to a lesser extent.
CoJ
Capital
expenditure (% of
CoCT
RLM
Average
15
21.5
16.7
17.7
municipal budget)
Capital spending between 15-21% of
municipal budget. Over 80% spent
on basic services infrastructure.
Economic (%)
2.4
1.2
1.1
1.5
Social (%)
4.4
6.8
7.2
6.1
Given budget constraints more
motivation to align policies.
Housing (%)
10.2
8.1
3.1
7.1
Infrastructure (%)
81.1
81.4
86.6
83.0
The City of Jo’Burg
Economic spending:
south, south east parts
of the city (CBD, City
Deep, Devland); parts of
Soweto.
Social spending: parts of
Soweto; City Centre,
Cosmos City
Housing spending:
southern parts, eastwest corridor; also in
Cosmos City.
Infrastructure spending:
City Centre, Cosmos City,
Diepsloot area.
The City of Jo’Burg
Highest spending in the consolidation area (public transport, soccer infrastructure,
inner city regeneration), although SDF strategy mentions it should limit spending
there.
Spending for new housing development outside the densification priority area and
movement system of the city. Mixed-use and industrial nodes have attracted higher
levels of capital spending.
Central city areas have attracted high levels of capital spending, whilst
other public transport management areas have not.
The City of Cape Town
Economic spending: CBD, southeast parts of the City; urban
regeneration areas like Mfuleni,
Maccassar, Khayelitsha.
Social spending: CBD, southeast parts of the City like Langa,
Blue Downs, Khayelitsha.
Housing spending: southern &
south-east suburbs (Belhar,
Khayelitsha, Bellmont Park), far
north-western parts (Atlantis),
Kuilsrivier & Brackenfell areas.
Infrastructure spending: In and
around the CBD (Green Point,
Milnerton areas).
The City of Cape Town
Accessibility grid in and around the CBD have attracted high capital
spending.
IRT (phase 1) has influenced spending patterns. Areas in the far north, not
part of the accessibility grid, linked thro IRT.
Parts of the marginalised area in the SE of the city have received capital
spending, but much lower than the designated metropolitan nodes.
The Rustenburg LM
Economic spending:
north-western areas,
north of the central city,
later years eastern parts.
Social spending: higher
density low income
areas like Meriting,
Freedom Park, Phokeng.
Housing spending: new
housing development
close to central city, then
also to rural settlements.
Infrastructure spending:
in and around the central
city; also low income
residential areas like
Meriting.
Rustenburg Local Municipality
Areas where residential, industrial and commercial development nodes are
defined, have attracted higher levels of capital investment.
With the exception of the central areas, both the rapid bus transport system
and the development corridor did not attract substantial capital spending.
Concluding statements on the integration:
Some concepts of the SDF strategies did indeed influenced
capital spending patterns, however there is still significant
scope to improve on the integration and alignment.
All case-study municipalities identified measures to manage urban growth (urban
edge, compaction, densification, development corridors, viable nodes).
And to address connectivity (BRT, IRT, Rapid Bus Transport system).
Public transport corridors (focus areas for development & intensification) has high
levels of influence over investment in the City of Cape Town, but less pronounced
in the City of Jo’Burg & Rustenburg LM.
Areas identified as development nodes (residential, industrial, commercial)
generally attracted higher levels of capital spending.
There is evidence of capital spending directed towards marginalised areas,
although the central core is the main focus. Mainly due to urban renewal & the
main centre of the transport system.
There are evidence of integrated spending for housing projects & its infrastructure.
Although many housing projects are located outside the main development &
accessibility areas, municipalities are using expensive transport infrastructure
investment to connect fragmented settlements.
Government’s unique capacity to secure
consensus between public & private capital
investment, enabling the achievement of multiple
development aims such as economic
development, employment creation and service
delivery (UN-Habitat, 2008).
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Proportion of
persons
employed
2001
58.4
2011
63.3
Unemployment
rate (expanded)
24.0
18.4
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
CAPEX 2011
CAPEX 2012
CAPEX 2011
CAPEX 2012
Stats SA collects CAPEX data from National, Provincial, District, Municipal public
entities; and public corporations.
Important source for empirical evidence on the implications of infrastructure
spending: does it contribute to growth in SA? Does it reduce poverty?
