Opening the cities: comparative perspectives on desegregation


ISK) r


THE PRIVATE SECTOR COUNCIL ON
URBANISATION (PSC)


The PSC comprises representatives of 6 private sector organisations and 42 individual
members. The PSC receives research and administrative support from the Urbanisation


Unit of the Urban Foundation.


Established in November 1985, the PSC set itself the task of formulating proposals for a
new urbanisation strategy for South Africa.


INSTITUTIONAL MEMBERS


Afrikaanse Handelsinstituut
Chamber of Mines of SA


National African Federated Chamber of Commerce and Industry
Steel and Engineering Industries Federation of SA


SA Chamber of Business
The Urban Foundation


INDIVIDUAL MEMBERS
Abrahamse, L.G. Syfrets Trust, Cape Town
Angus, B. Steel and Engineering Industries Federation of
South Africa, Johannesburg
Botha, R. SA Federated Chamber of Industries, Johannesburg
Brett, V. Association of Chambers of Commerce, Johannesburg
Buthelezi, M. Evangelical Lutheran Church of South Africa
Carson, D. Steel and Engineering Industries Federation of
South Africa
Frankel, J.A. Witwatersrand Chamber of Commerce, Johannesburg
Godsell, R.M. Industrial Relations Division, Anglo American .
Corporation, Johannesburg
Groom, H. Association of Chamber of Commerce, Johannesburg
Gumede, M.V. Durban
Haywood, R.F. SA Federated Chamber of Industries
Hofmeyr, R.T. Johannesburg
Houston, J.R. National Cash Registers, Johannesburg
Kambuie, T.W. Pace Commercial College, Soweto
Kutumela, M.S.P. National African Federated
Chamber of Commerce
Lawrence, D.M. First Corp, Johannesburg
Lee, R.H. Centre for Policy Studies, Wits Business School, Parktown
Liebenberg, J. Chamber of Mines, Johannesburg
Mabiletsa, D.M. The Urban Foundation, Johannesburg
Main, T.R.N. Chamber of Mines, Johannesburg


Malepa, M. Entokozweni Early Leaning Centre, Soweto
Moponya, M. Maponya Discount Store, Soweto
Menell, C.S. Anglovaal, Johannesburg
Motlana, S. Black Housewives League, Soweto
Ntuli, Z. W. Anglovaal, Johannesburg
Oppenheimer, H.F. Anglo American Corporation, Johannesburg
Pavitt, E. Johannesburg
Ridgway, V.M. Association of Chamber of Commerce, PE
Rosholt, A.M. Bariow Rand Limited, Johannesburg
Roodt, A.K. Afrikaanse Handelsinstituut, Pretoria
Schlemmer, L. Centre for Policy Studies,
Wits Business School, Parktown
Sebidi, S.J. Funda Centre, Soweto
Seutloadi, J. Caltex Oil Southern Africa, Johannesburg
Sims, I.J. BP Southern Africa, Cape Town
Sonn, F.A. Peninsula Technikon, Bellville
Steenkamp, T.I. General Mining, Johannesburg
Steyn, J.H. The Urban Foundation, Johannesburg
Stiglingh, F.J. The Urban Foundation, Johannesburg
Tlagale, B. Educational Opportunities Council, Johannesburg
Van Coller, D.L. The Urban Foundation, Johannesburg
Wessels, A.J.J. Wesco Investments, Parktown
Wilsnach, M.P. Afrikaanse Handelsinstituut, Pretoria




t


Comparative Perspectives on Desegregation


An Indicator SA Issue Focus
September 1990


INSTITUTE
O f


DEVELOPMENT
STU D! E S
LIBRARY


A joint publication


The Urban Foundation
Indicator Project South Africa




PUBLICATION CREDITS


GUEST EDITORS Ann Bernstein & Jeff McCarthy


EDITOR Graham Howe
SUB-EDITORIAL/PRODUCTION Rob Evans


IPSA RESEARCH Phinda Kuzwayo
C O P Y TYPING Denise Lenton, Charlene Nel


SECRETARY Pat Fismer


" GRAPHICS Jeff Rankin
" C O V E R REPRO Hirt and Carter


" PRINTING Pinetown Printers


" SPONSORSHIP We would like to thank the Urban Foundation for their generous support for
this special report


ISBN: 0-86980-728-5


The INDICATOR SOUTH AFRICA Quarterly Report and the INDICATOR SOUTH AFRICA
Issue Focus series are published by the Centre for Social and Development Studies, based at the
University of Natal, Durban. Opinions expressed in these publications are not necessarily those of the
Editorial Committee and should not be taken to represent the policies of companies or organisations
which are donor members of the Indicator Project South Africa


© Copyright for all material herein is held by INDICATOR SOUTH AFRICA or individual authors,
except in the case of short extracts for review or comment, which must be fully credited.


© Sole copyright for all data bases rests with INDICATOR SOUTH AFRICA. Permission to
republish or reproduce any part of this publication must be obtained from the publisher..




OPENING THE CITIES
(


COMPARATIVE PERSPECTIVES ON DESEGREGATION


Opening The Door Ann Bernstein and Jeff McCarthy 5


The Divided City: Group Areas And Racial Segregation . . . Jeff McCarthy 7


The Elusive Deal: International Experience Of Desegregation
Lawrence Schlemmer and Louise Stack 15


New Neighbours: The Namibian Experience SPCilliers 23


Cities In Transition: Urban Renewal And Suburbanisation . . Johan Fick 31


Urban Coalitions: Intergrated Neighbourhoods In A Segregated Society
. . . Daniel J Monti 36


Ethnocentric Symbols: Attitudes To Group Areas Reforms
Lawrence Schlemmer and Louise Stack 43


Black Youth Speak Phinda Kuzwayo 54


Free Settlement Or Free Cities? Ann Bernstein 56


Opening The Cities: Post Group Areas Urban Planning And Management
Ann Bernstein and Jeff McCarthy 63




FOREWORD
All the papers in this Issue Focus, except two, are based on work
originally commissioned or done on behalf of the Private Sector Council
on Urbanisation. The exceptions are the contribution by Johan Fick
which is based on a paper he presented to the Carlton Conference on
the Witwatersrand in July 1989, and that of Phinda Kuzwayo, based on
research commissioned by the Tongaat-Hullet Group.


The PSC is a forum which brings together the major urban communities
and the Urban Foundation (see inside cover page). Over the last several
years the Urban Foundation and the PSC have commissioned research
from a wide range of academics, both locally and abroad, focused on
a number of problems relating to urbanisation and how it might be
managed in South Africa for the benefit of all.


This special Issue Focus is one of several special issues of academic
journals which are being supported and widely distributed by the Urban
Foundation as part of the process of disseminating the PSC's research
findings. The Urban Foundation hopes that in actively encouraging
publication of selected research papers it will be sharing valuable
information with the wider body of informed specialists in South Africa.


The PSC project has been one to which many have contributed, and it
is appropriate to thank in particular the Chairman, the individual and
organisational members of the PSC, the Chairman and members of the
Working Groups, the large number of academics, researchers, and
consultants, those who participated in the many discussions to test the
thinking that was emerging, and the members of the UF's Urbanisation
Unit who managed what has been an extremely demanding process.


The goal of the PSC project has been that ultimately the lives of millions
of South Africans should benefit through the implementation of new
policy frameworks that address South Africa's pressing development
challenges.


Ann Bernstein
Executive Director: Urbanisation


The Urban Foundation




PREFACE


OPENING THE DOOR
By Ann Bernstein and Jeff McCarthy


he articles collected here have to do with a
critical issue for South Africa's immediate


urban future: that is, the issues of group areas,
desegregation and the need to repeal
discriminatory legislation relating to the cities.
Government statements on this issue remain
ambiguous, with promises at this stage only to
look at' the Group Areas Act and the Land Acts
in the next parliamentary session (interview
with FW de Klerk, Washington Times,
14/06/1990).


In the meantime, South Africa's cities have
undergone a substantial degree of de facto
desegregation. Research conducted for the
Urban Foundation, for example, reveals that,
whilst there are no exact estimates of the
number of black people living in housing
officially designated for whites, there is now
some degree of integration on a very wide array
of 'white' group areas. For example, in a 1988
survey of Pretoria-Witwatersrand region whites,
11 percent overall indicated awareness of
'non-white' families occupying property in their
neighbourhoods (domestics and occupants of
domestic quarters not included). Only in
Krugersdorp were there none who were aware
of a level of desegregation (Schlemmer and
Stack, 1989).


Moral arguments, unfortunately, have seldom
had much force in South African politics and it
is therefore necessary to point to the cold facts
of South African urban areas.


The disjuntture between de facto and de jure
settlement patterns not only causes considerable
personal hardship, but given the broader
pattern of demographic and housing market
forces at work, nothing short of massive forced
removals on a par with that of the 1960s will
achieve a pattern of complete segregation, as
originally envisaged in the Group Areas Act.
Needless to say, even debate on the prospects of
such removals at this stage would provoke a
local and international political and economic
backlash of disastrous proportions.


If only for this reason, rational policy debate on
Group Areas will henceforth have to focus
squarely upon processes of integration and
desegregation, or else be marginalised from
reality.


It is in this context that the papers in this Issue
Focus here assume their special significance.
Most of the papers derive from research
previously conducted for the Urban Foundation
and Private Sector Council on Urbanisation, and
their release forms part of a broader programme
for communicating these research results. The
papers present a complete array of data on
segregation and desegregation in South Africa,
and elsewhere. What emerges, in broad terms, is
that whilst South Africa is hardly unique in
experiencing high levels of de facto racial
segregation, the legally enforced nature of
segregation in South Africa is an anachronism.
As Johan Fick, a previous Deputy Chairman of
Johannesburg's Management Committee
comments in his article; 'any usefulness that the
Group Areas Act may have had as instrument to
pattern residential settlement has disappeared'.
Professor S P Cilliers, Dean of Arts at the
University of Stellenbosch goes further still, and
concludes on the basis of his research into the
Namibian experience that group areas will
cause more harm than good: total abolition of
the Group Areas Act is the preferred route.


The evidence on patterns of segregation and
desegregation elsewhere in the world, as
presented by Schlemmer and Stack, and Monti,
is such that it is clear that broadly homogeneous
neighbourhoods tend to persist, even without
legislative support as is the case in South Africa.
However, as Schlemmer and Stack and Monti
indicate, each in their separate ways, it is
possible that both local governments and
private corporations can enhance the prospects
for successful integration. Clearly, given the
severe social costs of segregation not only in
South Africa, but elsewhere, it will be important
that these more positive prospects be actively
nurtured in a post-Group Areas future.


11 GROUP AREAS Issue Focus




Schlemmer and Stack's article on attitudes to
Group Areas reform indicates that positive
measures to enhance urban environmental
quality will be acceptable to a wide spectrum of
South Africans, but that these measures should
be strictly non-discriminatory in racial terms,
and democratic in their formulation and
implimentation. This will obviously be a
delicate policy issue for the future, although
experience from other Southern African contexts
(eg Mafikeng, Windhoek, Harare) indicates that
the transition to 'open' housing markets has
much less impact than the current white
stereotypes in South Africa would suggest.


Moreover, it is striking how, in the South
African context, white attitudes tend to be
strongly influenced by the leads offered by their
political representatives. The Immorality Act,
for example, is now widely regarded by whites
as an embarrassing relic from the past, yet prior
to its repeal most whites assumed that it should
be retained (Rhoodie, 1989). Moreover, research
by Retief (1978) indicates that it is often simply
uncertainty over the group areas status of
neighbourhoods which leads to aggressive
behaviour amongst whites in integrating
neighbourhoods. Presumably, once the
uncertainty is removed, the propensity towards
such resistance will greatly diminish.


Besides, 'white fears' have to be balanced
against black aspirations for a just,
equal-opportunity society. The legacy of the
Group Areas Act is such that it constitutes a
major violation of such aspirations, and it is for
these amongst other reasons that the Urban


Foundation has on numerous occasions
expressed itself in favour of the immediate
repeal of the Group Areas Act (cf Urban
Foundation, 1990).


This is not to say that there can be any easy or
problem-free path towards residential reform in
South Africa. The articles collected here should,
if nothing else, dispel such simplistic illusions.
For us, the obvious choice is to go for the route
that opens up the best chance for a positive
future for all in South Africa's cities, and then to
capitalise on the advantages of such a choice.
This choice must not be prevented, inhibited or
diverted away from the core urban challenges
into detours that act to prevent, put off or
complicate the inevitable. For this reason, the
penultimate article in the collection reflects on
the pitfalls of the Free Settlement approach,
whereas the final article offers our reflections on
an option that provides the best chances for all,
and which capitalises on the advantages of that
choice,


R E F E R E N C E S


Retief, A. 1989. "Group areas as a form of territorial behaviour -
Mayfair-West and Kraaifontein." Paper presented to the
Conference on Group Areas and Free Settlement, Rand
Afrikaans University: 26 May.


Rhoodie, N. 1989. "Sosio-politieke persepsies oor
woonbuurt-vestiging in Suid Afrika".Paper presented to the
Conference on Group Areas and Free Settlement, Rand
Afrikaans University: 26 May.


Schlemmer, LS and L Stack, 1989. Black, White and Shades of
Grey: A study of Responses to Residential Segregation in the
Pretoria-Witwatersrand Region.
Johannesburg: Centre for Policy
Studies


Urban Foundation, 1990. Tackling Group /liens Policy.
Johannesburg: The Urban Foundation.


11
GROUP AREAS Issue Focus




BACKGROUND


GROUP AREAS AND RACIAL
SEGREGATION


By Jeff McCarthy
The Urban Foundation


Many of the core problems of South
African cities derive from a historic
legacy of central government policy
and planning which impacts on
urban residential patterns,
encapsulated in the Group Areas
Act. The main features of this legacy
are summarised here, followed by
the author's evaluation of the main
socio-political, economic and
welfare consequences. In
conclusion, the de facto breakdown
of group areas is discussed.


urrent central government policy
' on residential patterns in South


Africa's cities is framed around the
Croup Areas Act which was originally
written into law in 1950. The Act has
since been amended on several occasions,
but its essentials have remained that
South Africans must live in separate
residential areas designated for the use of
members of different groups as defined
in terms of the Population Registration
Act of 1950 (i.e. on the basis of statutory
race groups).


It is this legal enforcement of urban racial
segregation that makes South Africa
anomalous in international terms. In
terms of the Group Areas Act, a Group
Areas Board was established for the
purposes of identifying specific
neighbourhoods within all cities and
towns that would be reserved for the


exclusive use of a given race group. To
date, some 1 700 Group Areas have been
proclaimed following the
recommendations of the Board, and
effectively, all residential areas of South
Africa's cities and towns are now legally
reserved for the exclusive occupation of
one or another race group.


In order to appreciate the significance of
the Group Areas Act in both urban and
political terms, it is important to situate it
in a historical context. South African
cities have always been characterised by
high levels of de facto racial-residential
segregation. Even prior to the
implementation of the Group Areas Act
during the 1950s and 1960s, South
African cities recorded high 'segregation
indices'.


A segregation index is a quantitative
measure of the degree of racial
segregation/integration which varies
from 0 to 1 where 0 represents perfectly
proportional distribution of the different
groups in each neighbourhood, and
where 1 represents maximum
concentration in different
neighbourhoods. In the 1940s in South
Africa (i.e. prior to the Group Areas Act)
segregation indices for South African
cities varied between 0,8 and 0,9. Davies
(1976) points out that only marginal
increases in these figures were achieved
after the application of the Act, despite
hundreds of thousands of forced
removals.


Segregation prior to the Group Areas Act
was partly brought about by informal
social pressures and individual choice,
and partly by a range of discriminatory
local by-laws, title deeds restrictions, the
Black Land Act (1913) and 'Pegging Acts'


Prior to the
Group Areas
Act, South
African cities
recorded high
'segregation
indices',
increasing only
marginally with
forced
removals fn
the 1950s and
1960s


11 GROUP AREAS Issue Focus




The planning
model
envisaged by
the Group
Areas Act was
not consistent
with actual
patterns of
settlement
existing at the
time


As a result, in
the forced
removals that
took place
between 1960
and 1983,
some 860 000
persons were
moved


(1943 and 1946). Segregation indices were
as high, and often higher, than their
equivalents in the cities of America's
'Deep South' at that time. The application
of the Group Areas Act, however,
resulted in significant structural
transformation in South African cities.


Planning Instrument
Whilst a loose, zonally-organised pattern
of segregation prevailed in most South
Africa cities by 1950, what emerged after
the application of the Act was 'a city
more structured and quartered than
anything which had preceded it' (Davies,
1976). This was because the Act was used
as an instrument of 'urban design' by
planners during the 1950s and 1960s as
part of the application of a particular
spatial-political vision.


The Group Areas Act implied a
particular urban planning framework
which consisted of six interlinked points:
" 'There should be consolidated


residential areas for each race group.
" Each consolidated area should be so


placed as to have access to a growth
hinterland for future development.


" The consolidated areas should,
wherever possible, be separated from
each other by strong natural barriers
(eg a river valley). As a second option
strong manmade barriers should be
used (e.g. railway, highway, etc). In
the event neither of these options
being available, 'buffer zones' of open
space should be employed as a divide.


" Each racial group should have access
to and from the work zone where
interaction is permissible. In the
process of movement to and from the
work zone, however, no racial group
should cross the residential areas of
another group. Consequently 'ethnic
islands' should also be avoided.


" The black areas should be located as
close as possible to work centres, since
it is they who have to bear transport
costs at low wages.


8 Each area should become
self-governed and should become as
functionally independent as possible
of all other areas. Areas should
proceed towards equality in all
respects.'


This interpretation of the main planning
implications of the Group Areas Act was
derived by the Durban Housing Survey,
University of Natal (1952) - Western's
(1981) study of the Group Areas Act in


Cape Town reaches similar conclusions,
as do McCarthy and Smit (1984). Not all
of these points were realised in practice,
however, particularly the last two
objectives. It has been noted that only one
urban planning model could satisfy the
first four of these conditions
simultaneously ... a sectoral model in
which members of designated race
groups are located in different residential
sectors, and where each commutes to
centrally located production and
exchange facilities (see figure 1).


It has been widely observed that this
planning model, in turn, was not
consistent with the actual patterns of
settlement that existed in our cities at the
time of the passage of the Group Areas
Act. In consequence, very significant
numbers of people had to be moved, the
great majority of whom were black (see
Davies, 1976; Western, 1981; McCarthy
and Smit, 1984, for actual figures). In the
Durban case, sixty per cent of the
'non-white' population were displaced in
terms of Group Areas by comparison
with ten percent of the white population
(McCarthy and Smit, 1984).


The initial forced removals which
occurred in the 1950s, often sparked
symbolic confrontations between the
government and black political
organizations, for example, in
Sophiatown in Johannesburg (see Lodge,
1983). Even after the 1950s and the
suppression of resistance, many
thousands of people were affected. One
estimate is that between 1960 and 1983
some 860 000 persons were forced to
move as a result of their disqualification
as legal residents in terms of the Act, the
majority of whom were 'coloureds' and
Indians (Surplus Peoples Project, 1987).


Official statistics are not markedly
different. According to Hansard (1985,
Question 92:230, 25/02/85) some 745 000
white, 'coloured' and Asian persons had
either been removed or were under
threat of removal in terms of the Group
Areas Act (assuming average family size
of 3,5 for whites, 5,5 for 'coloureds' and 6
for Indians). The proportions involved
were 1% white, 65% 'coloured' and 34%
Asian.


Costs & Consequences
There are a number of important reasons
why the Group Areas Act poses barriers
to the efficient and equitable


11
GROUP AREAS Issue Focus




management of our cities. For the
purposes of the present discussion, it is
possible to isolate three broad categories
of consequence of the Group Areas
policy in terms of efficiency, welfare and
socio-political impact.


Efficiency consequences


Group Areas planning has imposed
limitations upon the ability of South
African cities to operate as efficient
economic entities. Parcels of disused land
are located in central areas which
otherwise might have been released
decades ago as part of the development
of efficient and compact urban growth,
e.g. Cato Manor in Durban and District
Six in Cape Town.


Land use mismatches are another legacy
of Group Areas planning. The rigid,
sectoral structuring of residential
opportunities has led to expensive
commuting patterns between home and
work. For instance, seventy per cent of
central Johannesburg's employees are
black yet there are no centrally located
legal residential opportunities presently
available for blacks; two-thirds of
industrial land in Durban is in the
southern sector, yet the main direction of
both planned and unplanned black
settlement is to the north, with numerous
other examples.


The distortion of residential property
markets is evident, where the price of
land is differentially affected by variable
supply constraints in the declaration of
Group Areas, and where black housing
shortages are accompanied by white
housing surpluses.


There is some debate as to the exact size
of these deficits and surpluses, but
figures of the magnitude of an 800 000
unit shortage for blacks, and a 40 000 unit
surplus for whites, are commonly used.
Maasdorp and Pillay (1977) found that,
even during the 1970s, these differential
supply constraints significantly increased
the price of black housing opportunities
vis-a-vis the equivalents available to
whites. A Cape Town property
economist has calculated that houses in
'coloured' group areas in 1989 were up to
90 per cent more expensive than
equivalent houses in adjacent white
group areas, as a result of these same
forces.


The distortion of commercial markets
was initially felt in terms of the group


11 GROUP AREAS Issue Focus


FIGURE 1 : A model group areas city (after Davies, 1976)


areas concept being applied to restrict
rights to trade in certain areas; and
subsequently felt in terms of the
mismatch between optimal trading
locations and enforced residential
locations of (black) informal sector
traders, product distribution
inefficiencies, and 'costs of entry'
problems for small entrepreneurs (all of
these have restricted the growth of black
entrepreneurs).


Industrial inefficiencies are evident
where the locational freedom of the firm
was circumscribed and linked to
deconcentration policy; and centralised
control over the allocation of industrially
zoned land was used to further the aims
of segregated urban development. For
example, the provision of subsidies to
industries locating in places such as
Atlantis or Bronkhorstspruit; and
restricting industrial land supply in the
Witwatersrand.


Lastly, public sector inefficiencies are
linked to the duplication of certain
services and amenities, the increased cost
of servicing a spatially disaggregated,
compartmentalised urban structure, the
need for transport subsidies, etc. For
example, half-empty, whites-only
teachers training colleges and schools
cost over R1 billion per annum;
commuter transport subsidies cost R1
billion per annum in 1985 already; etc.


Group areas
have not only
distorted
housing
supply, but
have also
restricted the
growth of black
entrepreneurs




A BRIEF CHRONOLOGY OF DESEGREGATION


1974 Johannesburg City Council removes 'whites only' signs from park benches.
1975 The Carlton Centre is allowed to establish South Africa's first non-racial, sit-down restaurant.
1975 Mixed audiences are allowed in theatres for the first time.
1976 20 hotels acquire 'international' (multiracial) status/21 applications refused.
1976 Durban's Mayor calls for CBD desegregation, Theron Commission recommends the same.
1977 'Coloured' and Indian business people given more freedom to trade outside of group areas in


terms of Section 16 of the Group Areas Act.
1977 Facilities in Courts desegregated.
1977 Bus services in Cape Town desegregated.
1978
58 'international' hotels exist, permanent permits for mixed audiences at theatres granted.
1979 Riekert Commission recommends desegregation of areas of CBD's.
1979 East London's bus service granted permission to desegregate.
1980 Cape Town City Council decides to no longer enforce beach segregation.
1980 Government delegates power to decide on desegregation of sports facilities to municipalities.
1981 President's Council investigates the possibility of open trading areas.
1981 Financial Relations Amendment Act (102 of 1981) allows Provincial Councils to authorise


admission of black children to private schools with subsidy.
1982 Group Areas Amendment Act (62 of 1982) repeals restrictions on mixed sport meetings and


mixed clubs with liquor licenses.
1982 The verdict in the State vs Govender case has an impact on the application of the Group Areas


Act - forced removals now more difficult.
1982 President's Council recommends that families not be evicted in terms of the Group Areas Act


unless alternative accommodation is available, and that trade exemptions should be granted
more easily under Section 19.


1983 74 hotels, 34 restaurants and 6 racecourses now have 'international' status; 15 multiracial
cinema applications received of which 11 are successful.


1984 Strydom Committee Report urges desegregation of CBD's.
1984 The Transvaal Provincial Administration blocks Pretoria City Council's attempt to close 17 of its


parks to blacks.
1984 Group Areas Amendment Act of 1984 allows local authorities to request 'free trading zones'.
1985
78 cinemas now open to all.


11
GROUP AREAS Issue Focus




1986 63 local authorities had submitted applications for open trading areas by March 1986. The first
two allowed are Durban and Johannesburg, but in the course of the year
29 areas are
declared 'free trade areas'.


1986 Durban's bus service desegregated and three routes desegregated in Johannesburg.
1986 Port Elizabeth City Council applies for beach desegregation and all municipal signs enforcing


segregation are removed.
1986 Liquor Amendment Act allows all hotels to desegregate (still subject to provisions of


Group Areas Act).
1986 Proclamation R17 (in terms of the Group Areas Act) exempts restaurants in 'free trade areas'


from permits for desegregation.
1987 Hospitals placed under 'general affairs' Provincial Administrations'.
1987 Durban's beaches (except two) desegregated.
1907 President's Council Committee recommends retention of principle of residential segregation, but


that a mechanism is needed for desegregating some areas.
1900 Following 1987 President's Council Report on Group Areas, three Bills are introduced in


Parliament - the Free Settlement Areas Bill, Group Areas Amendment Bill, and the Local
Government Affairs in Free Settlement Areas Bill. A 'constitutional crisis' ensues.


1900 The President's Council's Constitutional Committee recommends the Repeal of the Reservation
of Separate Amenities Act.


1989 The Free Settlement Areas Act and Local Government Affairs in Free Settlement Act are
promulgated, enabling selective residential integration.


1909 Group Areas 'task forces' appointed to 'police' the Act.
"1909 Pretoria Supreme Court disallows Carletonville Council's reimposition of petty apartheid


measures.
1909 Johannesburg City Council opens buses, swimming pools and recreation centres.
1909 First Free Settlement Board hearings begin. Board recommends four such areas to government.
1989 State President announces intention to repeal Separate Amenities Act, and requests local


authorities to desegregate beaches.
1990 Johannesburg City Council votes to declare the whole municipal area a free trade area


(Queenstown and Durban Councils recommend the same).


1990 Pretoria, Klerksdorp and Vryheid Councils apply for open CBD's.


1990 A proposed Johannesburg Free Settlement Area is advertised for comment by the Board.
Johannesburg's Council rejects the proposal.


1990 Separate Amenities Act repealed.


i Source:
Urbanisation Unit, Urban Foundation Research.


11 G R O U P A R E A S Issue Focus




Group areas
manufacture
an inward,
group-oriented
consciousness
which, in turn,
is one basis for
race-based
political
mobilisation
and intergroup
conflict


The Urban
Foundation's
research
indicates that
62% of black
residents in
the PWV
region favour
immediate
abolition of the
Group Areas
Act


Welfare consequences


The inefficiencies referred to above have
reduced the level of material welfare
available to all South Africans, but it is
also important to recognise the
disproportionate impact of Group Areas
planning upon specific, particularly
income-related, racial groups. It would
appear that the main negative impacts
have been on the urban poor and, in the
context of South Africa's high levels of
welfare inequality, this is a most
disquieting conclusion.


The poor are affected by the lack of
(legal) central residential options.
Whereas typically the poor tend to locate
as close as possible to the centre in order
to maximise their access to scarce
economic opportunities and money spent
on travelling, the poor in South Africa
have limited access to comparative price
advantages in the more competitive
central areas (goods cost 30-40% more in
remote townships), etc.


Group Areas also place further
constraints upon the already insufficient
allocations of land for the poor, thereby
increasing costs and residential densities
beyond those which might be expected
under normal market conditions.
Further, it results in the effective removal
of deprived groups from access to public
facilities such as libraries, health care
facilities and other support services
important to the self-improvement and
often mere survival of the poor.


Socio-political consequences


Some of the most important
consequences of the group areas
framework for our society are difficult to
calculate in money terms. Amongst these
are poor communication insofar as
Group Areas manufacture an inward,
group-oriented consciousness which, in
turn, is one basis for race-based political
mobilisation and intergroup conflict.


Another consequence is the inequalities
of opportunity in the workplace. Group
areas planning makes it difficult for
senior black personnel to translate job
achievement into lifestyle improvement.
Moreover, there are difficulties in
promoting extramural interactions
amongst multiracial groups of
employees; and restrictions on the
inter-city transfer of black managers.


Fragmented, duplicated planning often


leads to costly inertia because several
bureaucracies are often simultaneously
trying to plan for one area. For instance, a
recent Provincial study in Natal shows
that at least eleven levels of government
authority overlap with each other in
planning for the Durban Functional
Region. This number could be much
reduced without the Group Areas
framework.


Several studies have shown the
extraordinary injury to human
sensitivities resulting from forced
removals, and prosecutions under the
Group Areas Act. The last mentioned of
these socio-political consequences - a
sense of discrimination and rejection - is
probably the most important in terms of
black opposition to the Group Areas Act.


Western (1981), in his careful study of
removees in Cape Town, certainly
demonstrated the enormous hurt that has
been imposed upon people who have
forcibly been removed from their homes.
This point is often emphasised by black
political leadership. For example, the
Reverend Alan Hendrickse described the
Group Areas Act during the joint debate
on the Group Areas Amendment Bill in
1988 as 'an Act of violence because it is
an Act of dispossession' (Hansard, 1988:
col 16653). He also noted in relation to
criticisms of emotionalism 'that it is easy
to reject emotions, the feelings and the
experience of other people when one is
not in a position of having gone through
that experience' (Hansard, 1988: col
16665).


In any event, whatever the range of
reasons might be for black opposition to
the Group Areas Act, there is little doubt
as to the extent of that opposition. The
Urban Foundation's research indicates
that 62% of black residents in the
Pretoria-Witwatersrand region favour
immediate abolition of the Group Areas
Act (Schlemmer and Stack, 1989:157), and
similar figures have been recorded in
other surveys (eg Rhoodie, 1989; Retief
and Kelbrick, 1990).


Incremental Breakdown
In summary, whilst de facto
racial-residential segregation has always
existed in South Africa, the Group Areas
Act extended this segregation and
resulted in a centrally-controlled 'urban
design' which has had major
consequences for efficiency and equity in


11
GROUP AREAS Issue Focus




our cities. Not all of these consequences
would be immediately remedied b y
simplv repealing the Group Areas Act,
but it is important to understand h o w
deeply implicated the Act has been in
creating patterns of urban inefficiency
and inequity.


Tin.' .symbolic association of the Group
Areas Act with the historical trauma of
forced removals, together with a range of
socio-political considerations, have made
tlu: Act repugnant to the majority of
South Africans. Moreover, given the
power of market forces to override
centrally planned inefficiencies, the
contempnrary reality of the South
African ciiv is such that the Group Areas
Act is increasingly impracticable and
unenforceable. The realities of a changing
and integrated urban economy, and the
funclinn.il interdependence of cities, have
eroded rai ial compartmentalisation at
the grassroots level.


Whilst the Group Areas Act was
rigorously enforced during the 1950s,
1960s and 1970s, by the mid-1980s a
number of incremental adjustments had
to be made to the Group Areas Act and
supporting legislation, and to the
application of such legislation (see
legislative chronology). In general terms
these changes began by government
allowing for certain exceptions to the
provisions of the Reservation of Separate
Amenities Act, then went through an
intermediate phase of broader opening of
amenities and desegregation of business
areas through an amendment to the
Group Areas Act, and have n o w reached
the stage of providing for exceptions to
the Group Areas Act in terms of
residential areas (so-called Free
Settlement Areas), and the formal repeal
of the Separate Amenities Act.


The incremental breakdown in the
enforcement of racial segregation began
in the centres of the largest cities and
change has remained focused on these
areas throughout. The fact that the
breakdown in the application of the
Reservation of Separate Amenities Act
has preceded the breakdown and
changes to the Group Areas Act is
important, since these two statutes were
originally conceived as logically
complimentary.


Urban Foundation research shows that
desegregation of private and public
amenities proceeded rapidly during the
1980s. By 1989 a high level of


desegregation of private amenities had
occurred, varying from over 90 per cent
of such facilities in the metropolitan
centres, to 50 per cent in smaller, more
conservative towns.


The desegregation of public amenities
has not only been slower, but
commenced later and has varied
considerably from one local authority to
another. For example:


" Cape Town, Durban and
Johannesburg have n o w desegregated
all local public facilities;


" in other major urban centres fifty
percent or more of public amenities
are desegregated;


" some local authorities of smaller
urban areas had not at the time of the
repeal of the Separate Amenit ies Act
opened any public amenities to blacks.


H o w the repeal of the Separate Amenit ies
Act will affect broader processes of
desegregation is not yet clear. What does
seem clear is that the Group Areas Act
has and will crumble in the wake of
desegregated public life in the cities.


The 1982 Go vender case verdict in
particular s lowed the rate of prosecutions
in terms of the Group Areas Act. This
verdict implied that suitable alternative
accommodation must be found prior to a
Group Areas eviction. In consequence,
for example, in 1987 the police
investigated 1 243 complaints in terms of
the Act, but only 3 parties were charged
and tried (prosecutions) (Schlemmer and
Stack, 1989:75). However , this rose
slightly in 1988 with the police
investigating 1 689 complaints leading to
98 prosecutions (Hansard , 16/03/1989,
421; 15/03/1989, 411). The latest figures
are for the period of 07/1989 to 02/1990
during which the police investigated
1 249 Group Areas contraventions, but no
charges were laid (Business Day,
16/03/90).


By the mid-1980s, there was also a more
flexible approach to the granting of
permits, for members of other race
groups to reside in white areas. For the
period 1/9/85 to 31/8/86 a total of 280
such applications were received of which
113 were granted, 119 were refused and
48 were still under consideration. In 1987
the Transvaal Provincial Administration
(which took over the function of
considering Group Areas applications in
September 1986) approved 940 out of 961
applications from blacks to live in white


The realities of a
changing and
integrated urban
economy, and
the functional
interdependence
of cities, have
eroded
grassroots racial
compartment-
alisation


The Group
Areas Act will
crumble in the
wake of
desegregated
public life in
the cities since
the repeal of
the Separate
Amenities Act


11 GROUP AREAS Issue Focus




areas; 15 out of 46 Indian applications;
and one out of 18 coloured applications
(Schlemmer and Stack, 1989:74). In 1988,
1393 similar applications were received,
although figures are not available for
refusals/permissions (Hansard,
13/03/1989,411).


The rate of official relaxation of the Act
has therefore increased but, much more
dramatically, unofficial relaxation has
occurred via the 'greying' process (see
Schlemmer and Stack 1989). In the
meantime, despite all of these
adjustments, the core segregationist
legislation the Group Areas Act remains
on the Statute Books, and government
has not yet indicated an unambiguous
intention to repeal this legislation. tPOfil


R E F E R E N C E S


Davies. RJ Of Cities and Societies: A Geographers
Viewpoint.
Cape Town: University of Cape Town, 1976


Lodge. T Black Politics in South Africa Since 1945.
Johannesburg: Ravan, 1983


Maasdorp. G and Pillay. N Urban Relocation and Racial
Segregation: The Case of Indian South Africans.
Durban:
Natal University, Department of Economics, 1977


McCarthy. JJ and Smit. DP South African City: Theory in
Analysis and Planning.
Cape Town: Juta and Co, 1984


Retief.A and Kelbrick.E Group Areas as a Term of
Human Territorial Behaviour.
Pretoria: Human Sciences
Research Council.


Rhoodie.N "Socio-politieke persepsies oor woornbuurt
- vesting in Suid Africa", Paper presented to the
Conference on Group Areas and Free Settlement,
Randse Afrikaanse Universiteit, Johannesburg, 26
May, 1989


Schlemmer, LS and Stack, L Black, White and Shades of
Grey: /I study of Responses to Residential Segregation in
the Pretoria-Witwatersrand Region.
Johannesburg:
Centre for Policy Studies.


Surplus Peoples Project. The Surplus People: Forced
Removals in South Africa.
Johannesburg: Ravan Press,
1987


Urban Foundation Tackling Group Areas Policy.
Johannesburg: Urban Foundation, 1990


Western J Outcast Cape Town.Minneapolis: University
of Minnesota Press


11 GROUP AREAS Issue Focus




COMPARATIVE PERSPECTIVE


THE ELUSIVE IDEAL
INTERNATIONAL EXPERIENCES


OF DESEGREGATION
By Lawrence Schlemmer and Louise Stack


Centre lor Policy Studies, Wits Graduate School of Busienss Administration


Lvidence from other societies makes
it abundantly clear that restrictions
on freedom of residential choice can
be powerful and pervasive even
tc/jc/'c I he formal provisions of law
nominally encourage race
integral ion. International evidence
briefly reviewed here suggests that
the ideal of open residential
opportunity has been elusive in
silnations which, very broadly,
might be compared with South
Africa. The authors demonstrate
thai fulure policy in South Africa's
cities will have to take account of
issues which go beyond the repeal of
legislation.


The nearly forty-year old Group Areas Act has been unique in the
world as a massive, legally entrenched
lorm of social engineering. There can be
little doubt that the abolition of this Act,
an intention announced by the State
President on April 19, will in itself
constitute a very significant step towards
a more normal society in South Africa.


The existence of the Group Areas Act and
other legislation providing for statutory
race segregation, however, should not
obscure the fact that race segregation
does not depend on statutory provisions
alone.


Trends in the USA
The richest source of comparative
research-based evidence is the United
States. O n the surface the situations in
South Africa and the U S A might- seem to
be dramatically divergent, due to
differences in the ethnic and
demographic composit ion of the two
societies. Even though blacks are a large
majority in South Africa and a minority
in the U S A the situations in the cities of
the two societies may be very broadly
comparable, however. The proportion of
South African blacks with the means to
enter the existing, largely white, housing
market would be a minority relative to
whites, as is the case in the USA.


As in South Africa, race segregation in
the U S A has long historical roots. Until a
Supreme Court ruling in 1917, formal
municipal residential segregation was
fairly widespread in the Southern states.
Thereafter white property owners
resorted to restrictive leases and
covenants (agreements not to sell to
blacks). The Federal Housing
Administration aligned its policies with
prevailing norms and until well into the
fifties tended to regard infiltration of
non-whites into white neighbourhoods as
a threat to social stability. Thus a dual
housing market became entrenched.


Furthermore, a much higher proportion
of whites than blacks received assisted
housing and black areas were regarded
as a financial risk and hence denied
effective subsidisation inter alia in the
form of mortgage bond insurance. The
combined effects of these and other
practices institutionalised segregation
and condemned the predominantly black


The existence
of statutory
race
segregation
should not
obscure the
fact that race
segregation
does not
depend on
statutory
provisions alone


In the Southern
states of USA
formal
municipal race
segregation
was fairly
widespread
before 1917


11 GROUP AREAS Issue Focus




Several studies
confirm that the
level of urban
racial
segregation in
the US remains
high despite
two decades of
outlawed
discriminatory
legislation


Segregation is
most typical in
the North and
West USA, but in
the South,
although more
favourable for
integration,
patterns indicate
segregation at
the city block
level


inner city areas to deterioration (Lief and
Goering, 1987).


From the sixties onward the US
Department of Housing and Urban
Development sought to eliminate these
unfair housing practices, armed with a
number of Executive Orders and statutes,
including the Fair Housing Act of 1968.
In the seventies efforts to counteract
segregation were intensified in the form
of various affirmative housing
programmes designed to promote black
access to housing in all areas.


The norms and practices already
established, however, appeared to defeat
these administrative and legislative
reforms. Mechanisms for the processing
of complaints were inadequate, powers
to influence market forces were equally
lacking and official action to implement
affirmative programmes was overly
cautious and, some authors argue,
subject to conservative political pressures.


Lief and Goering (1987:257) in assessing
the steps taken, argue that 'Any
successful change in the complexion of
residential neighbourhoods would
require altering the practices of real
estate agents and brokers, mortgage
lenders, insurers, appraisers developers -
in sum, all the actors and institutions in
the housing market'. This, manifestly, did
not occur and these authors conclude
that: 'Despite the apparently clear
executive and legislative mandates that
racial discrimination in housing be
ended, segregation has in fact increased
in many cities since 1962. For instance,
one study found that integration on a
block by block basis actually declined on
average' (Lief and Goering: 240).


In 1977, Farley (1977), after a study of 29
cities, concluded that 'residential
segregation by race is considerably
greater than by social class'. Subsequent
research based on the 1980 census
suggests t h a t ' . . . with some variation
from city to city, there was on average a
modest decline in segregation levels ...
several studies suggest a decline in the
proportion of blacks and whites living in
racially exclusive areas between 1970 and
1980 ... (but) a decline in racial exclusivity
does not imply changes in segregation at
other levels of racial mix ... and it is clear
that most blacks and whites live in areas
predominantly composed of people of
their own racial groups' (Farley, 1987:
99-101).


Other studies also confirm that the level
of urban racial segregation in the US
remains high despite two decades of
outlawed discriminatory legislation.
Levels of racial segregation in US
Standard Metropolitan Areas in 1980 (at
the scale of the 'census tract') were
indexed on a continuum ranging from
0% (no segregation) to 100% (complete
segregation) by Jakubs (1986). His mean
index for 1980 was 67,7% compared with
75,5% for 1970; only a slight
improvement.