Data must be spatial referenced – location of spending.
SDFs must give direction to capital expenditure.
Municipal integrated geostatistical system
Provincial integrated geostatistical system
National
Municipal and provincial
Regions
Wards
Settlements
National integrated
geo-statistical
system
Dissemination
geographies with
key statistical
data
Small areas
Cadastre and addresses
Other core spatial datasets
Current data supply not
suitable for planning. Call
for innovative approaches
to provide the required
statistical data for planning.
Strong case for the spatial
management of municipal
financial data.
Implying integrated geostatistical information
systems, from National to
below the municipal level.
Framework geographies
with identifiers and
classifiers
Aligning policy will imply
standard geographical
boundaries.
Policy design and implementation
National priorities
more jobs, united state, more infrastructure,
better education and health, adequate housing
– better quality of life
Aligning policy will imply
mechanisms (like a small
spatial unit with regular key
statistical denominators)
that can aggregate to other
geographical levels
Having a national statistical
system that underpins
development planning: a
spatial expression of facts &
figures
Thank You
email: [email protected]
Acknowledgements - Danie, Herman, Amanda & Prof Geyer from CRUISE.
Slide 21
The reshaping of urban structure in
South Africa through municipal
capital investment:
Evidence from 3 municipalities
Sharthi Laldaparsad, EM Policy Research
Statistics South Africa
• Well known structural and morphological deficiencies of SA
cities
SETTLEMENT TYPE
City regions and cities (e.g CoJ,
CT, eThekwini, Nelson-Mandela Bay,
etc.)
Other towns and settlements
(excluding dispersed rural
settlements)
% POPULATION
% ECONOMY
2001
2011
(2007)
46.0
49.7
69
28.2
27.7
23
Source: Stats SA & CSIR, 2013; NUDF, 2009
• Importance
Continues to be the primary sites of population growth
Drivers of economic growth
Concentration of poverty, social and ecological challenges
• The RDP in 1994 introduced spatial planning concepts such as “the
need to break down the apartheid geography through land reform,
more compact cities and decent public transport” (1994:83) and
“densification and unification of the urban fabric” (1994:86).
• “Since 1994, densities have increased in some urban areas and there
has also been partial regeneration of inner cities, but, overall, little
progress has been made in reversing apartheid geography, and in
some cases the divides have been exacerbated” (NDP 2011: 238).
• For nearly 20 years, the concept of “restructuring South African cities”
remained at the top of the urban spatial planning agenda.
• Since 1994 several policies and legislative mechanisms were implemented to
transform the spatial landscape of SA.
• SDFs are regarded as the key spatial restructuring tool for local municipalities.
• Perhaps the most under-recognised instrument for spatial restructuring is the
municipal budget itself.
• The need has arose for a comprehensive spatial vision for the country.
• A strategic approach to capital investment is essential to enable spatial
transformation.
• Infrastructure planning more powerful in shaping the spatial structure of
cities than spatial planning (Todes, 2008).
• Aligning & integrating the two, effective restructuring mechanism for local
municipalities. To what extent is there alignment in the City of Jo’Burg, City of
Cape Town, & the Rustenburg Local Municipality.
The presentation looks at • the capital investment patterns in 3 municipalities of South Africa
over the five-year period, 2007/8 to 2011/12.
• whether municipal capital spending patterns have contributed to
reshaping the spatial structure of the municipalities.
• whether municipal capital investment follows the strategic vision
of the IDPs and the SDFs.
• the statistical and geographical frameworks underpinning such
planning.
Capital spending for the five-year period
Capital spending has largely
benefitted key historical economic
hubs. Other areas have benefited
but to a lesser extent.
CoJ
Capital
expenditure (% of
CoCT
RLM
Average
15
21.5
16.7
17.7
municipal budget)
Capital spending between 15-21% of
municipal budget. Over 80% spent
on basic services infrastructure.
Economic (%)
2.4
1.2
1.1
1.5
Social (%)
4.4
6.8
7.2
6.1
Given budget constraints more
motivation to align policies.
Housing (%)
10.2
8.1
3.1
7.1
Infrastructure (%)
81.1
81.4
86.6
83.0
The City of Jo’Burg
Economic spending:
south, south east parts
of the city (CBD, City
Deep, Devland); parts of
Soweto.