Observers in the USA had hoped that the
move by middle class blacks to the
suburbs would break patterns of
segregation. Here again, however Farley
(1987:111) notes t h a t ' . . . segregation
within the suburbs is only slightly less
intense than within central cities and ...
the forces perpetuating segregation are as
much at work in the suburbs as in the
cities'.


Stahura (1987:135) found that,
'Blacks continue to migrate to a relatively
small number of suburbs with existing
black populations while still being
excluded from most of the
predominantly white suburbs. Blacks are
concentrated in relatively few suburbs.
For example, in 1980 there are about
three times as many blacks in the 72 black
suburbs as there are in the 643
predominantly white suburbs. Black
suburbs are also larger in size ... and are
located closer to the outer boundary of
the central city than are predominantly
white suburbs'.


There is a view sometimes expressed that
the pattern just outlined is most typical in
the North and West USA, but in the
South, where black and white interaction
is more historically rooted, patterns may
be more favourable for integration. Yet
Mc Entire (1960:36) some time ago noted
that 'Racial segregation in Northern cities
seems to arise chiefly from the exclusion
of non-whites from large sections of each
city. In Southern cities the broad areas of
exclusion are lacking but non-whites tend
to be segregated, more rigidly than in the
North or West, on a block or street basis'.
Guest (1978) records a decline in black
suburban residence in the South due to
white penetration into areas formerly
occupied by blacks linked to agriculture.
Jakubs (1986) shows that segregation at
the level of the city block is significantly
higher in the South than in the
North-East.


11
GROUP AREAS Issue Focus




rvnerallv, the broad P a t t e r n s r e f I e c t a n
i n o r d i n a t e l y Waggish expansion of
s ired r e s i d e n c e . The U S Association for


.-ban Studies reported in 1987 that; 'Our,
mom basic conclusion is that none of the
WL'U-known economic, social and
statu tor v changes have fundamental ly
altered the ghetto system. Ghetto
expansion ami resegregation of
integrated neighbourhoods are still
taking place' ( Hw Star, 16/2/88).


Trends in Europe
Jn Europe the influx of foreign migrant
workers to many cities has created
situations somewhat similar to the
majority-minority ratios in the United
States, although obviously the
proportions of' 'non European' residents
is relative! v lower. The patterns of
residence are very similar to those in the
USA. A few examples of research are
noted below.


In Germany, tVLoughlin (cited in
Massey, 1980) examined patterns of
ethnic segreg.ilion in Bremen, Dusseldorf
and Stuttgart and found that at the ward
level:
" groups pen
eived by Germans to be


most foreign, such as Greeks and
Turks, were highly segregated with
'dissimilarity' indices ranging from 27
to 45;


" those groups perceived to be closer,
such as Italians and Yugoslavians,
were found to be less segregated, with
indices ranging from 24 to 31;


" French and Dutch immigrants were
found to be hardly segregated at all
with indices under 15;


" segregation measured at the city block
level revealed dissimilarity indices of
70 for Spaniards, 69 for Turks, 65 for
Greeks and Italians and 62 for
Yugoslavians;


" at the level of the apartment building,
however, there was almost total
segregation between groups with
indices ranging between 75 and 100.


In a similar study by DeLannoy (1975) in
Brussels, Turks were found to be most
segregated from the rest of the
population with a dissimilarity index of
68, followed by Greeks at 63, Moroccans
at 58, Spaniards at 51, Germans at 45,
Britons at 39, Dutch at 26 and French at
22. A cluster analysis of residential
dissimilarity revealed three basic
clusters: Western Europeans, Southern
Europeans and Turks.


In London, the clustering of West Indian
settlement in the Avest of the city and
black settlement in areas like Brixton,
which have undergone rapid transition
to black majorities, is self-evident. Apart
from voluntary residential congregation
for purposes of cultural cohesion and
support and the lengthy residence
conditions required to qualify for council
housing, informal, de facto discriminatory
measures also operate to maintain
residential segregation (Jakubs, cited in
Wills et al, 1987).


Christopher Bagley (1968) observed that
in the early post-war period in the
Netherlands, the assimilation of black
minorities from the colonies proceeded
very favourably. He suggested that the
greater initial success achieved with
racial integration in the Netherlands as
compared to Britain, m a y have been to a
strong Dutch social cohesion based on '...
consensus in the commitment to an ethic
of tolerance of social diversity in a single
society in which there is division on
religious and political grounds' .


This tolerance, as Bagley puts it, results
in a strong commitment to the 'right of
other pillars (social segments) to exist'. It
is not a tolerance based on insistence on
homogeneity but on an acceptance of
diversity. In addition, a consistent policy
was followed in terms of which housing
for immigrants was provided in m a n y
parts of the country thus avoiding the
development of ethnic concentrations.


Generally, however, the position in
Europe is one of very distinct patterns of
informal segregation, which are closely
correlated with the degree of cultural
dissimilarity between native Europeans
and foreign minorities.


Segregation Mechanisms
As the analyses in the volume edited by
Tobin (1987) suggest, in earlier periods in
the USA various official and semi-official
measures established a base pattern of
segregation, and in this sense parts of the
U S A were comparable with South Africa
under Group Areas Act. Of particular
interest however, are the informal
mechanisms which have persisted since
the seventies to perpetuate the patterns
of residential zoning. It is these informal
processes which are going to constitute
the policy challenge for South African
cities once statutory measures are
removed.


In Europe the
influx of foreign
migrant
workers to
many cities has
created
majority-minority
ratios similar to
the USA


In Europe the
distinct patterns
of informal
segregation are
closely
correlated with
the degree of
cultural
dissimilarity
between native
Europeans and
foreign minorities


11 GROUP AREAS Issue Focus




Informal
measures used
to manipulate
racial
residential
patterns include
selective
granting of
housing loans


Other
measures used
are the
'steering' of
certain groups
to particular
areas by estate
agents, and the
artificial
inducement of
panic selling


Informal measures used to regulate
and/or manipulate racial residential
settlement patterns include 'red-lining' -
the selective granting of housing loans by
mortgage companies and banks. This is
seldom done on an overtly racial basis.
Appraisals of areas into which black
families are moving are adversely
influenced by perceptions of economic
risk. This leads to a lack of finance for
such areas, a drop in property values, a
white exodus, and thereafter further
black in-migration due to vacancies in the
area.


Measures also include so-called 'routing'
or 'steering' - of certain groups to
particular areas by estate agents, and
'block busting' by estate agents - the
artificial inducement of panic selling by
means of rumours that a certain area is
going to go black and in some cases by
going so far as to back this up with
financial support to some blacks to move
into the area. Whites then leave and
property values drop. Once the area
becomes increasingly sought after by
blacks, property prices can rise again to
new heights.


These practices are part and parcel of a
process referred to as 'invasion and
succession' or 'tipping'; a well known
phenomenon in terms of which a rapid
transition occurs within an area from
white majority residence to majority
black or all-black residence, as described
by Fick, de Coning and Olivier (1988).
The people least tolerant of a change in
composition of the area move out first. It
seems that different groups experience
differing tolerance thresholds. Among
the more tolerant groups in the USA are
young professionals without family
commitment, socially marginal groups
and white ethnic minorities whose social
networks isolate them from their
immediate social surroundings.


In the USA a traditionally white family
suburb 'tips' once the percentage of the
black population in the suburb reaches
between 12 and 20%. A reverse tipping
has also occurred in some American
cities where a process of rehabilitation
and revitalisation (gentrification) turns a
neighbourhood from black to white.


Efforts by residents associations to halt a
white exodus by controlling real estate
solicitation, maintaining and enhancing
community standards, building
neighbourhood morale and correcting
stereotypes about blacks may in fact


speed up the rate of transition of an area
by making it more attractive for
middle-class blacks while having little
impact on whites for whom a wider
variety of housing choice is available
(Varady, 1979).


A study conducted by the University of
Chicago found that although majorities
of both blacks and whites support the
principle of open housing in opinion
surveys, blacks typically describe their
ideal neighbourhood configuration as
40% black whereas whites indicate
discomfort once blacks 'cross into double
digits' (Newsweek, 7/3/88:35).


Given this imbalance of 'ideal images', ' , . .
although theoretically compatible colour
mixes in neighbourhoods exist, the
dynamics of movement determines that
any such mixture will attract outsiders'.
Such inmigration cumulatively tilts the
balance and thus '... there are only two
stable equilibria. One consists of all
blacks and no whites, the other all whites
and no blacks' (Schelling, quoted by Fick,
de Coning and Olivier, 1988:10).


In a variation of the same theme, a report
of recent research indicates a
displacement of blacks in the Western
states of the USA, seemingly due to
Hispanic immigration (Lee, 1986). Once a
process of tipping begins, a characteristic
feature appears to be an increase of
negative perceptions and anxiety levels
in neighbourhoods immediately
surrounding the 'tipping' area as
contrasted with a softening of ethnic
attitudes in the area itself, probably due
to the experience of shared residential
space. The fact that most of the less
tolerant original residents are no longer
present would also contribute to the
improved social climate in an integrated
area.


Although some evidence suggest that
'tipping' is more likely to occur in areas
where rental units predominate as a
result of lessees being more apt to 'flee'
than established homeowners,
homeowners are also apt to migrate in
due course due to anxiety concerning
anticipated property devaluations. It is
also clear that it is in general more typical
for whites to retreat from transitional
areas to compete over them (Varady,
1979:15), which in a sense avoids conflict.


It is obvious that fears of property
devaluation are a major factor in the
responses of whites. Evidence on


11
GROUP AREAS Issue Focus




r devaluation is contradictory.
, inviiui^lv, there are conditions under
u'hicli property values may increase. At
... c i rlv stage in an integration process
'there mav be additional demand for
housing from new residents and a
limitation in supply because most
existing residents still remain. A fall m
property values may occur once the
'flight' of established residents is in full
swing. This may rectify itself later as
moreand more new residents bid for
property in such an area.


S e g r e g a t i o n n Causes
The -.endencies outlined above, whatever
their detailed origins and characteristics
might be, reflect a pervasive
colour- consciousness and sensitivity to
race and (o lifestyles broadly associated
with race. II is necessary to explore the
factors underlying this sensitivity which
seem to characterise both American and
European i ities.


As alread\\ suggested, race segregation is
nut an overt ideology (or is no longer
such). A recent keynote study by
.Srhum.in and Bobo (1988) suggests the
following:


'National trend data on ivhite racial
attitudes show sharply increasing support
for the principles of residential and other
forms of integration ... By 1985, for
example, 74% of the whites claimed to
disagree with the statement that "White
people have a right to keep blacks out of
their neighbourhoods and blacks should
respect that right - up from 39% in 1963
...". Simultaneously, hoivever, the same
surveys show another dimension; "...
white support for the implementation of
black rights through open housing laws
has been significantly loiver and less
consistent in groivth, reaching 48% in
1986":


After reviewing their own evidence
based on national surveys in which
hypothetical 'experimental ' situations
were employed, the authors conclude
I hat there is 'general resistance' to the
enforcement of open housing, and that it
is relatively greater than w h e n it is based
on local referenda.


It seems clear, therefore, that there are
very persistent and consistent
motivations underpinning informal
segregation, which survive in the face of
general values which incline American
whites towards inter-racial tolerance and


equality. W e need to consider some of
the major findings relating to these
motivations in order to understand them
more fully.


Varady's s tudy of Wynnefield,
Philadelphia, among m a n y others,
indicated that house type significantly
influences the decision of whites to
remain in an area of transition. Those
living in large attractive detached homes
were far less likely to move than those
living in attached homes or apartments.
Those w h o indicated that they were
interested in residential integration were
only interested in living in a racially
mixed community if whites are in the
majority (Varady, 1979:134-5).


Tumin, like most more recent
researchers, concluded from his study of
white male attitudes towards
desegregation in North Carolina that the
most important variables influencing
readiness for desegregation are high
levels of education, occupational status,
income and media exposure. This implies
that racial discrimination declines as the
potential threat of competit ion for l imited
opportunities for status improvement is
overcome through status attainment
(Tumin, 1958:80).


Darden (1987), on the basis of his
research demonstrates that segregation
does not vary significantly according to
the income or class status of either whites
or blacks. Even where status similarity
exists, significantly greater integration of
black-white residence does not occur.


Findings such as these s h o w that race
segregation is a general tendency, which
is not reduced b y similarity of status
between black and white, but which
weakens somewhat where the whites are
high-status, well-educated professionals.
This general tendency has led m a n y
authors to explain the phenomenon in
terms of race prejudice and
discrimination. For example, in the work
by Tobin (1987) virtually all the authors,
including the editor, conclude that
prejudice among white residents and/or
white estate agents, perpetuates the
entrenched and institutionalised
separation of the races which developed
in earlier decades.


The diagnosis of race prejudice and
discrimination does not necessarily
explain anything, however. The vast
majority of the whites in the U S A are not
narrow-minded bigots with deviant


Because the
general
tendency for
racial
segregation is
not reduced by
status similarity,
most
researchers
conclude that
race prejudice
is responsible


Race prejudice
amongst white
residents and
estate agents in
the USA
perpetuates the
institutionalised
separation of
the races
developed in
earlier decades


11 GROUP AREAS Issue Focus




Although
prejudice
toward
outsiders, the
drive toward
social
dominance, etc,
are universal
tendencies, as
explanations
they miss the
point


There is no
meaningful
'cultural'
difference
between
native-born
white and black
Americans


personalities who are antagonistic
towards out-group members. If it is race
prejudice, then it is of so generalised a
type that it is fairly meaningless as a
sociological 'cause' of segregation. The
argument becomes circular to boot -
discrimination exists because most white
Americans, in their housing preferences,
discriminate.


One must, therefore, seek some
substantive content in the motivations.
Some authors have offered even more
general explanations than 'prejudice' and
'discrimination'. Massey argues that
urban ethnic segregation initially occurs
because migrants 'do not select
destinations randomly, but follow social
networks of family and friendship
connections to specific jobs in particular
neighbourhoods of selected cities'. This
pattern is then reinforced by
institutionalisation once a threshold of
ethnic density is reached. Shops,
churches, clubs and local publications
emerge and increase the attractiveness of
the area to potential immigrants of the
particular ethnic group. Massey suggests
that the degree to which segregation
persists is a function of social distance
between 'immigrants' and 'natives',
acculturation and socio-economic
mobility (Massey, 1984:318).


Varady (1979:35) resorts to an even more
general explanation when he refers to
Down's explanation of this phenomenon
in terms of the 'Law of Dominance':
'Whites ... want to be sure that the social,
cultural, and economic milieu and values


of their own group dominate their own
residential environment. . . The best way
to ensure that this will happen is to
isolate oneself and one's children in any
everyday environment dominated by -
but not necessarily exclusively
compromised of - other families and
children whose social, economic, cultural
and even religious views and attitudes
are approximately the same as one's
own. . . '


All these general explanations are true of
human communities in general.
Prejudice with regard to outsiders, the
drive towards social dominance, etc, etc
are universal tendencies but they miss
the point. If one equalises or controls for
social status, education and income then
black Americans should be simply
Americans with darker pigmentation.
Insider-outsider problems should not
apply. There is no meaningful 'cultural'
difference between native-born white
and black Americans.


Yet the patterns in the USA show that
there is less residential segregation
between white Americans and (culturally
distinct) Hispanics and Asians than
between whites and blacks. Massey and
Denton (1988) re'fer to the 'extra burden
of being black'. (See also Woolbright et al,
1987). More specific answers seem to be
required.


Most of the literature quoted suggests
that a .major particular factor, which locks
onto the general motivations referred to
above, is that whites in the USA have


11
GROUP AREAS Issue Focus




d e v e l o p e d a specific fear that
neighbourhoods into which a large
number of blacks move will deteriorate
(see Kain, 1987, inter alia). Black
in-migration has come to be associated
with slum conditions or with rising levels
of social deviance.


In wrv large measure this perception is
due to precisely the fact that whites move
out of integrating neighbourhoods
causing property prices to fall; in other
words it is largely a self-fulfilling
prophecv. Nevertheless, an
accompanying factor is probably the
well-known fact that rates of social
deviance and family breakdown are
higher among blacks than among any
other US minority (in large part due to
segregation).


Lessons for South Africa
Evidence from Southern African
countries other than South Africa is not
covered in this article since it is more
appropriately assessed in combination
with evidence from South Africa (see
following article by SP Cilliers, for
instance).


The above review, however, shows just
how easily a situation could develop in
South Africa in which segregation is
reproduced in formerly all-white
neighbourhoods. The US data present a
tragic picture of blacks seeking the
neighbourhood stability, high grade
services and lifestyle benefits that racial
'balance' could provide only to find that
white flight recreates a racial ghetto.


This has not happened in some parts of
Southern Africa, in particular in
Windhoek and Mafikeng (see review in
Schlemmer and Stack, 1989) but
particular conditions applied in those
towns. In Windhoek the numbers of
blacks moving into white areas was very
limited, as has been the case in Mafikeng,
which also has the special provision that
schools and hospital facilities have been
allowed to remain segregated. South
African cities are likely to be closer to the
US pattern once laws providing for racial
/"ning and separate amenities are lifted.


A part from the inherent social costs,
particularly to blacks, of continuing
social segregation, political expectations
in South Africa are such that a
reproduction of urban race segregation
"light turn our cities into arenas of


conflict. What would be most desirable is
an integration process which is spread
throughout the cities, which does not
substantially alter the social
characteristics of neighbourhoods, and in
which whites do not retreat into social
enclaves with high cost barriers or
informal 'steering'mechanisms, as exist
in the USA, to keep blacks out.


Judging from the US and European
experience, it is essential to attempt to
minimise neighbourhood deterioration in
integrating areas, since this would
become the focus of fears which would
cause whites to avoid or resist
desegregation. Where such conditions
are developing, well-planned efforts
should be made to protect or upgrade the
areas.


Black
in-migration
has come to
be associated
with slum
conditions or
with rising
levels of social
deviance,
prompting
'white flight'


Needless to say, this is no easy task, as
US experience shows. Where upgrading
succeeds the risk is that the
disadvantaged black residents that
prompted the upgrading will be
effectively forced out.


Varady (1979:22) demonstrates that in the
US most integration has occurred within
three contexts:


" large scale private projects where the
central management used 'benign
quotes' to maintain stability;


" redevelopment areas in the central
city consisting primarily of fairly
expensive apartments (where the level
of black housing demand is usually
relatively low); and


" suburban communit ies distant from
existing black ghetto areas. He points
out however, that most of the
integration in these contexts is
relatively slight or of a token variety.


Furthermore, Eisinger (1980) points out
that the pattern of white response in the
US persists even in cities where political
power has shifted to the black
constituency and whites accept the
political change. They tend to maintain
social enclaves nevertheless.


It is essential to
attempt to
minimise
neighbourhood
deterioration in
integrating
areas, so as to
allay white
fears of
desegregation


South African cities have to do better
than the USA in achieving a stable
balance of ethnic groups in the cities. The
image of neighbourhood deterioration
has to be avoided. This is not the place to
debate strategies and techniques, but
suffice it to say that very active
involvement by local authorities, using
innovative methods, with adequate
funds to deploy, will be essential. UlPSJSi


11 GROUP AREAS Issue Focus




R E F E R E N C E S


Bagley C. 'Racial Barriers 1: Holland Unites' , in Neiv
Society,
7 March 1968.


Bradburn N, S Sydman and G Grockel. Side by Side:
Integrated Neighbourhoods in America.
Chicago:
Quadrangle Books, 1967.


Darden JT. 'Choosing Neighbours and
Neighbourhoods ' in Tobin, loc cit, 1987:15-42.


De Lannoy'W. 'Residential Segregation of Foreigners
in Brussels. ' Bulletin, Societe Beige d'Etudes
Geographiques,
No44,1975:215-38.


Eisinger PK. The Politics of Displacement. N e w York:
Academic Press Inc, 1980.


Farley R. 'Residential Segregation in Urbanised Areas
of the United States' in Demography, Vol 14 ,1977 .


Farley JE. 'Segregation in 1980: H o w segregated are
American Metropolitan Areas ' in Tobin, loc cit,
1987:95-114.


Fick J, C De Coning and N Olivier. Ethnicity and
Residential Patterning in a Divided Society: A Case Study
ofMayfair in Johannesburg.
Johannesburg: Rand
Afrikaans University, 1988.


Guest AM. 'The Changing Racial Composit ion of
Suburbs, 1950-1970', in Urban Affairs Quarterly,
December 1978.


Jakubs J. 'Recent Residential Segregation in US
SMSA's ' , in Urban Geography, Vol7/No2,1986:146-64.


Kain JF. 'Housing Market Discrimination and Black
Surburbanisation in the 1980s' in Tobin, loc cit,
1987:43-67.


Lee BA. 'From Black to White: Reverse racial change in
Neighbourhoods of Large American Cities, 1970 -
1980', in journal of the American Planning Association,
Vol52/No3,1986 .