Social spending: parts of
Soweto; City Centre,
Cosmos City
Housing spending:
southern parts, eastwest corridor; also in
Cosmos City.
Infrastructure spending:
City Centre, Cosmos City,
Diepsloot area.
The City of Jo’Burg
Highest spending in the consolidation area (public transport, soccer infrastructure,
inner city regeneration), although SDF strategy mentions it should limit spending
there.
Spending for new housing development outside the densification priority area and
movement system of the city. Mixed-use and industrial nodes have attracted higher
levels of capital spending.
Central city areas have attracted high levels of capital spending, whilst
other public transport management areas have not.
The City of Cape Town
Economic spending: CBD, southeast parts of the City; urban
regeneration areas like Mfuleni,
Maccassar, Khayelitsha.
Social spending: CBD, southeast parts of the City like Langa,
Blue Downs, Khayelitsha.
Housing spending: southern &
south-east suburbs (Belhar,
Khayelitsha, Bellmont Park), far
north-western parts (Atlantis),
Kuilsrivier & Brackenfell areas.
Infrastructure spending: In and
around the CBD (Green Point,
Milnerton areas).
The City of Cape Town
Accessibility grid in and around the CBD have attracted high capital
spending.
IRT (phase 1) has influenced spending patterns. Areas in the far north, not
part of the accessibility grid, linked thro IRT.
Parts of the marginalised area in the SE of the city have received capital
spending, but much lower than the designated metropolitan nodes.
The Rustenburg LM
Economic spending:
north-western areas,
north of the central city,
later years eastern parts.
Social spending: higher
density low income
areas like Meriting,
Freedom Park, Phokeng.
Housing spending: new
housing development
close to central city, then
also to rural settlements.
Infrastructure spending:
in and around the central
city; also low income
residential areas like
Meriting.
Rustenburg Local Municipality
Areas where residential, industrial and commercial development nodes are
defined, have attracted higher levels of capital investment.
With the exception of the central areas, both the rapid bus transport system
and the development corridor did not attract substantial capital spending.
Concluding statements on the integration:
Some concepts of the SDF strategies did indeed influenced
capital spending patterns, however there is still significant
scope to improve on the integration and alignment.
All case-study municipalities identified measures to manage urban growth (urban
edge, compaction, densification, development corridors, viable nodes).
And to address connectivity (BRT, IRT, Rapid Bus Transport system).
Public transport corridors (focus areas for development & intensification) has high
levels of influence over investment in the City of Cape Town, but less pronounced
in the City of Jo’Burg & Rustenburg LM.
Areas identified as development nodes (residential, industrial, commercial)
generally attracted higher levels of capital spending.
There is evidence of capital spending directed towards marginalised areas,
although the central core is the main focus. Mainly due to urban renewal & the
main centre of the transport system.
There are evidence of integrated spending for housing projects & its infrastructure.
Although many housing projects are located outside the main development &
accessibility areas, municipalities are using expensive transport infrastructure
investment to connect fragmented settlements.
Government’s unique capacity to secure
consensus between public & private capital
investment, enabling the achievement of multiple
development aims such as economic
development, employment creation and service
delivery (UN-Habitat, 2008).
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Proportion of
persons
employed
2001
58.4
2011
63.3
Unemployment
rate (expanded)
24.0
18.4
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
CAPEX 2011
CAPEX 2012
CAPEX 2011
CAPEX 2012
Stats SA collects CAPEX data from National, Provincial, District, Municipal public
entities; and public corporations.
Important source for empirical evidence on the implications of infrastructure
spending: does it contribute to growth in SA? Does it reduce poverty?
Data must be spatial referenced – location of spending.
SDFs must give direction to capital expenditure.
Municipal integrated geostatistical system
Provincial integrated geostatistical system
National
Municipal and provincial
Regions
Wards
Settlements
National integrated
geo-statistical
system
Dissemination
geographies with
key statistical
data
Small areas
Cadastre and addresses
Other core spatial datasets
Current data supply not
suitable for planning. Call
for innovative approaches
to provide the required
statistical data for planning.
Strong case for the spatial
management of municipal
financial data.
Implying integrated geostatistical information
systems, from National to
below the municipal level.
Framework geographies
with identifiers and
classifiers
Aligning policy will imply
standard geographical
boundaries.
Policy design and implementation
National priorities
more jobs, united state, more infrastructure,
better education and health, adequate housing
– better quality of life
Aligning policy will imply
mechanisms (like a small
spatial unit with regular key
statistical denominators)
that can aggregate to other
geographical levels
Having a national statistical
system that underpins
development planning: a
spatial expression of facts &
figures
Thank You
email: [email protected]
Acknowledgements - Danie, Herman, Amanda & Prof Geyer from CRUISE.
Slide 22
The reshaping of urban structure in
South Africa through municipal
capital investment:
Evidence from 3 municipalities
Sharthi Laldaparsad, EM Policy Research
Statistics South Africa
• Well known structural and morphological deficiencies of SA
cities
SETTLEMENT TYPE
City regions and cities (e.g CoJ,
CT, eThekwini, Nelson-Mandela Bay,
etc.)
Other towns and settlements
(excluding dispersed rural
settlements)
% POPULATION
% ECONOMY
2001
2011
(2007)
46.0
49.7
69
28.2
27.7
23
Source: Stats SA & CSIR, 2013; NUDF, 2009
• Importance
Continues to be the primary sites of population growth
Drivers of economic growth
Concentration of poverty, social and ecological challenges
• The RDP in 1994 introduced spatial planning concepts such as “the
need to break down the apartheid geography through land reform,
more compact cities and decent public transport” (1994:83) and
“densification and unification of the urban fabric” (1994:86).
• “Since 1994, densities have increased in some urban areas and there
has also been partial regeneration of inner cities, but, overall, little
progress has been made in reversing apartheid geography, and in
some cases the divides have been exacerbated” (NDP 2011: 238).
• For nearly 20 years, the concept of “restructuring South African cities”
remained at the top of the urban spatial planning agenda.
• Since 1994 several policies and legislative mechanisms were implemented to
transform the spatial landscape of SA.
• SDFs are regarded as the key spatial restructuring tool for local municipalities.
• Perhaps the most under-recognised instrument for spatial restructuring is the
municipal budget itself.
• The need has arose for a comprehensive spatial vision for the country.
• A strategic approach to capital investment is essential to enable spatial
transformation.
• Infrastructure planning more powerful in shaping the spatial structure of
cities than spatial planning (Todes, 2008).
• Aligning & integrating the two, effective restructuring mechanism for local
municipalities. To what extent is there alignment in the City of Jo’Burg, City of
Cape Town, & the Rustenburg Local Municipality.
The presentation looks at • the capital investment patterns in 3 municipalities of South Africa
over the five-year period, 2007/8 to 2011/12.
• whether municipal capital spending patterns have contributed to
reshaping the spatial structure of the municipalities.
• whether municipal capital investment follows the strategic vision
of the IDPs and the SDFs.
• the statistical and geographical frameworks underpinning such
planning.
Capital spending for the five-year period
Capital spending has largely
benefitted key historical economic
hubs. Other areas have benefited
but to a lesser extent.
CoJ
Capital
expenditure (% of
CoCT
RLM
Average
15
21.5
16.7
17.7
municipal budget)
Capital spending between 15-21% of
municipal budget. Over 80% spent
on basic services infrastructure.
Economic (%)
2.4
1.2
1.1
1.5
Social (%)
4.4
6.8
7.2
6.1
Given budget constraints more
motivation to align policies.
Housing (%)
10.2
8.1
3.1
7.1
Infrastructure (%)
81.1
81.4
86.6
83.0
The City of Jo’Burg
Economic spending:
south, south east parts
of the city (CBD, City
Deep, Devland); parts of
Soweto.
Social spending: parts of
Soweto; City Centre,
Cosmos City
Housing spending:
southern parts, eastwest corridor; also in
Cosmos City.
Infrastructure spending:
City Centre, Cosmos City,
Diepsloot area.
The City of Jo’Burg
Highest spending in the consolidation area (public transport, soccer infrastructure,
inner city regeneration), although SDF strategy mentions it should limit spending
there.
Spending for new housing development outside the densification priority area and
movement system of the city. Mixed-use and industrial nodes have attracted higher
levels of capital spending.
Central city areas have attracted high levels of capital spending, whilst
other public transport management areas have not.