Lief BJ and S Goering, Susan. 'The implementation of
the Federal Mandate for Fair Housing' , in Tobin, loc
cit, 1987:227-267.


Massey DS. 'Ethnic Residential Segregation: A
theoretical synthesis and empirical review', in
Sociology and Social Research, Vol69, October 1984:318


Massey DS and N A Denton. 'Suburbanization and
Segregation in US Metropolitan Areas' , in American
Journal of Sociology,
Vol94/No3,1988.


O'Loughlin J. 'Distribution and Migration of
foreigners in German Cities', in The Geographical
Review,
Vol70/No3,1980:253-75.


Schuman H and L Bobo. 'Survey-based Experiments
on White Racial Attitudes toward Residential
Integration', in American Journal of Sociology, Vol../No..


Stahura JM. 'Characteristics of Black Suburbs,
1950-1980', in Sociology and Social Research, Vol71 /No2,
January 1987.


Tobin GA. 'Divided Neighbourhoods: Changing
Patterns of Racial Segregation', Urban Affairs Annual
Reviews,
Vol32. Newbury Park: Sage Publications, 1987.


Schlemmer L and L Stack. Black, White and Shades of
Grey.
Johannesburg: Centre for Policy Studies,
University of the Witwatersrand, 1989.


Tumin M M . Desegregation: Resistance and Readiness.
Princeton, N e w Jersey: Princeton University Press,
1958.


Varady DP. Ethnic Minorities in Urban Areas. Boston:
Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 1979.


Wills TM, RF Haswell and D H Davies. The Probable
Consequences of the Repeal of the Group Areas Act for
Pietermaritzburg.
University of Natal, 1987:14.


Woolbright L ana u j n a r t m a n n . 'The N e w
Segregation: Asians and Hispanics' in Tobin, loc cit,
1987:138-57.




PRECEDENTS


By SP Cilliers,
Department of Sociology, University of Stellenbosch


The demographic, social, economic
and ideological forces at work in
South African society continue to
impact on changing settlement
patterns, particularly in larger
u r hmi areas. Under these
circumstances the author reviews
research findings on the reactions to
the emergence of deracialised
residential settlement in Namibia.
The si udy was commissioned by the
Urban Foundation to investigate
settlement, issues relating to the
Croup Areas Act.


I he passing of the Local Government
A Affairs in Free Settlement Areas


Act, No 103 of 1988, in conjunction with
llu' Free Settlement Areas Act (No 102 of
1988), provided proof that the
'leracialisation of urban settlement
patterns through the scrapping of the
('t'oiip Areas Act would inevitably
require a reconsideration of the whole
system of local government in South
Africa.


infective government at whatever level
t only be achieved where there are
clear areas of jurisdiction designated by
geographical boundaries. A racially


structured system of local government as
exists at present in South Africa would be
drastically affected by deracialised
settlement patterns. This is particularly
true with regard to the kinds of interests
which local government serves.


Under these circumstances it may very
well be argued that a review of the
Group Areas Act should only be
considered in conjunction with proposed
negotiations concerning a new
constitutional dispensation for the
country as a whole. In this regard, the
process of deracialised settlement in
Namibia may offer some instructive
lessons for the reform process in South
Africa.


Namibian Parallels
In Namibia, the institution of separate
areas for different racial groups began
during the German colonial period
(1884-1919) and was consolidated and
expanded during the period of South
African rule (1920-1989). It was a gradual
process culminating in the Odendaal
Commission Report which was
published in 1964 and recommended the
extension of the homeland system to
SWA/Namibia.


When South Africa took over control of
Namibia as a League of Nations C
Mandate Territory in 1920, it found the
system of racial zoning of land already
well entrenched. There were rural
reserves set aside for certain tribal groups
only and 'natives' were confined to
locations in urban areas. The Native


The present
system of local
government in
South Africa
would be
drastically
affected by
deracialised
settlement
patterns


11 GROUP AREAS Issue Focus




When South
Africa took
control of
Namibia in
1920, they
simply
consolidated
the existing
system of racial
zoning


Regulations of 1907 had provided that
'natives' could only occupy land or
obtain land rights with the permission of
the governor.


The South African authorities introduced
their own legislation to consolidate the
position. In 1922 the Native
Administration Proclamation Act
provided for the establishment of
segregated reserves. Residential
separation was given legal force by the
Native Administration Proclamation Act
of 1928 which provided for segregated
African locations.


On 11 September 1962, the South African
government appointed the Odendaal
Commission of Inquiry to investigate
social, economic and political conditions
in SWA. The report of the commission
was published in 1964 and became the
'statement of policy for all subsequent
constitutional and economic
developments in the Territory up to 1975'
(Du Pisani 1986:161).


The report recommended the creation of
ten homelands for the various black
ethnic groups, but left the 'coloureds'
without a specified territory. Whites
would have their own area which they
would control themselves.


in the late
seventies, the
National
Assembly
abolished racial
land use and
opened public
facilities, with
the exception
of health and
education


Six of these homelands were created by
the Development of Self-Government for
Native Nations in South West Africa Act
of 1968. They were Damaraland,
Hereroland, Kaokoland, Okavangoland
(later Kavango), Eastern Caprivi and
Ovamboland (later Ovambo). The
Bushman reserve, Bushmanland, was
established in 1970. By 1978 the Namas
had their own homeland and the
Rehoboth Gebiet functioned as a
homeland for the Basters.


Abolition Of Racial Zoning
The circumstances which enabled the
abolition of the racial zoning of land in
Namibia to be achieved came about as a
result of a policy change by the South
African government towards the
territory. In September 1974 the National
Party in (then) South West Africa
announced it would invite members of
other population groups to'discuss the
political future of the territory.


The result was the Turnhalle
Constitutional Conference which opened
in September 1975 and was attended by


representatives of the Territory's various
ethnic groups. Although firmly rooted in
the politics of ethnicity, the black
delegates were opposed to
institutionalised apartheid. A declaration
of intent by the conference included
commitment to the promotion and
respect of 'human rights and
fundamental freedoms for all without
discrimination on the basis of race,
colour, sex or creed'.


The Turnhalle Conference led to
one-man, one-vote elections in 1978. The
party which gained the majority of votes
was the Democratic Turnhalle Alliance
(DTA), an alliance of various ethnicallv
based political parties. In May 1979 a
National Assembly was established in
which the DTA was the majority party.


Part of the DTA's election platform had
been the abolition of racial
discrimination. Accordingly, on 8 June
1979, the chairman of the DTA, Mr Dirk
Mudge, introduced the Abolition of
Racial Discrimination (Urban Residential
Areas and Public Amenities) Bill. This
measure (including amendments to it in
1980 and 1981) provided for the opening
of white urban residential areas to all
races and the opening of public facilities
including hotels, restaurants, cinemas
and recreation resorts. The Bill was
passed by the Assembly on 2 July 1979.


The Act, as later amended, became the
Abolition of Racial Discrimination
(Urban Land and Public Amenities) Act.
It is the key to the abolition of racial
zoning of land use in urban areas as it
contained a catch-all provision that any
law which went against the provisions
opening facilities and residential areas
would cease to have the force of law.


It might be added that two important
areas where the separation of facilities for
different races remained to a large extent,
were health and education. The
administration for whites, the second tier
ethnic authority responsible for white
affairs, maintained essentially segregated
hospitals for whites only. A concession
had beeii made to coloureds and basters
who were given wards in under-utilised
white hospitals, but wards remained
segregated and no blacks were admitted
(except to theatre in dire emergency).


The white administration also
maintained schools for whites only and a
teacher training college for whites only.
On 17 September 1986 the (then)


11
GROUP AREAS Issue Focus




c l V * > Vimihi'5 1 1 Cabinet announced that


- ' m s r " i- < i n d c o l o u r c o u l d n o
r ' n ^ r p l ^ ' role in admission to all


, ,is The u ivite administration
f e v e r relu-ed to amend its Ordinance
i m v U l i n v ; I ' " ' ' v h i t e s o n l > ' s c h o o l s '


[ ste id it a directive allowing
r i ] Va'rent committees to request the


U'ninii t l u i r s c h ° o 1 1 0 o t h e r r a c e s '
The Depart men L' of National Education in
SlVA '.Nainihi'1 w d various other second
tier ethnu ai;th- .rities have for some time
run open m. pools, however.


Reactions To Repeal
Many white- in the territory were
opposed to the Abolition of Racial
D i ' - c r i n n n a l i o n - Urban Residential Areas
and Public Amenities) Bill. Opposition
within the \\ai ional Assembly came from
(lie all-wliiie Vi t ional Party and the
all-white I li-r-iigte Nasionale Party. The
\\'P leader, Mr M l du Plessis, speaking
under the banner of the conservative
alliance, AKTUR, said in the Assembly
that the Bill was aimed at 'violating the
identity' of the white population group,
f I\\P leader Sarel Becker called it
'treason'. Both parties voted against the
passage of the Bill (Windhoek Advertiser,
9/6/1979).


The Bill sparked a heated controversy
throughout the territory. White anger
almost spilled over into violence as
newspaper reporters were physically
threatened at an A K T U R and H N P
public meeting to protest the Bill and
politicians were jostled by a
demonstrating crowd outside the
National Assembly (Ibid, 11 and
12/6/1979)


I n lotions were whipped up and the
Windhoek Advertiser reported that
'political leaders, Afrikaans and German
church leaders, w o m e n ' s societies and a
large section of the white man on the
street have become embroiled in heated
exchanges about the bill'. The
Mederduitse Gereformeerde Kerk in
South West Africa sent a telegram to the
South African Prime Minister protesting
the bill. The Windhoek City Council
petitioned the National Assembly not to
open white residential areas.


In the highly charged and confrontational
atmosphere prevailing in Windhoek at
the time a grenade was thrown into the
city's Masonic Hall, killing one man and
injuring five others on 26 June 1979.


Against this background, a survey was
conducted in Namibia in 1987 to
investigate issues relating to the effects of
racial zoning.


The Property Market
The effect of the abolition of racial zoning
of land on property values was evaluated
on the basis of the 1987 survey of the
views and experiences of property
agents, both in Windhoek and in the
smaller towns and villages of Luderitz,
Swakopmund, Usakos and
Keetmanshoop. The survey consisted of
structured interviews aiming at:


" identifying higher, middle and lower
class residential areas;


" identifying changes in property
values in such residential areas
immediate}}/ after the abolition in 1979
and at a later stage, and;


" identifying the time and rate of
in-migration.


In those towns / villages where there were
no estate agent(s), information was
obtained from the relevant local
authorities.


Estate agents generally agreed that
changes in land values since July 1979
were primarily a function of market
factors and not a result of the abolition of
racial land zoning. It would appear that
such factors had a gradual effect and that
no dramatic changes occurred at any
stage. By and large the opinion was that
the scrapping of racial land zoning over
time contributed to the stimulation of the
demand for land/housing.


Estate agents in Windhoek were also
unanimously of the opinion that mixed
settlement since July 1979 occurred only
very gradually and that specific
residential areas were preferred
primarily on the basis of affordability
and/or location vis-a-vis certain
facilities/needs.


For the platteland towns and villages,
there was even greater unanimity in line
with the findings for Windhoek. The
extent of in-migration experienced was
limited, a function of market factors and
mostly represented an upward
movement into better/higher class
neighbourhoods. Land values were
positively affected.


The scrapping
of racial land
zoning in
Namibia has
stimulated the
demand for
!and/housing,
seen as a
function of
market forces


For the
platteland
towns and
villages, the
extent of
in-migration
was limited
although land
values were
positively
affected


11 GROUP AREAS Issue Focus




In-migrants are
mostly younger
people moving
into mainly
rented houses
due to primarily
job-related and
financial
considerations


Survey On In-migration
A survey of households in Windhoek,
Swakopmund, Usakos, Keetmanshoop
and Luderitz to test reactions to the
process of in-migration was conducted in
conjunction with the study on the
property market. The towns selected
were ones in which a degree of
residential mixing had occurred since the
change in legislation and which were
geographically widely distributed. The
findings therefore cover both the
platteland and the one major urban area,
viz Windhoek.


Windhoek itself is divided for census
purposes into more than eighty census
zones. Sixteen of these were covered in
this survey, selected to represent
different classes and types of residential
areas, varying from traditional black
areas such as Katutura and Khomasdal to
Erospark, a new higher income
residential area.


Although most
in-migrants
reported
regular contact
with
neighbours,
those who did
not gave
reasons which
did not reflect
racial rejection


These towns and the residential areas of
Windhoek were allocated for surveying
to different field workers acquainted
with the relevant areas. Fieldworkers
were instructed to identify and survey all
in-migrants in these areas/towns. Once
in-migrants had been identified, other
residents were to be interviewed on a
random basis, each field worker ensuring
that at least an equal number of settled
residents to the number of in-migrants
surveyed be included in the survey.


The total sample consisted of 489 heads
of households interviewed, of w h o m 243
(49%) were white, and the balance
coloured and African. Some 203 (42%)
consisted of in-migrants while the rest
were established residents of the relevant
residential areas. In-migration had
overwhelmingly occurred through
'non-whites ' moving into what had
previously been exclusively white
neighbourhoods. Of the 203 in-migrants
only fourteen were white.


As m a y be expected, therefore,
resettlement after the scrapping of racial
zoning consisted mainly of a movement
on the part of members of other racial
groups into previously exclusively white
residential areas. Proportionally less in-
migration occurred into high class areas.


In-migrant responses


It is mostly younger people who
in-migrated (70% under 35 years of age).


In-migrants, like residents, mostly
occupied houses/maisonettes rather Uian
apartments or rooms, although
significant proportions did occupy
apartments/rooms. The majority (63,2 ' , ;
rented the property occupied.


The gradual in-migration process
described by estate agents is confirmed
by in-migrants. Only 5 ,4% of in-migranls
had moved to their present address
during the first 12 months after July
Job-related and financial consideration-,
(transfer, promotion, employer 's policy,
etc. were listed by almost half (47,5 ) o'l
the in-migrants as the chief reason for
migration, while quality of housing and
family needs accounted for 30,9% of the
reasons.


The most important reasons for choice of
the specific neighbourhood were:


Employer's policy 28,1%


Quality of environment 27,1 %


Housing shortage 23,6%


The majority of in-migrants (65,0%) did
not feel that the in-migration of people of
a different colour had any effect on
property values. Of those (a minority)
who felt that property values had been
affected, the vast majority thought the
values had increased.


The majority (73,4%) of in-migrants
reported regular (at least once a week)
contact with new neighbours and with
other residents of the neighbourhood
(50,6%). The minority who reported no
contact with n e w neighbours, when
asked for the reason, gave a variety of
reasons which did not reflect rejection on
racial grounds.


When asked specifically about
acceptance by their new neighbours
89,2% reported acceptance while 77,8%
felt that they were being accepted by the
residents generally. W h e n asked to
validate their reactions, 80 ,1% reported
regular involvements and/or friendly
treatment, while only 4 ,5% reported no
communication as the basis of their
feeling of rejection.


W h e n asked how they felt about their
decision to move, 93,6%c reported
satisfaction. This was validated on the
basis of grounds relating to the quality of
life in the new neighbourhoods, such as
peacefulness, privacy, adjustment,
acceptance and centrality.


11
GROUP AREAS Issue Focus




ResilkMils' responses
^ their part when questioned


t their reaction to the m-migration of .
"p]e ol' different racial/colour groups,


p o r t e d as follows:


. A significant proportion (46,6%)
r e p l i e d contact with in-migrants as
neighbour- and 38,5% reported
c-oiTinct with in-migrants in the
neighbourhood.


. The nature of the contact with
in-migi-an(s' neighbours was typified
iis urdinarv social contact b y 7 5 % of
llmse reporting on their contact.


" Those reporting contact with
in-migranis in the neighbourhood also
overwhelmingly typified the contact
as of a s i k ial nature (67%).


" Only 8,-"' " of residents answered 'no'
to tiie question on whether they
accepted the in-migrants as
neighbours, and 11,7% did not accept
them .is residents of the
neighbourhood.


" When asked for reasons for their
reaction, ihe large majority w h o had
reai led positively, mentioned reasons
such as nui tual respect, the absence of
disiurKi in-es, satisfactory personal
relations and a respect for other
people's privacy.


" I .ikewisr. .ibout four-fifths of the
residents reported that they treated
new in-migrants in the same way as
their other neighbours or
fellow-u'sjdents.


Residents u ere asked how they felt/feel
regard in;.', I he scrapping of racial zoning
ot land use under different
ciiYimisLun es, Those expressing positive
feelings reacted as follows:


% Rending positively
At the time of scrapping 50,9


U V n new in-migrants
became neighbours 46,3
At the time of the survey 71,7


There was therefore over time a
significant growth of the percentage of
existing residents who reacted positively
to the in-migrants. When asked w h y their
reactions h a d changed over time, 57,0%
of those who had reported changes in
attitudes listed positive experiences such
as the in-migrants had lived up to
expectations in terms of adaptability, etc,
or that prejudices had proved to be
unfounded. Only 4 cases (out of 100
reporting changes in attitudes) reported


that in-migrants had not proved to be
adaptable to the expected standard of
development or reported negative
experiences.


A more detailed analysis, on the basis of
in-migrant status, shows that all types of
in-migrants had retained significant
contact with their previous residential
areas, primarily at the social level.


Highest incidence of contact with n e w
neighbours is reported by African
in-migrants into coloured areas (95,8%),
followed by coloureds who had moved
into African areas (85,0%o), then white
in-migrants (71,4%); while coloureds
(68,8%) and Africans (57,7%) who had
moved into white areas reported the
lowest incidence of contact with their
neighbours.


Acceptance of change


A m o n g all types of in-migrants, a
majority did report contact with residents
of their new neighbourhoods. All types
of in-migrants as well as all types of
residents reported social rather than
other functionally oriented contacts.


Further confirmation of the acceptability
of in-migrants by other racial groups was
that 88,6%) of white residents of white
residential areas, 93,1 % of coloured
residents of coloured areas and 95,77c of
African residents of African areas
indicated that they were prepared to
accept in-migrants as neighbours.


Particularly significant is the finding that
while only about 407c of white residents
reported that they had felt positive about
the idea of in-migration at the time when
the scrapping of racial land zoning was
announced, and even later when new
in-migrants moved into the area, this
percentage had over time grown to 66,57c
at the time of the investigation (1987).


The subjective reactions of both
in-migrants and residents therefore
suggest that the scrapping of racial
zoning of land use in due course came to
be accepted by the overwhelming
majority.


Socio-economic criteria


The majority of
established
residents
reported an
acceptance of
in-migrants of
different race
groups as new
neighbours


The subjective
reactions of
most residents
suggest that
the scrapping
of racial land
use became
acceptable in
due course


One may, however, ask h o w in-migrants
compare to residents on the basis of
objective socio-economic criteria. The
results show that the average size of the
households of in-migrants tend to be


11 GROUP AREAS Issue Focus




Those opposed
to the
scrapping of
racial land use
are mainly
Afrikaans-
speaking, have
lower
educational
levels and
lower income
than those
favouring it


In South Africa,
a larger
proportion of
the coloured,
Indian and
African
communities
will be able to
compete for
available
residential
facilities than in
Namibia


more or less similar to those of the
residents of the areas into which they
move. In-migrants tend also on average
to have higher education levels than the
inhabitants of their own racial zones, but
- with the exception of white in-migrants
- slightly lower than that of the receiving
areas.


As may be expected, white in-migrants
on average have a higher income than the
inhabitants of the areas into which they
migrate, while the income of coloureds
and Africans moving into white areas
tend to be on average slightly lower than
that of the white residents of such areas.
Yet, at the same time coloured and
African migrants into white areas have
on average higher incomes than the
average coloured and black residents
surveyed in their relevant areas.


Minority resistance


As is clear from the preceding analysis, a
small minority (approximately 259c) of
white residents had not viewed the
scrapping of racial land zoning
positively. Detailed analysis showed
these to be predominantly
Afrikaans-speaking (80%), to have on
average a slightly lower educational
status than those viewing the repeal
positively, to have on average a lower
income than those favouring repeal and
to have less contact with in-migrants.


Nevertheless, even here an
overwhelming majority of those who
have m-migrants as neighbours accept
them, and treat them in similar fashion to
other neighbours.


In sum, subsequent to the abolition of
racial land zoning in SWA/Namibia in
1979, a process of in-migration very
slowly gathered momentum. Relatively
few whites migrated to residential areas
for non-whites. In-migrants consisted
mostly of coloureds. There does not as
yet appear to have occurred a large-scale
resettlement, and the consensus of
opinion appears to be that property
values had, if at all, over time been
positively affected by the legislative
change.


At the time of the survey, the
overwhelming majority of inhabitants
surveyed, both in-migrants and
residents, appeared to feel positively
about the change. This preponderance of
positive reaction tended to increase over
time.


Positive Influences
The findings of this study on the
experience in areas where the statutory
protection of the racial/ethnic group '
character of residential areas has been
lifted shows that subsequent population
movements tend to be a gradual and
uneven process.


Initially, this often evokes strong fe;
which subsequently tend to abate on [h,.
basis of real life experiences and in
general tend to have a positive infhieniv
on intergroup relations. This conch
is confirmed by the findings of other
independent researchers (see Simon,
1986).


These findings throw some light on thi
fears and expectations expressed with
regard to a possible repeal of the Croup
Areas Act in South Africa. Some of these
are as follows:


Firstly, it is feared by some people that
large masses of out-group members will
move into previously exclusive in-group
areas. This did not occur in Namibia.
Residential relocation is strongly
influenced by property values and by the
property market. Since in traditionally
"white residential areas most properties
are owner-occupied, only a low rate of
turn-over in occupants occur at any
stage. In-migrants into such areas are
overwhelmingly buyers who have to be
able to compete at market price for
available properties.


It is probably true that due to the
relatively rapid socio-economic
advancement currently experienced by
those in the coloured, Indian and African
communities able to compete with whites
in the property market, a larger
proportion of these groups will be able to
compete for available residential facilities
in South Africa than was the case in
Namibia.


It is also true that there is a severe
housing shortage in coloured, Asian and
black communities. This has already
resulted in a significant degree of
'greying' of many previously all-white
residential areas - evidence of the
importance of market forces. It must be
assumed that these in-migrants already
occupy much of the residential properties
that may become available should the
Group Areas Act be repealed. It is
therefore reasonable to conclude that the
scrapping of the Group Areas Act will


11
GROUP AREAS Issue Focus




, h , . fo l i c . ' * I ' l l bv a massive influx into
S u - r white residential areas.


C .rondlv, it is anticipated that there will
," , , concenti'.il'on of in-migrahon in
InJcilic areas, resulting in the
,-Linergem-e < -f ^ lack spots or the
VviWnit-iil of ghetto's. This has not
o c c u r r e d in Namibia, presumably
iieuiiiso racial land zoning was scrapped
tor al! urban areas. In this regard, one of
the undesirab!'.' characteristics of the
pn.".ent siiuaiion in South Africa is the
p h e n o n u n o ' . i of penetration into specific
buildings or neighbourhoods which then,
rivm th^ limiU'd range of options
available, tend to become areas of
concentration and/or overpopulation.


Thirdly, it is le.ired that conflict may
erupt bcl'vcvn residents and in-migrants.
The research findings reported above
tend to support the opposite likelihood -
relativelv lev. " ases of rejection were
reported in in-migrants, while residents,
including those who had originally
opposed the idea of free settlement, in
general maintained civil interpersonal
relations with in-migrants. This finding is
in agreement """. ith what m a y be expected
on the basis of social-scientific analysis.
!:\\peric:n< c !:.is shown that open conflict
in residential areas overwhelmingly
involves non-residents, that is,
individuals or groups from outside get
involved in conflict with residents.


Lastly, it is often argued that standards
will be lowered as a result of differences
in the social status of in-migrants. Again,
this did not happen in Namibia either.
Since property values and rent levels in
residential areas usually reflect the status
of the neighbourhood, the process of
in-migration is selective.


On the basis of the above, it would
appear that a piecemeal strategy for
moving away from racially based


'sett lement in urban areas may well be
less appropriate than the direct strategy
of scrapping the total system. ^ n ^


Acknoivledgement


The study of the Namibian experience was
executed'in 1987 by SP Cilliers with the
assistance of a team of researchers, Annelie
Odendaal, Department of Sociology,
Academy, Windhoek, acted as project leader
in Namibia, Her team consisted of Brian
Jones, a journalist, who investigated the
historical background of racial land zoning
and its abolition, Innis Botha, who compiled
the questionnaires, Anchen Parkhouse ivho
conducted the investigation on property
values and some 24 staff and students of the
Academy who acted as field workers. Pieter
Joubert of the Department of Sociology,
University of Stelleubosch undertook the
statistical processing of the survey material.


R E F E R E N C E S


Bley H. South West Africa under German Ride. London:
Heinemami, 1971.


Du Pisani A. Namibia: The Politics of Continuity and
Change.
Johannesburg: Jonathan Ball, 1986.


Goldblatt I. A History of South West Africa from the
beginning of the nineteenth century.
Cape Town: Juta,
1971. ' '


Kozonguizi J. 'The Legal Apparatus of Apartheid' in R
Segal and R First, South West Africa: Travesty of
Trust.
London: Deutch, 1967.


Simon D. 'Desegregation in Namibia: the Demise of
Urban Apartheid' , Geofonim, Vol l7/No2,1986 :289-307 .


The Windhoek Advertiser, Windhoek: see references in
text.


Many of the
fears
concerning the
total scrapping
of group areas
in South Africa
are unfounded
if compared to
the Namibian
case


GROUP AREAS Issue Focus 29






CASE STUDY


CITIES IN TRANSITION
URBAN RENEWAL &
SUBURBANISATION


ByJohan Fick,
Chairman, Department of Development Studies, Rand Afrikaans University


Cities rank among the most
dynamic of all the institutions
invented by mankind. The
relationship between space and
society is constantly remodelled
according to present day needs,
challenging prevailing cultural
values ami political institutions by
vigorously exploring new social
meanings for cities and by refusing
planned spiii ial forms induced from
the outride. In this universal
context, the author explores the
impact of the Group Areas Act in
South Africa and the current move
to deregulation of residential
planning.


About five and a half centuries ago humans commenced living in large,
dense and permanent agglomerations
associated with a fundamental structural,
demographic and behavioral
transformation of their life-styles. Since
the first cities were formed 3500 - 3000
BC in Mesopotamia and the Nile Valley,
the process of urbanisation has gradually
gained momentum reaching a peak in
our times. Presently, about 40% of the
world population are city dwellers. It is


estimated that this figure will grow to
50% by the end of the century and that by
the year 2050 more than 90% of all
humans will be living in cities (cf Potter,
1985:19-45).


Over time the city developed into a
metropolis, the metropolis into a
megalopolis, and now we are witnessing,
what Doxiades and Papaioannou
(1974:14-31), have labelled the emergence
of an ecumenopolis, or a single world
city, sustained by an astounding network
of infrastructure and of complex
managerial capabilities.


Cities have, however, throughout the
ages been more than barricaded military
fortresses, religious shrines, bustling
market places, smoggy industrial centres
or micro-chip programmed technotronic
terminals. Cities have always been living
systems, made, transformed and
experienced by people (cf Mumford,
1961:93), Urban forms and functions are
produced and managed by the
interaction between space and society -
by the close relationship between human
consciousness, matter, energy and
information.


Although cities are without doubt the
most remarkable and ingenious creation
of man, they are not without problems -
problems that stem from both the
physical and social dimensions of urban
life such as traffic congestion, housing
crises and environmental contamination
as well as alienation, stress, poverty and
violence (Downs, 1976:29-49; Moynihan,
1971:180-208; Smith, 1979:1-48).


It is estimated
that by the end
of the century
the world's
population will
be 50%
city-dwellers,
and 90% by the
year 2050


11 GROUP AREAS Issue Focus




Inner-City Decay
The centrifugal
dynamic of
urban sprawl is
still the
dominating
force of
population
movement


A recent study
of thirteen
major US-cities
found that
'resegregation'
rather than
inter-racial
accomodation
had become
the dominant
residential
pattern


The onslaught on the physical fabric of
city life is particularly directed to
inner-cities as the process of
suburbanisation continues. Although
unique topographical features, cultural
values, political forces, historical inertia
and transport lines can significantly
influence the outcome in particular
situations, a concentric-circle pattern
does emerge as a crudely accurate
universal description of this process.
Fischer (1984: 46-47) summarises the
typical situation as follows:


'In the central circle are usually found
bureaucratic enterprises (financial
institutions, corporate headquarters) and
specialised retail stores. The next ring
usually includes manufacturing and
warehouse districts. Around these
business areas are deteriorated
neighbourhoods housing low-income
families and transients ... residential areas
tend to be higher in quality the farther
they are from the centre. And the farther
out, the less dense the neighbourhood, the
smaller the proportion of minority (i.e.
ethnic) residents and the higher the
proportion of children in the population'.


A variety of inner-related push and pull
factors perpetuated the flight from city
centres to new suburbs on the outskirts
of metropolitan areas. The physical
ageing and decay of inner-city housing
accompanied by a decline in
infrastructure and social services
(together with surging crime rates and
declining tax bases) all helped to portray
negative images of downtown living.


O n the other hand, suburban dwelling
developed its own mystique
encompassing security and private
surroundings, open space and green
lungs, good educational facilities and a
healthy environment for family life and
the rearing of children, small community
political autonomy and escape from the
disorganisation and complexities of
crowded cities. The mass introduction of
the atitomobile and the construction of
h ighway networks further enhanced
metropolitan mobility and spatial
dispersal (cf. Spates and Macionis,
1987:153-184; Hayden, 1986:173-232;
Judd, 1984:143-196; Jackson, 1985:73-86).


As the process of suburbanisation
continued, cities were under threat of
becoming necropoles, or abandoned
cities, devoid of life and inhabited as if by


only the dead. In an effort to prevent (ht,
strangling of central cities by a suburban
noose, many city governments have
initiated major schemes of slum clearance
and C B D revitalisation or have embarked
on a process of incorporation of new
suburbs into the city limits (Chudacoff '
1981:297-301; Jackson, 1985:138-156; Judd
1984:156-161).


So-called 'gentrification' has of late
awakened new hope amongst city
administrators of luring young
middle-class people back to the central
core (Hening and Gale, 1987:399-40 i ) \\|v
own conclusion, after studying this
phenomenon in various American cities,
is, however, that gentrification is fairly
limited in scope and that the centrifugal
dynamic of urban sprawl is still the
dominating force of population
movement. Other studies have confirmed
this pattern (Fischer, 1984: 237-269).


Like urban renewal and redevelopment,
gentrification has exacerbated housing
problems and, in many cases, merely
transferred blight somewhere else,
pushing low-income groups to other
dilapidated areas and even contributing
significantly to homelessness (Chudacoff,
1981:298-301) .


Resegregated Suburbs
The growing isolation of suburbia from
the inner-city was, however, not only
spatially structured but differentiated
according to the social characteristics of
residents. Residential patterning thus
today also reflects economic status and
class orientation (Horwitz, 1970:
120-1350); family stage - unmarried
people and childless couples typically
tend to congregate in city centre
apartment neighbourhoods and families
with children in areas of detached
dwellings in outlying districts (Fischer,
1984:48); or group affiliation, particularly
race and ethnic background (Glazer,
1970:3-30).


In a recent study of thirteen major
US-cities, the author found that
'resegregation' rather than inter-racial
accommodation settlement had become
the dominant notion in terms of
residential settlement in that country
(Fick and de Coning, 1989: 9). The same
pattern has also emerged in prominent
European cities (cf Rees, 1982:9;
Husband, 1982:21; Amersfoort ,
1980:135-136), Latin American cities (cf


11
GROUP AREAS Issue Focus




cvk inJ de Coning, 1989:12-14); and
Uric in cities (cf Fick, de Coning and


Olivier, 1^8:2-4).


Tlu' persistence of residential segregation
" \\ ;ri!inv multi-ethnic cities, and within a
wide spectrum of socio-political as well
^ economic conditions, is astounding.
This phenomenon is perhaps the most
visible manifestation of the growing
important e of ethnic loyalty and conflict
^ ti vibrant force shaping human affairs
n i o r w i t / , 1985:3-54). In the residential
context the pattern seems to be clear; if
groups are d i f ferent ia te , the social
dynamics underlying the process of
r e s i d e n t i a l settlement invariably manifest
a strong tendency towards the
inainte'nani e of mono-colour
neighbourhoods (cf. Schelling,
1978:137-166).


1980s Transformation
Government policy since the late forties
led to a significant divergence in South
African urban centres from the typical
spatial pattern of residential settlement
described above. The poorest persons
were, through legislative determinism,
moved i'ai ihest away from the city
centres, jobs and shopping facilities (cf
\\landv b'.s 1:82-93).


For some time at least, South African
cities, such as Johannesburg, did not
experience the problems of marginality
caused by urbanisation in the United
States and elsewhere. Suburbanisation
did occur, but until very recently, this
process occurred mostly within the city
limits of Johannesburg. The later
formation of Randburg, Roodepoort,
Sandton, etc. on the periphery of
Johannesburg, did not dramatically affect
the viability of the primary urban unit.


The pattern started changing slowly
during the early 1980s, gaining
momentum between 1984 and 1986. It
was also as if an unseen hand was
correcting the results of induced social
engineering - the general economic
decline and other factors now led to
substantial vacancies in apartheid-type
housing units in the inner-city as well as
adjacent areas. This created the
opportunity for poorer people to migrate
from the periphery, where an acute
housing shortage had developed due to
intensified urbanisation, to the central
city, and closer to their jobs.


At first the newcomers were most ly
Coloured and Indian but black people
gradually swelled their ranks despite the
retention of the Group Areas Act on the
statute book. Because of the illegality of
their presence, statistics on the actual
number of these migrants barely exist
and are highly unreliable. There is,
however, a general agreement that a
substantial majority of residents in the
C B D are now 'non-white ' (Mandy,
1989:3).


In our Hillbrow study undertaken in
1986, we estimated that about one-third
of residents in greater Hil lbrow were
Coloured, Indian and African (de
Coning, Fick and Olivier, 1986:7). In our
Mayfair study conducted during 1988,
we found that Indians had become the
largest ethnic group (47,7%) in this
so-called 'white group area' (Fick, de
Coning and Olivier, 1988:15-16).


11 GROUP AREAS Issue Focus




There is no
denying that
Johannesburg's
inner-city in
residential
terms has been
transformed
into a typical
racial ghetto


Over a remarkably short period of time
the inner-city of Johannesburg
underwent a dramatic character change
and today it approximates the typical
American urban pattern in various
important ways. Urban decay has begun
in some areas, particularly parts of the
CBD and Joubert Park, accompanied by
other typical phenomena such as high
crime rates and overcrowding. The
unique exception is Mayfair where ethnic
tipping caused a major rehabilitation of
the housing stock and revitalisation of
the neighbourhood as reflected in, for
instance, property valuations (Fick, de
Coning and Olivier, 1988:24-27).


These central city areas are, therefore, in
line with the international experience, in
transition from one mono-colour
situation to another through an
intermediary phase of shared residence.
Joubert Park and Mayfair have
substantially progressed on this road.
The length of the transitional phase can,
of course, be influenced by a variety of
factors. For instance, the cosmopolitan
character of Hillbrow has prolonged this
phase in that neighbourhood. There is no
getting away from the fact that
Johannesburg's inner-city in residential
terms has been transformed into a typical
racial ghetto.


Forced Lessons


Research
clearly
indicates that
any usefulness
that the Group
Areas Act may
have had as an
instrument to
pattern
residential
settlement has
disappeared


What can and should be done especially
against the background of the strong
dynamism inherent in the process of
residential settlement? The record is poor
where authoritative sanctions have been
employed, regardless of good intentions
and well-sounding political rhetoric, as
the dominant instrument to steer the
process in preconceived directions.
Forced integration did not work in
America, and forced segregation did not
work in marginal residential areas of the
major urban centres in South Africa.


What has clearly emerged from all the
research undertaken is that any
usefulness that the Group Areas Act may
have had as an instrument to pattern
residential settlement has disappeared.


The perception amongst many white
South Africans that this legislation
guarantees an own community life for
them is simply a myth. The fact is that
community-based interests are not
threatened in the vast majority of
neighbourhoods - why should the


general pattern be any different in South
Africa from elsewhere in the world?


Government and city council action
should primarily be aimed at facilitating
the inevitable outcomes of residential
patterning in these marginal areas. The
handling of alienation, frustration and
conflict in neighbourhoods going
through the transitional phase of a
character change should receive
particular attention. This process, which
can be traumatic, should be cushioned by
mechanisms such as the enhancement of
the mobility of leavers (especially the
older and poorer segment or 'trapped
category'), by way of subsidy strategies
and by placing a strong emphasis on the
maintenance of standards, security and
the quality of life in these areas (e.g. tin-
prevention of over-occupation of housing
units by newcomers).


The intrinsic nature of the typical white
middle-class lifestyle makes it highly
improbable that significant numbers ol
this group can be persuaded to give up
their lush gardens, sparkling swimming
pools and tasty patio braai's for the
crowdedness of inner-city living, even if
substantial and imaginative rehabilitation
were to occur. A revitalised CBD, will
thus, apart from remaining the major
commercial and financial centre for the
country, have to come alive as a pleasant
shopping and recreational areas for
suburbanites to visit during daytime, but
also at night. The thrust of city planning
and private sector investment should be
directed towards these goals.


The recognition of multi-ethnic
residential areas, made possible by the
Free Settlement Act of 1988, is the first
serious attempt by government to
address directly the particular needs and
problems of these areas as unique
entities. This is undoubtedly an
important step towards the deregulation
of residential patterning and the
acceptance of the primordial role and
meaning of social forces in spatial group
formation. One is, however, somewhat
perturbed by three impressions:


" the possible new townships on the
urban periphery, and not the already
existing multi-ethnic inner-city areas,
are receiving priority attention;


" the vagueness that surrounds the
functions of the proposed
'management committees' for these
areas, as well as the financial
implications of their declaration,


11
GROUP AREAS Issue Focus




which might dramatically erode the
base of city councils;


. the arbitrary demarcation of free
settlement areas appears to be based
on perceived expediency rather than
sound planning requirements. (For
in.stance, the exclusion of central
I lillbrow.)


|t clear that the Group Areas Act
cannot survive the broader process of
political reconstruction that is presently
underway in South Africa. Free
settlement areas must not be perceived as


wav to perpetuate discriminatory
practices in the field of housing but, in
order to make any sense, can merely
serve as an intermediate strategy
whereby the end goal of complete
freedom of association should be attained
ns quickly and as smoothly as possible.


To conclude, spatial forms, economic
functions, race and ethnicity, political
institutions and cultural meaning are
interwoven worldwide in the highly
dvnamic process of urban residential
patterning. The fates of cities and
societies are shaped by the outcomes of
this interaction. It is only by
understanding the complexities of these
processes better that we can
constructively plan and work for a
meaningful future, here in our own
metropolis - Johannesburg.


R I T T K E N C E S


Berger BM.'Suburbs, Subcultures, and the Urban
Future', in SB Warner (ed), Planning for a Nation of
Cities.
Cambridge: MIT Press, 1966.


Casteils M. The City and the Grassroots: A Cross-Cuitwal
Theory of Urban Social Movements.
Berkeley: University
of California Press, 1983.


Chudacoff HP. The Evolution of American Urban Society,
(second ed). Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, 1987.


De Coning CB, JC Fick and P Olivier. 'Residential
Settlement Patterns: A Pilot Study of Socio-political
Perceptions in Grey Areas of Johannesburg' , in South
Africa International, Vol l7/No3,1987:121-137.


Downs A. Urban Problems and Prospects. Chicago: Rand
McNally, 1976.


Doxiadis C A and JG Papaioannou. Ecumenopolis - The
Inevitable City of the Future.
N e w York: W W Norton,
1967.


Rck JC, CB de Coning and P Olivier. 'Ethnicity and
Residential Patterning in a Divided Society: A Case
Study of Mayfair in Johannesburg' , in South Africa
'»to)!nf/oim/,Voll9/Nol, 1988:1-27.


FickJC. 'Etniese Determinante in
Woonbuurtvestiging', in M Roelvert (ed),
Verstedeliking en Plakken/. Bryanston: Institute for
Housing of Southern Africa, 1988:1-9.


Fick JC and CB de Coning. Patterns of Ethnic
Neighbourhood Formation and Change: Micromotives
and Macrobehavior. Unpublished paper, Group Areas
and Free Settlement Conference, Johannesburg: 26
May 1989.


' Fischer CS. The Urban Experience, (second ed). San
Diego: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1984.


Glazer N. Cities in Trouble. Chicago: Quadrangle
Books, 1970.


Glazer N and P Moynihan. Ethnicity: Theory and
Experience.
Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1975.


Hayden D. Redesigning the American Dream: The Future
of Housing, Work, and Family Life.
New York: W W
Norton, 1986.


Henig JR. 'The Political Incorporation of newcomers to
Racially Changing Neighbourhoods' , in Urban Affairs
Quarterly,
Vol22/No3,1987:399-420.


Horowitz DL. Ethnic Groups in Conflict. Berkeley:
University of California Press, 1985.


Horwitz J. 'In One Month, 50 000 Persons were added
to the City's Welfare Rolls' , in N Glazer (ed), Cities in
Trouble.
Chicago: Quadrangle Books, 1970:120-135.


Husband C. Race in Britain: Continuity and Change.
London: Hutchinson, 1982.


Jackson KT. Crabgrass Frontier: The Suburbanisation of
the United States.
N e w York: Oxford University Press,
1985.