The City of Cape Town
Economic spending: CBD, southeast parts of the City; urban
regeneration areas like Mfuleni,
Maccassar, Khayelitsha.
Social spending: CBD, southeast parts of the City like Langa,
Blue Downs, Khayelitsha.
Housing spending: southern &
south-east suburbs (Belhar,
Khayelitsha, Bellmont Park), far
north-western parts (Atlantis),
Kuilsrivier & Brackenfell areas.
Infrastructure spending: In and
around the CBD (Green Point,
Milnerton areas).
The City of Cape Town
Accessibility grid in and around the CBD have attracted high capital
spending.
IRT (phase 1) has influenced spending patterns. Areas in the far north, not
part of the accessibility grid, linked thro IRT.
Parts of the marginalised area in the SE of the city have received capital
spending, but much lower than the designated metropolitan nodes.
The Rustenburg LM
Economic spending:
north-western areas,
north of the central city,
later years eastern parts.
Social spending: higher
density low income
areas like Meriting,
Freedom Park, Phokeng.
Housing spending: new
housing development
close to central city, then
also to rural settlements.
Infrastructure spending:
in and around the central
city; also low income
residential areas like
Meriting.
Rustenburg Local Municipality
Areas where residential, industrial and commercial development nodes are
defined, have attracted higher levels of capital investment.
With the exception of the central areas, both the rapid bus transport system
and the development corridor did not attract substantial capital spending.
Concluding statements on the integration:
Some concepts of the SDF strategies did indeed influenced
capital spending patterns, however there is still significant
scope to improve on the integration and alignment.
All case-study municipalities identified measures to manage urban growth (urban
edge, compaction, densification, development corridors, viable nodes).
And to address connectivity (BRT, IRT, Rapid Bus Transport system).
Public transport corridors (focus areas for development & intensification) has high
levels of influence over investment in the City of Cape Town, but less pronounced
in the City of Jo’Burg & Rustenburg LM.
Areas identified as development nodes (residential, industrial, commercial)
generally attracted higher levels of capital spending.
There is evidence of capital spending directed towards marginalised areas,
although the central core is the main focus. Mainly due to urban renewal & the
main centre of the transport system.
There are evidence of integrated spending for housing projects & its infrastructure.
Although many housing projects are located outside the main development &
accessibility areas, municipalities are using expensive transport infrastructure
investment to connect fragmented settlements.
Government’s unique capacity to secure
consensus between public & private capital
investment, enabling the achievement of multiple
development aims such as economic
development, employment creation and service
delivery (UN-Habitat, 2008).
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Proportion of
persons
employed
2001
58.4
2011
63.3
Unemployment
rate (expanded)
24.0
18.4
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
Using the census data – planning of capital projects
(where to invest), monitoring & evaluation of
spending outcomes (impact on quality of life)
CAPEX 2011
CAPEX 2012
CAPEX 2011
CAPEX 2012
Stats SA collects CAPEX data from National, Provincial, District, Municipal public
entities; and public corporations.
Important source for empirical evidence on the implications of infrastructure
spending: does it contribute to growth in SA? Does it reduce poverty?
Data must be spatial referenced – location of spending.
SDFs must give direction to capital expenditure.
Municipal integrated geostatistical system
Provincial integrated geostatistical system
National
Municipal and provincial
Regions
Wards
Settlements
National integrated
geo-statistical
system
Dissemination
geographies with
key statistical
data
Small areas
Cadastre and addresses
Other core spatial datasets
Current data supply not
suitable for planning. Call
for innovative approaches
to provide the required
statistical data for planning.
Strong case for the spatial
management of municipal
financial data.
Implying integrated geostatistical information
systems, from National to
below the municipal level.
Framework geographies
with identifiers and
classifiers
Aligning policy will imply
standard geographical
boundaries.
Policy design and implementation
National priorities
more jobs, united state, more infrastructure,
better education and health, adequate housing
– better quality of life
Aligning policy will imply
mechanisms (like a small
spatial unit with regular key
statistical denominators)
that can aggregate to other
geographical levels
Having a national statistical
system that underpins
development planning: a
spatial expression of facts &
figures
Thank You
email: [email protected]
Acknowledgements - Danie, Herman, Amanda & Prof Geyer from CRUISE.