Judd DR. The Politics of American Cities: Private Power
and Public Policy,
(second edition). Boston: Little Brown.


Mandy N. Economic Dimensions of Residential
Patterning in and Central Business Districts with
special reference to Johannesburg CBD. Unpublished
paper, Group Areas and Free Settlement Conference,
Johannesburg, 26 M a y 1989.


Moynihan DP. 'Poverty in Cities', in LK Lowenstein
[edl, (irfcmi Studies: An Introductory Reader. N e w York:
The Free Press, 1971:180-208.


Mumford L. The City in History: Its Origins, its
transformation and its prospects.
N e w York: Harcourt,
Brace and Javonich, 1961.


Potter RB. Urbanisation and Planning in the 3rd World:
Spatial Perceptions and Public Participation.
London:
Croom Helm, 1985.


Rees T. ' Immigration Policies in the United Kingdom',
in C Husband [edl, Race in Britain: Continuity and
Change.
London: Hutchinson, 1982:91-113.


Schelling TC. Micromotives and Macrobehavior. New
York: W W Norton, 1978.


Sinclair R and B Thompson. Metropolitan Detroit: An
Anatomy of Social Change.
Cambridge: Balinger, 1977.


Spates JL and JJ Mackmis. The Sociology of Cities,
(second ed). Belmont: Wadsworth, 1982."


Squires GD, L Bennett, K McCourt and P Nyden.
Chicago: Race, Class, and the Response to Urban Decline.
Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1987.


Smith MP. The City and Social Theory. N e w York: St
Martin's, 1979.


Taub RP, DG Taylor and J D Dunham. Paths of
Neighbourhood Change: Race and Crime in America.
Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1984.


Van Amersfoort JMM. 'Woonsegregasie, gettovorming
en de Overheid' , in P W Blauw and C Pastor (eds),
Beschoiavingen over Ruimtelijke Segregate ais
MaatschappelijkProbleem.
Deventer: Van Loghum
Slaterus:135-68.


11 GROUP AREAS Issue Focus




CASE STUDY


URBAN COALITIONS
INTEGRATED NEIGHBOURHOODS


IN A SEGREGATED SOCIETY


By Daniel J Monti
University of Missouri-St Louis


The process of dismantling a
non-statutory system of segregation
in the United States and undoing
the harm it caused has proven more
difficult than many persons
expected. The author evaluates the
social trends of the post-war
decades, drawing on a case study of
integrated urban redevelopment in
St Louis, Missouri. He warns that
if the changes in race relations
experienced in the USA carry any
lessons for other nations, then the
adventure upon which South
Africans are embarking holds both
promise and disappointment.


One can provoke a spirited debate over how much integration or
desegregation Americans, black as well
as white, really wanted. More important
to the prospects of building a pluralistic
society were changes occurring across the
United States after World War II. Notable
among these were the movement of
many city residents and industrial
employers to suburban communities or
smaller metropolitan areas some distance
from the larger concentrations of black
Americans.


The spotty success of efforts to promote
racial mixing in public accommodations,
the work place, schools, and the polity


can b e understood better, perhaps, in this
context. All these things, however, had a
bearing on how well and even whether
persons from different races could live
among each other in relative harmony.


Major Trends
The degree to which US communities are
integrated varies widely. Based on the
best available evidence, however, several
general trends do stand out:


" Most minority citizens live in racially
segregated communities.


Over the last few decades, the degree of
residential segregation has declined
somewhat. Much segregation remains,
however. This is true in both the central
cities and suburbs.


" Suburban communities are only slightly
less segregated than inner-city
neighbourhoods.


Blacks, Hispanics, and Asians still tend to
live in central cities; but they have begun
to follow whites to the suburbs. The
suburban communities in which they live
may have some white residents, but the
number is often small or decreasing.


" New areas populated by racial minorities,
especially blacks, tend to be extensions of
old areas populated by that same group.


It is not uncommon to find city and
suburban neighbourhoods with a few
minority residents, and for these
individuals to be living a good distance
away from large numbers of other
minority people. It is much more


11
GROUP AREAS Issue Focus




common, though, to find new pockets of
minority settlement contiguous to old
ones. Municipal boundaries, such as
those between a city and its closest
suburbs, are not effective barriers to this
movement. The type and cost of housing
available in a contiguous area can be.


" The quality of housing available to
minority citizens has improved.


The housing rented or purchased by
minorities today tends to be more
structurally sound and has more
amenities than was the case several
decades ago. A gap remains, however, in
the quality of housing available for
minorities as compared to whites. Racial
minorities, especially blacks, also tend to
pay more for the housing that usually is
available to them.


In general, then, minorities have better
housing than they once did. They also are
no longer confined to inner-city ghettos
and have begun to take advantage of
suburban housing opportunities. On the
other hand, racial minorities are still
more likely to live in areas separated
from most whites. This is so even though
blacks often can afford to buy homes
identical to those bought by white
people. The effects and practice of
discrimination linger, despite many
public and private efforts to overcome it.


Integrated neighbourhoods can be found
m virtually any metropolitan area.
Minority people, particularly blacks,
consistently express an interest in living
in such neighbourhoods. White people
express greater support today for the
idea of integration. Notwithstanding
their respective statements on behalf of
integration, however, minority and white
people still tend to live in segregated
communities.


Persistent Segregation
Residential segregation persists for
several reasons. One reason may be that
whites and minorities are more willing to
support integration verbally than they
are with their actions. A second reason
no doubt involves the actions of private
and public institutions which continue to
discourage interracial contact.


A third reason has more to do with gross
changes in the economy of US urban
areas and the timing of minority
immigration to cities in this century. In


general, more recent immigrants to US
cities faced several problems that earlier
immigrants did not confront. These
problems made it more difficult for them
to establish a foothold in urban job and
housing markets. As a result, these newer
immigrants found it harder to be
accepted and have not been as mobile as
their predecessors.


The number of Europeans coming to the
US decreased dramatically after the
imposition of immigration quotas
following World W a r I. It was only
during World War I and afterward that
black Americans began to leave the South
in large numbers and moved to northern
cities. Continuing harsh treatment and
the gradual mechanisation of agriculture
in the South convinced many blacks to
find employment in northern industrial
plants that were still expanding at that
time. A second major wave of black
immigration occurred after World W a r II.


After 1950, other non-European
immigrants also began to come to United
States cities. Like black Americans, these
Hispanic and Asian people looked
different from the Europeans who
preceeded them, even if they were no less
or more skilled on average than the
earlier European immigrants had been.
Furthermore, these racial minorities had
the misfortune of arriving in US cities at a
bad time. Not only were white people
beginning to leave central cities in large
numbers for newer suburban
communities, but so too were the
industries that had initially employed
unskilled European immigrants.


This combination of factors made it
especially difficult for racial minorities to
become better integrated in the work
force and housing market. M a n y blacks
and some branches of the Asian and
Hispanic populations found themselves
confined to large inner-city ghettos. It
was, and still is in many instances, hard
to find work and a decent place to live.
The absence of federal funds to build
low-income housing and the reluctance
of suburban municipalities to pursue
such funding as does exist make it
virtually impossible to disperse these
large concentrations of low income
people.


Whether persons of African American
descent should be encouraged to leave
inner-city areas is a matter that sparks
much controversy. I am not one of those
who believe that such a 'voluntary'


Notwithstanding
their respective
statements on
behalf of
integration,
minority and
white people
still tend to live
in segregated
communities in
the USA


More recent
immigrants to
US cities
struggled to
establish a
foothold in urban
job and housing
markets, and
many were
confined to
inner-city ghettos


GROUP AREAS Issue Focus 37




Less prosperous
and powerful
groups were not
likely to benefit
directly from
redevelopment
efforts and more
likely to be
discomforted by
them


migration would be in the African
Americans' best interest, even if it were
feasible. For that reason alone, it is
important to consider what in the
American context can be done to
encourage more racial mixing inside
cities.


A serious but uncoordinated effort to
rebuild large portions of United States
cities began forty years ago. Much has
been accomplished; much remains to be
done. Among the more troubling pieces
of unfinished business associated with
these campaigns has been how minority
citizens fared as neighbourhoods were
rebuilt around them or without them.


On most occasions, urban redevelopment
favoured the more prosperous and
powerful. Less prosperous and powerful
groups, among whose number minority
groups were listed conspicuously, were
not likely to benefit directly from
redevelopment efforts and more likely to
be discomforted by them. There were
exceptions, of course. Low-income or
minority groups occasionally stopped a
particular project or shaped its outcome.
Much of the time, however, no
accommodation was reached between
those who typically benefit from urban
redevelopment and those who do not.


St Louis Model


What makes St
Louis
exceptional is
the way local
political and
corporate
entrepreneurs
undertook
projects that
helped change
the city's
economic base


St Louis, Missouri had many of the same
problems apparent in older US cities, and
it shared similar possibilities for
rebuilding. During the first half of the
century, the city lost some population
and industry to the surrounding suburbs.
Older sections of the city were
abandoned or looked shabby. They were
not rebuilt. The population of the city,
though still large at about 865 000, was
changing. More minority persons - in St
Louis this meant people of African
American descent and not Hispanic or
Asian people - came to live and work in
the city. More prosperous whites were
replaced increasingly by lower-income
whites with as much practice in urban
living as many of their black counterparts.


After World War II, the city experienced
a mass exodus of people and jobs of all
types. The population dropped by 50
percent between 1950 and 1990, and it
became nearly evenly split between
whites and blacks. The northern third of
the city had a predominantly black
population. The southern third remained


predominantly white. The middle third
of the city, which had been the city's
population and institutional core, lost
more people and employers than other
parts of St Louis. It also offered the best
opportunity for rebuilding the city to
meet the economic and social demands of
a post-industrial world.


Sections of the city's 'central corridor'
were redeveloped in much the same wav
as were similar parts in other US cities.
There was much demolition of old
buildings, scattering of the resident
population (often minority in character),
and construction of tall office buildings,
hotels, and cultural attractions. This
rebuilding created a great deal of
excitement and dismay, as
neighbourhoods in other parts of the cit\\
often became relocation sites for persons
displaced from one or another
redeveloping area.


Something different also happened in St
Louis, Missouri. In five parts of St Lotus,
in the city's midsection or contiguous to
it, major private corporations and public
institutions helped to rebuild rundown
neighbourhoods in a way that
accommodated modern professional,
technical, or service industries and
attracted a racially economically-mixed
residential population.


Many communities across the United
States have populations composed of
persons from different social classes and
ethnic groups. However, segregation on
the basis of racial classifications or
wealth, and sometimes both, is still
commonly practised in most places to
varying degrees. St Louis is no exception
in this regard. What makes St Louis
exceptional is the way local political and
corporate entrepreneurs undertook
projects that helped to change the city's
economic base, from heavy industry to
professional and service industries, even
as they fostered racial integration in the
neighbourhoods around these modern
industries.


They built a loose coalition of business
leaders, elected officials, civil servants,
and some grassroots leaders. The
membership changed over time and
parts of this coalition worked on different
redevelopment projects. In the process of
putting together these projects, coalition
members also had to fashion a set of
practices, understandings, and more
formal agreements among themselves
that enabled them to carry out their work


11
GROUP AREAS Issue Focus




" i relatively predictable, if not entirely
secure, political and economic
environment.


Some individuals made a great deal of
money or acquired much influence, or
lost their position and reputation in the
community. Regardless of w h o
happened to be in the coalition at any
particular moment , the rebuilding of St
Louis continued. St Louisans created a
redevelopment process in which the
practice of politics f igured prominently,
politics which compelled corporate
leaders, public officials, and community
,-ulivists to work together.


I iii)I hospitals and research institutions,
corporate headquarters and city
government sponsored the rebuilding of
the areas surrounding them with an
economically and racially-mixed
population is noteworthy. Much popular
and 'scientific' speculation holds that
such entities are not supposed to be
adventurous, particularly when no clear
profit and much potential trouble could
be realised in such a risky venture. Two
things happened in St Louis that made a
difference. First, local political
enirepreneurs provided corporations and
housing developers with substantial
incentives to build or rehabilitate
dwellings that would appeal to a diverse
population. Second, any number of
private leaders quietly expressed an
interest in promoting residential
integration. They thought it important to
see whether something could be done to
make the city less segregated even as
they were rebuilding large parts of it.


Renewal Coalition
None of these efforts succeeded as well
as some people may have wanted, but
they usually succeeded more than mam"
persons expected. Notwithstanding the
shortcomings of any particular project, a
number of positive lessons can be drawn
from their combined experiences. The
most important are these:


" The situation facing a community
must be sufficiently desperate before
public and private leaders are likely to
experiment with novel ways to
rebuild their city.


9 Political entrepreneurs can help to
fashion and direct a coalition of
parties whose primary interest is to
protect their own corporate assets or
political base.


GROUP AREAS Issue Focus 39




Political
entrepreneurs
can help to
fashion and
direct a coalition
of parties whose
primary interest
is to protect their
own corporate
assets or
political base


Incorporation of
grassroots
activists and
neighbourhood
leaders into the
redevelopment
process added
excellent
organisational
skills and a high
degree of
commitment


" That coalition sometimes can
accommodate the interests of both
corporate and grassroots leaders.


" It is possible to rebuild residential
areas around a large institution or
corporation so that they hold a diverse
population.


" Public assistance in the form of federal
grants and loans can be used to
leverage much larger sums of private
money that go to projects that serve a
relatively broad public interest.


" One could wait a lifetime for
individuals to do 'the right thing' for
the right reasons; it is better and
certainly more efficient to put one's
faith in the redemptive power of fear
and greed to get 'right things' done.


The kinds of public and private sector
cooperation that have been evident more
recently in St Louis could be reproduced
in other cities. How similar the results
would be remains to be seen. It is clear,
however, that corporations and
institutions can redevelop residential
areas. Moreover, the neighbourhoods in
question can be tolerant places in the
sense that a variety of people find them
comfortable places in which to live.
Finally, what happens in these places
tends to excite people and make them
more involved in local affairs. Even when
redevelopment proceeds relatively
smoothly, which is rare, residents pay at
least a little more attention to what is
going on around them.


Redevelopment can help to enrich and
energise local politics. Conservative
advocates of community action would
expect such a process to be led by a
'steward class' of business leaders. This
idea would not appeal to advocates of
community action with a more
left-of-centre bias.


Yet, what happened in St Louis could not
be viewed as a plutocrat's dream come
true, even though real and wouldbe
plutocrats helped to fashion it. There was
much more public arguing about
redevelopment and mixing of odd
combinations of people than a
selfrespecting plutocrat would have
tolerated. The whole enterprise was
handled much too sloppily and its results
were far too novel.


The public and private leaders
responsible for building St Louis'
development industry and nudging it
into action were aware that they were
doing something different. They did not


spend much time worrying about the
historical significance of their work,
however; events were moving much too
quickly. They left it to others to make
sense of their work. Private institutions
and corporations immersed themselves
in city politics and neighbourhood issues
in a way that had not been seen since the
nineteenth century. They created an
environment that was secure and
complemented the institutions that thev
represented.


To this end, they invested substantial
money and time in activities that were
bound to cause them more trouble. More
often than not, that is exactly what
happened. Nevertheless, they enjoyed a
fair amount of success. Far from acting
like footloose entrepreneurs, these
modern institutions sunk their roots
deeper into the community and made it
possible for persons from different social
classes and races to live together. They
did not run away from the problems
endemic to urban America.


The situation facing St Louis after World
War II had become grave. A variety of
technique to rebuild the city to fit in a
postindustrial world were tested. Some
worked better than others. Commercial
redevelopment in the downtown area
was taken seriously, and still is today.
Residential redevelopment was paid less
attention and did not fare especially well
between 1950 and 1970. Mistakes were
made in the earlier clearance and
demolition phases of redevelopment
activities, and these mistakes were taken
seriously. Once attention turned to the
areas referred to here, adjustments were
made. Public and private leaders
explored ways to blend commercial and
residential redevelopment in a less
disruptive and more beneficial manner.


The incorporation of grassroots activists
and neighbourhood leaders into the
redevelopment process was not an
accident. Such parties demonstrated
excellent organisational skills and no
small amount of commitment to their
effort to keep areas being rebuilt for
modern corporations as residential sites.
No one involved in the rebuilding of
these areas claimed much interest in
ethics, except when they talked about
someone else's behaviour. They were
tough, intelligent men and women who
faced difficult conditions and made the
best deals they could in order to protect
themselves and improve their part of the
city.


11
GROUP AREAS Issue Focus




Less Positive Lessons
II is all well and good to say this about St
I ( U , j s . It may even prove true for other
cities. Yet, it also is important to keep in
iniml some of the less positive lessons
lli.il Can be drawn from the experience of
rebuilding these parts of St Louis. The
following are the most important of these
Ic-sons:


" 11 is not clear that private leaders will
push for continued neighbourhood
improvements, once their own areas
are relatively secure.


" It is difficult to sustain even the most
progressive of pro-growth coalitions
over a long period of time.


" It is much more difficult to rebuild a
neighbourhood with many persons
still living in it.


" Displacement of many, if not all,
existing residents from an area may be
necessary, if that area is to be rebuilt
in a timely and effective way.


" The absence of long-term federal
assistance to promote racial and
economic mixing in neighbourhoods
is likely to reduce the chances that
integration can be sustained over an
extended period.


" There probably are limits to how
much integration can be achieved in a
redeveloped neighbourhood and on
how many neighbourhoods can be
integrated across a city.


" Despite some impressive
redevelopment efforts, rebuilt
neighbourhoods and the city as a
whole remain vulnerable; overlooked
problems do not vanish and may
grow to threaten otherwise good
works.


M(wt corporations and institutions that
become involved with redevelopment are
not in the business of rebuilding cities.
They are hospitals, food manufacturers,
computer firms, or any number of things
other than a development corporation.
The caretakers of these organisations are
interested primarily in making their part
of the city more attractive and safe. They
rebuild the area around their
headquarters and then try to retire from
the redevelopment game..


There are times when corporate officials
with some redevelopment experience are
asked to advise the sponsors or another
rebuilding campaign, and corporations
may contribute to a fund to help promote
that campaign. It is difficult, however, for
them to sustain their interest in work


conducted in other parts of the city and
sometimes even in their own part.


For this reason, perhaps a pro-growth
coalition is a fairly brittle thing. There
may be some consensus that growth is
good but that does not take the members
of the coalition terribly far. Often there
are fundamental disagreements over
where the city's limited public funds
should be spent and on what type of
projects. Even the most adept political
entrepreneur will have difficulty keeping
coalition members interested in new
projects and areas when resources are
thin and the areas in question are
thought to be unattractive.


The individuals living in or around a
redevelopment site often are among its
least attractive features. They can be
troublemakers or merely troublesome to
developers who would rather not have to
work around established residents or pay
to have them relocated. This is why most
or virtually all of an area's residents
usually are moved out of an area before
the developer moves in to restore it. This
response is not unique to wealthy
developers or big corporations. In one
area of St Louis just north of the central
business district, tenant management
firms run by low-income persons of
African American descent took
aggressive steps to remove 'bad'
elements from their public housing sites.
The only mitigating factor was that other
low-income people took their place and
did quite nicely in the redeveloped area.


Low-income individuals may fit in a
rehabilitated neighbourhood, but they
are not likely to stay unless they continue
to receive some kind of assistance to pay
for housing. Otherwise, they will not be
able to afford the rents that typically rise
as a neighbourhood is improved.
Unfortunately, the federal government
has cut back on the subsidy programmes
that proves so helpful in integrating
several St Louis neighbourhoods. Private
owners are not likely to pass along much
of the cost of housing low-income
individuals to their more well-to-do
tenants. No matter how successful racial
and economic integration is in
redeveloped neighbourhoods, therefore,
it may be only a temporary feature in the
city unless housing subsidies are
continued.


Other problems must be overcome as
well when one builds a racially or
economically mixed neighbourhood.


The absence of
long-term federal
assistance to
promote racial
and economic
mixing in
neighbourhoods
is likely to reduce
the chance of
sustained
integration


Once a
neighbourhood
has been
redeveloped,
low-in co me
tenants need
housing
subsidies, which
the federal
government has
cut back on


GROUP AREAS Issue Focus 41




The alliances
between
business and
public officials
that critics decry
may prove
instrumental in
addressing the
lingering effects
of poverty


Most important, perhaps, is the
reluctance of persons to live among
people different from themselves. It is
hard for developers to attract and hold a
diverse residential population. Moreover,
even as parts of St Louis's midsection
were becoming integrated, the northern
and southern thirds of the city generally
remained racially segregated.


Limits to Integration
The limits to which one can foster or
push racial integration are evident in St
Louis. Residential integration has not yet
resulted in many economic advances for
low-income minority persons. The
corporations and institutions sponsoring
redevelopment projects generally have
not tried to train or employ the minority
persons living around them. This is,
perhaps, the single greatest shortcoming
in the redevelopment efforts highlighted
here. No matter how well minority
citizens fit in these newly redeveloped
neighbourhoods, they will not find a
secure niche in their updated city until
they find gainful employment in area
industries. This is the next great problem
awaiting the careful attention of public
and private leaders who have tried to
rebuild large portions of the city.


In the face of such an appraisal two final
lessons are to be drawn. First, there is no
such thing as a guaranteed success or
'sure thing' in rebuilding cities. Contrary
to what many critics of redevelopment
think, politicians and big corporations do
not have the redevelopment game so well
rigged that their pet projects are assured
success even as the city around them
continues to decline. Second, the very
alliances between business leaders and
public officials that critics of
redevelopment decry may prove
instrumental in addressing the lingering
effects of poverty and despair left in the
shadow of a city's rebirth.


Although they might be reluctant to
admit it there is no easy way for business
persons to return to the comparative
safety of their corporate headquarters
once they revive the idea that they can
act as stewards of the city's future. They
are condemned to a dialogue with parties
who until recently have had little to siv
about the "way the community was beiin-
rebuilt.


Persons in other cities, or countries, will
no doubt find parallels between their
own situation and the events
summarised here. They are just as likely
to find differences that could make it
difficult to repeat what apparently
happened in St Louis, Missouri. The
important point is that private and public
leaders can do things that help to change
the social character of a community even
as they rebuild or expand its economic
base to fit in a more modern world. It is a
world into which racially and
economically-mixed neighbourhoods can
comfortably fit as well.


R E F E R E N C E S


Bradburn X and G G o c k e l Side by Side: Integrate
Neighbourhoods in America.
Chicago: Quadrangei
Books, 1971.


G o o d m a n A. 'Neighbourhood Impacts on Housing
Prices' , in Urban Neighbourhoods: Research Policy, 'ed> R
Taylor. X e w York: Praeger, 1986:123-143.


Hal lman H. Neighbourhoods : Their Place in Urban life.
Beverley Hills: Sage Publications, 1984.


Milgram \\>i. Gooii Neighbourhood: The Challenge of Open
Housing.
X e w York: X o r t o n , 1977.


M o m e n i J (ed). Rna\\ Ethnicity, and Minority Housing in
the United States. New
York: Greenwood Press 1986.


Tobin G (ed). Divided Neighbourhoods: Changing Patterns
of Racial Segregation.
Beverley Hills: Sage Publications,
1987.


Wilson WJ. The Declining Significance of Race: Blacks and
Changing American Institutions.
Chicago: University of
Chicago Press, 1980.


Wilson WJ. The Truly Disadvantaged: Inner City,
Underclass, and Public Policy.
Chicago: Univers i ty of
Chicago Press, 1987.


11
GROUP AREAS Issue Focus




S U R V E Y


ETHNOCENTRIC SYMBOLS
ATTITUDES TO


GROUP AREA REFORMS


By Lawrence Schiemmer and Louise Stack
Centre for Policy Studies, Wits Graduate School of Business Administration


The new reforms, and in particular
the intended abolition of racial
zoning, represent an untested
situation as far as the reactions of
the white community and white
political constituency are
concerned. This analysis of recent
attitude survey findings is intended
to shed some light on what these
reactions may be.


Government reforms to race laws in the past have not directly affected
white rank-and-file constituencies. The
abolition of influx control, the legal
recognition of black trade unions, the
desegregation of central business districts
and even the abolition of the Prohibition
" f Mixed Marriages Act and the Free
Settlement Areas Act have directly
affected only certain categories of whites
or only certain social situations.


The new range of reforms which have
been announced by government are all
likely to have a direct affect on the
ongoing community existence of whites.
These include the intended abolition of
I lie Separate Amenities Act, new
provisions for the opening of schools to
all races (admittedly only where a
majority of parents agree) and the
intended replacement of racial residential
zoning with new legislation to protect
neighbourhood standards broadly
intended to be non-racial in its effects.


South Africa is in the very initial phase of
residential integration after a long history
of separate spheres of residence for its
different races. During this history
residential segregation, as it applied to
whites, so-called coloured people and
Asians, was largely informal after Union
up to the latter years of the Smuts
regime, when the first rigid legal
entrenchment of segregation occurred in
the form of the Trading and Occupation
of Land (Transvaal and Natal) Act of
1943 and the Asiatic Land Tenure and
Representation of Indians Act of 1946.


For Africans official segregation after
Union stretched back to the Natives Land
Act of 1913 and the Natives (Urban
Areas) Act of 1923. The Group Areas Act
No 41 of 1950 systematised segregation
and provided it with a rigid formal basis,
the first departure being the Free
Settlement Areas Act of 1989.
Hence separate dwelling areas for
different races have been a pervasive
feature of South African life, a
taken-for-granted reality among whites
and blacks over the decades. Obviously
white perceptions of what is akin to a
'natural' state of affairs will pervade
attitudes to prospects of reform in
residential segregation.


At the same time, however, the Group
Areas Act, as one of the cornerstones of
apartheid, has become increasingly
controversial with the rise of both
internal and international condemnation
of the system. Increasingly whites have
come to realise that the 'natural' state of
affairs is both morally and in terms of the
practical requirements of political
resolution in South Africa, a situation
which is fundamentally problematic.


Increasingly
whites have
come to realise
that the 'natural'
state of affairs in
South Africa is
both morally and
in terms of
practical political
requirements,
fundamentally
problematic


GROUP AREAS Issue Focus 43




To people other
than white the
situation would
appear to be
simple, since
they have been
the people
excluded from
access to most
residential areas


Yet even
amongst
groups other
than white,
there are
complicating
issues to be
considered


Hence whites as a collectivity are caught
in a tension between two realities:
residential life as they have always
known it and the inevitability of change.
To people other than white the situation
is much simpler, since they, by and large,
have been the people excluded from
access to most residential areas. Yet even
for coloured people and Indians the issue
might be complicated by the knowledge
that the possible entry into their areas of
large numbers of Africans if the Act were
abolished might entail some disruptive
changes.


For Africans the issue is simplest of all.
The constraints of racial zoning have
been accompanied by hardly any
benefits, other than the fact that forced
segregation might have created more
cohesive political communities, with
middle-class and well-educated leaders
living right among the rank-and-file, and
the fact that black businessmen have
enjoyed 'captive' markets. This, however,
could hardly be expected to qualify their
rejection of the Act very perceptibly.


Yet even among Africans, reactions to
new conditions of life in integrated
communities might be more complex
than the universal moral condemnation
of racial zoning would suggest. Here one
takes account of the fact that virtually the
world over, ethnic and socio-economic or
class communities have a tendency to
live in areas of cultural or class
concentration.


These very broadly are the simple social
and political parameters within which
attitudes towards racial zoning in South
Africa may be approached.


Broad Patterns
Among whites, previous studies of
attitudes towards racial segregation have
shown a trend towards a gradual
liberalisation over time (Schlemmer and
Stack, 1989:137-8). An example of this
trend is seen in the responses over time
to an identical question put to its
nation-wide representative panel of just
under 2000 whites by Market and
Opinion Surveys (Pty) Ltd:


TABLE 1
Suppose a referendum were to be held among the people living in your residential area to establish their teelings about opening the area to blacks. How would you personally vote in such a referendum ?


Jan 1982 April 1986 Jan 1988 Aug 1989
For opening 17% 29% 25% 30%
Against opening 72% 61% 67% 55%
Uncertain/Don't know 11% 10% 8% 15%


The results suggest a fairly slight shift
over the past four years; most of the
attitude change having occurred in tlu>
early eighties. The major recent shift
appears to have been a weakening of
resistance to integration rather than a
strengthening of positive endorsement of
integration.


There is some variation in white support
for integration as regards different
groups. In the 1988 survey of Market and
Opinion Research (Pty) Ltd, (included
above) the support for an opening of
respondents' own areas to coloured
people, Indians and Africans was as
follows:


TABLE 2
WHITE ENDORSEMENT OF OPENING OWN AREA TO:


Indians:
Coioureds:
Africans:


34°X
31°/
25°/<


Marked differences exist nationwide
between English speaking and Afrikaans
speaking whites as regards the abolition
of racial zoning. Results from Market and
Opinion Research (Pty) Ltd polls show
the following pattern nationwide:


TABLE 3
PERCENTAGES OF WHITES IN FAVOUR OF THE COMPLETE
RETENTION AND STRICT APPLICATION OF THE GROUP
AREAS ACT BETWEEN JANUARY 1982 AND JULY 1988:


July 1988
January 1988
April 1986
January 1982


AFRIKAANS
%
40
45
37
52


ENGLISH-SPEAKING
%
8
9
6


10


Obviously one would expect white
attitudes to differ from those of other
races, against whom racial zoning laws
are directed. In a study by Marketing and
Media Research (Pty) Ltd, the research
company of the Argus press group, any
probability samples of whites, Africans,
coloured and Indian people in the
Pretoria-Witwatersrand area in October
1988, produced the following
comparisons:


TABLE 4
THE GROUP AREAS ACT SHOULD BE?


White White Coloured/ Africans
Afrikaans English Indian


- retained: 48% 16% 2% 8% - modified to suit local
situations: 36% 43% 33% 13% - abolished in time: 9% 19% 18% 16% - abolished immediately: 5% 21% 47% 62% (Sample) (239) (267) (120) (382)


11
GROUP AREAS Issue Focus




If would appear, therefore that
Vlferences in response between races are
L .'hat one would expect. Indians and less
Affluent coloured people are most
conservative among groups other than
white, among w h o m attitudes tend
towards the pattern found among
^ni-lish-speaking whites.


It is perhaps significant, however, that, in
thi- sample, somewhat less than 50 per
uMit of South Africa's ' intermediate'
i,u ial groups - coloureds and Indians -
endorse the immediate, summary
abolition of the Group Areas Act.
Coloured and Indian people are most
toiHrained by racial zoning since a
taiger proportion than is found among
Africans could afford to move into white
area1-. Their rejection of Group Areas as
already suggested, is somewhat
constrained by the fear of massive
Afrit ,m movement into their existing
areas if the Act were to be abolished.


White voters are of most concern in
regard to racial zoning, however, since
the\\ represent the primary constituency
of the present government and hence
the i r attitudes will weigh heavily in the
nature of policies which the government
formulates to replace the Group Areas
Act


The first co-author fielded a range of
questions through the Market and
Opinion Research (Pty) Ltd stratified
random panel of white adults in M a y of
1989. The sample size on which the
results were based was 1 379. In this
investigation respondents were offered a
choice between a wider range of policy
options than those reflected in previous
questions.


After being presented with a balanced
description of present trends towards
desegregation, respondents were asked
to provide a first and second preference
as regards future policy on racial zoning.
The policy alternatives presented to
respondents are paraphrased in the
summarised results which follow.


This question was followed by a
supplementary item which added to the
types of policy choices which were
presented.


Space does not permit a full presentation
of the results. The following table depicts
the broad pattern of findings derived
from the first and second choices
between alternative options presented.


TABLE 5
POLICY PREFERENCES AMONG WHITES AS REGARDS


RESIDENTIAL SEGREGATION " INTEGRATION


a) Stricter segregations as a policy applicable everywhere 18%
b) Group areas combined with Free Settlement Areas 22%
c) Gradual integration controlled to protect standards 27%
d) Areas given local choice 13%
e) Complete abolition of Group Areas 17%


However, when options c) and d) (gradualism and local choice are omitted) the proportions
under a) and e) tend to increase: ie,


a) Strict(er) segregation 23%
ej Endorsement or acceptance of complete abolition 41%


The results suggest that where the
possibility of gradual desegregation with
control on standards and numbers of
n e w residents is introduced, or a
possibility of the exercise of a local
suburban option is suggested, some
support for both strict segregation and
unqualified desegregation is drawn away.


The shift in responses between the two
sets of options can be interpreted in two
ways. One is that people w h o are able to
be convinced of the need to accept
abolition of racial zoning become more
cautious when more comfortable options
are presented. Another is that the
support for abolition is partly idealistic
and that a more realistic policy position is
taken in response to the second set of
options which include gradualism and
local option. Both these interpretations
may combine to explain the shift.


National Party supporters, as the
constituency to which government is
most directly accountable, are
particularly interesting. Generally they
lean towards reform and change. Results
for this group show the following'.


TABLE 6
NP SUPPORTERS
-less than 10% endorse stricter segregation
- some 35% regard present policies as adequate
- some 46% endorse controlled gradualism or local option
- up to 29% would endorse or accept unqualified abolition of segregation


(compared with 41 % in the overall group).


Government supporters, therefore are
less likely to hold 'extreme views'
(complete retention or complete and
unqualified abolition of race zoning) than
one finds in the white population as a
whole.


All these results are in response to
general policy preferences and do not
necessarily reflect how people will
respond in the context of their own


Support for the
extreme
options of
rejection or
acceptance of
abolition of
segregation, is
diminished
when softer
options are
presented


GROUP AREAS Issue Focus 45




The dominant
preference is
for controlled or
phased reform
of a type likely
to protect the
social character
of
neighbourhoods


neighbourhoods or in the context of
wider political dynamics.


On both these issues research conducted
by ourselves on behalf of the Urban
Foundation in 1988/89 is relevant.


One study was based on personal
interviews among a representative
sample of 1000 white householders in the
Pretoria-Witwatersrand area. The other
was a sample of 500 mixed residents of
'grey areas' in Johannesburg. A further
investigation covered a random sample
of 1019 Africans in townships and shack
areas in the Pretoria-Witwatersrand area.
All the samples were random, probability
samples, stratified to represent
geographic spread. Interviewing was
conducted by professionally-trained
commercial interviewers of the same race
as the respondent. Results across a range
of items are presented below,
commencing with relevant results based
on the white sample. (For details of
interview schedules and other aspects of
methodology, see Schlemmer and Stack,
1989).


TABLE 7
TOTAL WHITE AND NP SUPPORTERS CHOICE OF VARIOUS POLICY OPTIONS


ON RACIAL ZONING: PRETORIA-WITWATERSRAND AREA


Total sample NP Supporters
jn 1000) (n 404)


Paraphrased items from survey
in Pta-Wits (n 1000: Fieldwork by IMS (Pty) Ltd)
* How respondent would vote in
official referendum in opening own area


-For opening , 29 29
- Against opening 70 70


* 'Blacks should be allowed to live
in any area if they can afford to' 41 45


* Acceptance of blacks of same
income and lifestyle in neighbourhood 53 59


* All new areas should be open 39 42
* Would feel comfortable in neighbourhood with:
(Respondents were shown diagrams)


10-15% blacks 52 55
30% blacks 28 27
40% blacks 20 19


* Policy choices: - retention of GA 41 33
- local option 26 36
- white areas remain mainly white 10 13
-open choice 22 17


* Policy choice if change inevitable:
- reject change 21 16
- only certain areas open (despite overcrowding) 30 29
- all open with quotas 28 35
- open choice 23 20


* Choice if State President issued
appeal for acceptance of open areas with
controls on standards:


- support/accept appeal 50 57
- not support/reject appeal 50 42


It should be noted that in the interviews
present policies (i.e. Group Areas and
Free Settlement Areas) were fully
described, including the implication that
Free Settlement Areas would become
overcrowded.


These results tend to suggest that
government supporters are slightly more-
accepting of change in racial zoning than
the Pretoria-Witwatersrand white
population at large. The greatest
endorsement of desegregation occurs if
the average white voter can contemplate
people of the same class and lifestyle as
himself/herself entering the
neighbourhood (almost 6 out of 10 NP
supporters), but clearly when given a
choice of policy options or asked to make
a categorical choice in a referendum, only
between 20 and 30 percent of whites and
of NP supporters endorse free settlement.


The dominant preference is for controlled
or phased reform of a type likely to
protect the«6odal character of
neighbourhoods. Even a special appeal
by the (previous) State President does not
appear to have very significant impact,
which is surprising since the question
also included a re-assurance about
'standards'. In fact just such an appeal
has subsequently been made by
President FW de Klerk.


It is of interest to note that a US study
allows a comparison to be made with the
'comfort ratings' under different degrees
of integration obtained in our survey. In
Detroit, the proportion of whites
'comfortable' with a + - 1 5 % level of
integration is roughly 30% higher than
among our total sample and at the + -
40% level of integration more than twice
as many Detroit whites say they feel
comfortable compared with 20% in our
sample.


Hence it would seem that South African
white attitudes are considerably more
negative as regards residential
integration than those of whites in
Detroit, as one might expect. Given the
fact that despite the more
accommodating US attitudes, spatial
segregation has been maintained in that
country, the South African attitudes do
not augur at all well for an unresisted
process of informal integration (Farley,
Bianchi, Colosanto, 1979).


11
GROUP AREAS Issue Focus




Motivational Factors
II of interest to identify the relative
importance of different kinds of
motivations for resistance to integration.
The type of motivation is likely to
indicate what kinds of policy emphasis
and policy instruments are most likely to
address constituency fears and
perceptions.


The following is a synopsis of major
results from three open-ended questions
on motivations for desiring segregation,
en iss-tabulated against indicators of class
background.


The pattern of results in the table
suggests that the single largest type of
motivation is a poorly articulated and
very generalised perception that
race-segregation is somehow the natural
order of things (motivations 2, 3 and
4: 43%). On the one hand, this m a y
suggest a vacuous or thoughtless
resistance to integration which m a y
readily weaken when people are exposed
to the facts, as it were. Hence one might
expect resistance to integration among
people motivated in this way to be fairly
shallow and easily altered.


TABLE 8
MOTIVATIONS UNDERLYING SEGREGATION: PROPORTIONS OF RESPONDENTS GIVING


VARIOUS TYPES OF REASONS FOR REJECTING RESIDENTIAL INTEGRATION:


PERCENTAGES BASED ON A COMBINATION OF THREE QUESTIONS ALLOWING FOR SPONTANEOUS ANSWERS


HOUSEHOLD INCOME EDUCATION


Type of
Motivation


Total
Sample <2000


R2001-
R4999 R5000+


Std 9
& Less


Std
10


Std 10
+ Univ


(nIOOO) % (n206) % (n584) % (nt 62) %
(n289) % (n532) % (1177) %


'Ethnic' Factors:
Culturaldifference/incompatibility 27 32 26 29 24 30 25


Self-confessed
racism:
Personal dislike of mixing 21 20 29 16 28 18 39


Unfamiliariiy 16 14 18 18 16 15 20


Sexual, educational &
religious reasons 6 6 6 6 6 6 7


Socio-economic
class factors
& material standards 24


<2999
(n437)


20


R3000+
(n515)


27


<Std
7


(n63)
9


Std
8-10
(n571)
24


Std 10
(n364)


27


Discrepancies in levels
of development 6


<2999


6


R3000+


7


<Std
9
4


Std
10


7


Std (0+
Univ


10


Fear of unrest
and concern with
public order 4


<2000


6


R2000-
R4999


4


R5000+


2


<Std
7


8


Sid
8-10


5


Std 10+


3


<3999 R4000-
R4999


(n567) (n133)
Perceived social
pathology and moral
weakness among blacks 23 24 14
Type of Motivation <3999 R4000-


R5999
(n657) (n213)


Fear of swamping/ 8 7 11
displacement


R5000+ <Std Std Std 10+ |
7 8-10 i


(n162) I


19 35 24 19 J


R6000+ <SM Std Std Std 10+ j
7 8S9 10 1


(n82) (n62) (n226) (n345) (n364) j
li


18 8 5 9 15 j
1


GROUP AREAS Issue Focus




TABLE 9
EXPLANATIONS OFFERED FOR PRO-SEGREGATION VIEWS AMONG OTHERS AND THE


RELATIONSHIP TO RESPONDENTS OWN ACCEPTANCE OR REJECTION OF INTEGRATION


Non-whites in
neighbourhood:


Accept (n 107)
Reject (n 893)


Cultural Displacement


27
73


Types of Explanations Offered
Segregation Class & Dvlpmental natural


%


35
65


standards
%


37
63


differences
%


39
61


Social Pathologies
%


30
70


Fear of Displacement
%


66
34


Vote in Referendum
For inte-
gration (n 291) 16


Against (n 703) 84
24
76


45
55


31
69


19
81


57
43


Education is
the background
variable most
clearly
associated with
variations in
attitudes to
integration


On the other hand, it may simply be the
poorly articulated expression of a
powerful racial ethnocentricism which
does not have to be linked to culture,
class or anything else. Some results we
will discuss immediately ahead will shed
greater light on this question.


It is significant, however, that the
assumption of segregation as natural is
relatively less important among poorer
whites than among others. Among
poorer whites other considerations weigh
more or equally heavily.


Perceptions of cultural incompatibility, of
class incompatibility and of the presence
of social pathologies among blacks are all
roughly as salient as the
poorly-motivated assumption of
segregation as natural.


The trend in the results, although not
strictly statistically significant, is for the
importance of class factors to increase
with income and education (as
established elsewhere) and for the
importance of perceived social
pathologies among blacks to decrease
slightly with increasing income and
education. In other words, class factors
may retain their importance at higher
levels of status more than cultural or
social motivations.


In more general terms, however, the table
shows that education is the background
variable most clearly associated with
variations in attitudes to integration. The
less-well-educated respondents are
significantly more inclined to assume
segregation as natural or to base their
convictions on perceived social
pathology among blacks than is the case
with better educated people.


It is also of interest to examine the
different motivations and explanations
given by respondents for the general
phenomenon of race segregation in


housing in terms of how they relate to
acceptance or rejection of integration
among the respondents themselves. One
question was as follows:


'In South Africa there are opposing views
about group areas but some people seem to
feel that separate areas for different groups
should remain. Thinking of people you
know with such views, what are their
major reasons for keeping groups
separate?'


This question was cross-tabulated against
whether or not 'non-whites' would be
accepted in neighbourhoods, and
whether respondents would vote for or
against integration in a local referendum.


The tabulation above (table 9) suggests
that a perception of segregation as being
rooted in culture and social behaviour
tends to be associated with greatest
resistance to integration. On the other
hand, explanations linked to class and
material standards and to the fear of
displacement as a result of in-migration
are generally associated with
less-resistant attitudes to integration.


It seems quite clear that a perception of
fairly basic social, cultural and moral
differences between the races tends to
weigh most powerfully in inducing or
rationalising resistance to residential
integration.


In parenthesis, while not sufficiently
central to this analysis to require
tabulated demonstration, the specific
factor of class status sensitivity (narrower
than the class-standards variable
employed earlier) tends to decrease in
importance with increasing income and
to increase in importance with increasing
education level. It may well be that the
categories of people most likely to feel
their social-status threatened by
integration are the less-affluent but
well-educated families that struggle to
maintain a social facade in keeping with
their education.


This anxiety would not extend to affluent
people in upper-middle class suburbs in
which property values, large plots and
the general ecology insulate them from
threats of status-decline.


It is frequently assumed that resistance to
integration is partly or substantially a
rejection of residential penetration by
members with lower socio-economic
standards or class status. A comparison
of responses to three items, roughly


11
GROUP AREAS Issue Focus




comparable except for a reassurance as
r egards the 'class' factor in the latter two,
allows a tentative assessment of the
relevance of socio-economic status. The
comparison can be presented as follows:


TABLE 10
COMPARISON OF POSITIVE WHITE RESPONSES TO INTEGRATION IN RELATION TO INCOME AND EDUCATION


- Would vote for integration
in local referendum
- Support for freedom for
blacks to buy property if
they can altord it


- 'Acceptance' of black families
of similar income
and education in suburb


Total
Sample


(n 1000)
%


<R2999
(n 437) %


Household Income
R3000-
R5999


(n 433) %


R6000+
(n 82)
%


<Std
10


(n289)
%


Education
Std
10


(n532) %


University
(n177) %


29 17 34 63 12 31 51


41 28 47 73 22 43 66


53 43 58 76 31 57 77


The results above suggest that 'class
reassurance' (i.e. similarity of income and
education, the purchase of property
which blacks can afford) indeed raises
the level of acceptance of integration by a
factor of some 40 to 80%. We must be
somewhat cautious however, since the
rather stark suggestion of a referendum
may incline respondents to an
abnormally conservative response. The
results are nevertheless suggestive of the
fact that class reassurance is a significant
factor.


What is interesting in the results
immediately above, however is the fact
that the 'class reassurance' increases the
level of acceptance of integration more
dramatically for poorer and less
well-educated people than for the higher
status respondents. We may venture to
suggest that poorer people, living in
neighbourhoods with lower property
values, are more keenly aware of the
dangers of integration causing a decay of
material standards than more affluent
people.


The latter live in upper-middle class
suburbs where firstly, the effects of
material deterioration are less visible and
secondly, where higher property values
more effectively discourage poorer blacks
from acquiring accommodation.


A completely different kind of probe was
included in the research. Respondents
were asked why they thought the
tendency for different races to live in
different neighbourhoods persists in the
USA and Europe despite there being no


laws controlling where people can live. In
both 'grey' (integrating) and white
suburban areas, the overwhelming
majority of respondents (over 70%) gave
'ethnic' reasons, related to the
maintenance of identity in terms of
race/culture/custom - a 'soort soek
soort' (birds of a feather ...) response, also
encountered in our earlier results. The
second and third most cited reason
(between 7 and 12% each) involved a
preference on the part of similar income
groups to stay together and reference to
the existence of 'apartheid' all over the
world.


" In the grey areas, the predominant 'soort
soek soort' response is highest (between 75
and 90%) among:


Indians, the 40-49 age group, the
relatively low R2 000-R2 999 income
group and surprisingly, those with
English as their home language. Those
with neighbours of a different race also
predominantly gave this response. Those
who believe that blacks should be
allowed to buy or rent in any white areas
and those who would vote for an open
area also gave this 'ethnic' response
predominantly; hence even the people
willing to tolerate reform are not
necessarily convinced that mixed
neighbours would be compatible.


" The ethnic 'soort soek soort' response is
lowest among:


Blacks, the 60 plus age group, the lowest
income group, and those with a low
education level.


'Class
reassurance'
(similarity of
income and
education, the
purchase of
property which
blacks can
afford, etc)
raises the level
of acceptance of
integration from
40 to 80%


GROUP AREAS Issue Focus 49




Results in 'grey
areas' suggest
that attitudes
that endorse
integration are
'ideological'
preferences
rather than
behavioural
orientations


Residential
integration has
occured in
three types of
area thus far:
apartment
house areas,
deteriorating
city areas, and
areas with large
plot sizes


Those who think blacks should not be
allowed to buy or rent in white areas, and
those who would vote for an all-white
area in a referendum also gave less
prominence to the ethnic response. Thus
the ethnic response tends to be found
among more tolerant and more
middle-class respondents, not among the
materially threatened poor, as we have
already seen in the pattern of results for
the major survey among whites on the
PWV.


Finally, one further important finding
should be noted, albeit briefly. In the
areas of Johannesburg that had already
become mixed ('grey areas') and from
which a large number of people who
rejected integration had already moved,
some 40% of whites wanted all-white or
dominantly white areas and 53%
indicated that they would vote for a
return to segregation in a hypothetical
local referendum. Other results from the
study in these 'grey' areas indicated that
very little social mixing among the
different races occurs.


Even among those white residents of
'grey' areas who endorsed residential
desegregation, very little social contact of
a meaningful kind with black neighbours
occurred, prompting the description of
these people as 'closet liberals'. This
strongly suggests that in part, attitudes of
endorsement of residential desegregation
are 'ideological' preferences rather than
orientations which directly affect
behaviour.


Focused Resistance
Thus far residential integration has
generally occurred in three types of


areas: apartment house areas which have
had large vacancy rates (e.g. Hillbrow,
Joubert Park in Johannesburg, Albert
Park in Durban), single-dwelling unit
areas in (formerly) deteriorating areas of
the city in which white residence has
become increasingly marginal and
transient (e.g. Mayfair before recent
'gentrification', Judiths Paarl, Bertrams,
Doornfontein in Johannesburg,
Woodstock in Cape Town, Lower Berea
in Durban, etc.) and in very wealthy
areas with large plot sizes and great
privacy (e.g. Houghton and Lower
Houghton in Johannesburg). An
exception has been Kelvin in Sandton
which is a fairly typical middle class area.


Apart from a few demonstrations of
resistance in Mayfair in Johannesburg,
there has thusfar been little reaction from
conservative whites, possibly because
'typical' white areas have not yet been
affected. We do not know what is likely
to happen once integration starts
occurring in typical white lower-middle
and middle class areas of family
residence in which whites have an
interest in staying. Attitude survey
questions are not always valid
indications of what behaviour will occur,
but in as much as they provide some idea
of what the predispositions underlying
behaviour are, they are relevant.


The following results from the study
among 1000 white voters in the
Pretoria-Witwatersrand area are relevant
to the question on counter-mobilisation.
In response to a question of what
respondents would actually do if a black
family, with about the same income and
educational level as themselves, were t< >
move into their areas, the following
results are of interest:


TABLE 11
WHITE RESPONSES TO EQUAL STATUS BLACKS IN NEIGHBOURHOOD


Percentages of Pta-Wits Whites willing to respond in various ways to one equal status
black family in their neighbourhoods (open question)


Household Income (%)
All


(n 1000)
Under R2000pm


(n 206)
R2000-R3000pm


(n 231)
NP Support


(n 404)
-Positive reaction 11 5 7 9
-Acceptance 45 44 49 57
-Will move out/
socially reject 26 35 26 24
-Complain or
mobilise against 19 23 21 16


(Note: answers exceed 100% due to double answers)


11
GROUP AREAS Issue Focus




VVe should bear in mind that the question
related to a single black family with social
status compatible with the
neighbourhood. The results suggest a
roughly 40% potential among whites for
negative reactions. This represents a
considerable minority out of which a
substantial political dynamic of one form
or another could arise. National Party
supporters represent what one may term
the modal position on these issues. They
are only slightly at variance with the
attitudes of the white population as a
whole in a positive direction.


A question arises, however, as to whether
or not typical white sentiments have not
been swept along by the new climate of
reconciliation associated with Mr FW de
Klerk's negotiation politics, to have
significantly softened their attitudes since
our surveys were undertaken.


With this in mind, we fielded a question
in the May 1990 white national panel
survey of Market and Opinion Surveys
(Pty) Ltd: 'In future negotiation, which of
the following forms of protection for the
white minority are absolutely essential -
in other words non-negotiable': (inter
alia)
'The right to decide on the
composition of one's own
neighbourhood'. The results which
indicated that at least a local community
self-determination is felt to be essential
were:


Total whites
Afrikaners
English-speakers
National Party supporters


61%
73%
43%
54%


These results contain nothing to suggest
that a general swing towards unqualified
openness and integration has occurred.


Policy Observations
Broadly, the results of the investigations
reported on above and others which
could not be covered in the space
available suggest that some five out of
ten whites and at least four out of ten
government supporters are consistent in
their rejection of residential integration.
There is also a potential among between
two and four out of ten whites for some
form of mobilised opposition, or reaction
to, the entry of blacks into their own
neighbourhoods.


The pattern of motivations underlying
these responses suggest a combination of
what we have called broadly 'ethnic'


sentiments; i.e. the desire to live in areas
of social familiarity and homogeneity,
concerns over material standards,
physical conditions and the 'class'
character of neighbourhoods, and a fear
of social pathologies and crime emerging
in integrating suburbs. Concerns over
standards were most marked among
poorer whites living in areas which in
terms of market factors are more
vulnerable to deterioration. Among


. better educated whites concerns about
neighbourhood social and 'ethnic'
character assume greater prominence.


One should add to these general
conclusions the fact that broad
acceptance of integration does not appear
to be significantly greater than what is
typical for all whites in areas which have
already become integrated; the so-called
'grey' areas. Some 80% of whites in these
areas (data not yet referred to) evince
concerns over mounting crime and social
pathologies and very few of the whites
have established social interaction with
black neighbours. Needless to say, the
concerns about pathology and crime
seldom relate to neighbours as such but
to street phenomena, which may or may
not be a consequence of desegregation.


Broad comparisons with survey data
from the USA show, not unexpectedly,
that the degree of sensitivity to
desegregation is greater among South
African whites than among Americans.
In the accompanying analysis of
international evidence, it is abundantly
clear that segregation, informally
secured, has tended to persist in the USA
and Europe, based on much the same
motivations as are evident from our
South African data. Regrettably, it can be
fairly confidently predicted that after the
abolition of racial zoning in South Africa,
phenomena such as neighbourhood
'tipping' and white withdrawal from
rapidly integrating neighbourhoods are
very likely to occur.


At the same time, however, the damage
done to race relations, the costs of
segregation for blacks, considerations
based on the wider political climate and
the economic need in South Africa to
eliminate formal apartheid make it
inevitable that the Group Areas Act be
abolished, and the government has stated
this intention. The results of the research
referred to above show that some 55 to
60% of white government supporters will
support or accept residential
desegregation.


Results of a
survey
conducted after
de Klerk's
February
announcement
did not suggest
a swing to
greater
openness or
integration


It can be
confidently
predicted that
after the
abolition of
racial zoning in
South Africa,
white
withdrawal from
rapidly
integrating
neighbourhoods
is likely to occur


GROUP AREAS Issue Focus 51




The State President has indicated that,
because most white areas have a well
established character, with low vacancy
rates and hence a low potential for blat k
entry, fears of white reaction are
over-rated. In general he is correct. The
results of this research show that a small
percentage of blacks in white
neighbourhoods will not give rise to
negative reactions.


Against a background of the results from
the research, however, there are certain
kinds of residential areas in which there
might well be either mobilisation against
black entry, or rapid white retreat. As
suggested, these will be areas into which
an entry of new black residents will be
relatively rapid. Such areas will be those
with high vacancy rates, apartment
house areas in which many aged whites
live, deteriorating inner city areas and
certain new lower-middle or middle class
suburbs with lower than average market
values but which normally attract whiles
with young families: people who have
aspirations toward stable suburban
existence but fairly limited means. The
character of schools will weigh heavily in
the latter type of area.


If South Africa is to avoid the kind of
reproduction of segregation that has
occurred in the USA in the seventies and
eighties, some careful management of
desegregation is required, not in most
areas, but in areas in which rapid and
disruptive transition could occur, leading
to white reaction and new segregation oi'
black people entering areas in search of
shared and stable suburban life.


At this point it is appropriate to point out
that the surveys conducted among
Africans, the group most resistant to race
zoning, showed that there was quite
surprising tolerance of measures to
protect social and socio-economic
standards in integrating areas. Over 80%
of the 1 019 blacks interviewed en dorse J
strict controls over behaviour on the
streets, nearly 6 0 % accepted values
against multiple family occupation of
houses and flats, and as m a n y as 5 1 %
said that they accepted some form of
control over the process of desegregation
by existing white residents (forms of local
option) (See Schlemmer and Stack, 1989:
194).


In other words, there is evidence of a
convergence of white and black attitudes
around the principle of control over
standards and a protection of the 'social'


GROUP AREAS Issue Focus 54




(not racial) character of areas. The results;
very broadly indicate some mutually
a c c e p t a b l e policy opportunities in the
mix of black and white attitudes.


There are m a n y sentiments and
motivations among whites reflected in
the research that cannot be
accommodated at a time when there is a
manifest overriding need to eliminate
apartheid in South Africa. Desegregation
is inevitable and necessary. At the same
time however, all the evidence points to
the need for some very firm and effective
policy provisions for areas vulnerable to
the kind of rapid social transition which
will create disruption and a loss of
residential benefits for both white and
black. These areas will otherwise become
symbols of the kind of situations all
urban South Africans fear. Given the
strong underpinning of ethnic and race
sentiment among whites which this
study reveals, areas in which the social
fabric deteriorates m a y become catalysts
for very destructive reactions.


I n this context, it would therefore seem to
be desirable that:
" local authorities become more


effectively involved in the formulation
and implementation of residential
quality and be provided with the
resources and guidelines to do so;


" local residents be given an effective
form of participation in the drawing
up of these standards in the context of
the necessity to m o v e away from race
segregation;


" the larger cities, in which the greatest
readiness for desegregation exists
immediately, should be encouraged
and given material support, to
provide operating models of h o w
desegregation, which will be of
benefit to all residents, can occur.


Research
indicates a
convergence of
white and black
attitudes
around the
principle of
control over
standards and
a protection of
the 'social'
character of
areas


R E F E R E N C E S


Farley R, S Bianchi and D Colasanto. 'Barriers to the
Racial Integration of Neighbourhoods: the Detroit
Case', American Academy of Political and Social Science
Annals,
Vol 441, January 1979:97-113.


Schlemmer L and SL Stack. Black, White and Shades of
Grey.
Johannesburg: Centre for Policy Studies, 1989.


GROUP AREAS Issue Focus 53




COMMENT
BLACK YOUTH SPEAK
Compiled by IPSA Researcher Phinda Kuzwayo


Since its inception, the Group Areas Act has had its greatest effect on the African population, with at least
one generation not knowing an alternative. The following are responses of black youth from around the
greater Durban area on matters concerning the future of group areas. The information is extracted from
an attitudinal study which was commissioned by the Tongaat Hulett Group .


Three groups of 10 each were interviewed. The first two were selected from two high schools in Umlazi
township. The other was made up of 'comrades' (youths whose organisations are affiliated to the United
Democratic Front) from Clermont. The questions are those relating only to group areas issues and form
part of a much larger questionairre.


SCHOOL GROUP 1
Q ; You all seem confident that in future there will be equal opportunities: Where do you think you will be
staying in 10 years time?
R : I will be staying at an improved Umlazi.
R : In Cape Town, where there is a nuclear power station, because I want to study nuclear physics, but in
the township.
R : Where there are all races.
R : In the city.
R : In town.
R : In one of the flats in Durban.
R : I will like to be in Umlazi because that is where I was born and bred.
R : In white areas.
R : At Umlazi.


Q: Those of you that say they will be living outside the townships: What makes you think you will be living
there?
R : There will be no restrictions then.
R : Seeing the changes taking place in South Africa, I think in 10 years time the Group Areas Act will be
abolished and one will live wherever one likes.


Q : Those who will not go out of the township: What makes you decide to live there? Is it Choice or
restrictions?
R : It will be out of choice.
R : The township will have improved and I would like to see it improve.
R : It will improve because more (black) people will be employed.


Q : What makes you think more blacks will be employed?
R : More people will obtain better education.


Q: What changes do you expect to find in your residential circumstances in 10 years time?
R : I will be living in a multiracial society and money will be playing an important role.


Q : What will that (money playing an important role) do to black people's residential circumstances ?
R : There will be a big financial gap within the black society and we will have to do something to close it.


Q: How?
R : The government should open job opportunities.


11
GROUP AREAS Issue Focus




SCHOOL GROUP 2
Q
: You all seem positive about the changes taking place, those of you who say they will be living in the
township, is it out of choice ?
R : Yes.
Q
: What makes others want to live in the city?
R : In the city everything seems easy, the shops are near, life is fascinating for people who have never
been exposed to it.
R : I like to mix with people of other races.
R : There is too much trouble in the township.


Q : And those of you who say they will be in the township, why?
R : I will be living with people who understand me, of my own race.
R : I like township life, I enjoy it.
R : There is too much noise in the city, cars are running around.
Q: What makes you like it?
R : People living in the township are easy to socialise with.
R : We understand each other because we are of the same race group.
R : Its difficult to contact ancestors in the city.
Q : What makes it difficult to contact ancestors?
R : The ancestors will not go to the city because they have never known it.
R : Slaugthering cows for the ancestors will be impossible in the city.


COMRADES GROUP
Q : Where do you think you will be staying in 10 years time?
R : In Klaarwater (township).
R : There will be change enough to allow me a choice.
R : In Clermont because of my parents. But if it were not for them I would stay wherever I like.
R : In Clermont out of choice.
R : In Clermont.
R : It will be possible to stay in town. There will be changes enough to enable me to stay in town.
R : I will be staying in town.
Q : If there were changes enough where would you be staying (musician)?
R : In Clermont.


Q: Why?
R : Because that's where I was born (out of choice).


Q : So six of you think there will be changes enough to allow you to stay anywhere?
R : There will be changes, but as it is now they seem to be taking long.
Q : What do you think are the changes taking place now. Do you think the laws will change?
R : Some political organisations have been unbanned and opening of 'grey' areas.
R : Unbanning of organisations. There will be a socialist system in 10 years time.
R : Yes, laws will change.
R : There are no changes.
R : There are small changes but not enough.
R : I regard the unbanning of organisations not as change, but as a step towards change.


GROUP AREAS Issue Focus 55




POLICY REVIEW


FREE SETTLEMENT
OR


F T C F F r T T T F ^ ?
X X V X j X J V - « X X 1 1 - i L / "


By Ann Bernstein, The Urban Foundation
In presenting a case for the need to
repeal the Group Areas Act without
delay, the author makes the
following propositions:
" that Free Settlement Areas are an
unzvorkable, flawed concept for the
management of change in South
African cities;
" that Free Settlement Areas do not
provide an appropriate route
towards 'open cities';
" that current policy on Group
Areas and Free Settlement is
ambiguous and confused; and
" that instead of becoming
sidetracked into the Free Settlement
debate, we should rather focus on
the real urban priorities of the post
Group Areas Act city.


In February 1990 the Free Settlement Board advertised a proposed Free
Settlement Area (FSA) for central
Johannesburg (see map). This area
illustrates some of the problems
associated with the demarcation of free
settlement areas in general. A number of
areas were omitted - for example
Hillbrow, Mayfair, Pageview,
CBD/Newtown/Fordsburg,Troyeville,
Bezuidenhout Valley - which research
has shown to be significantly integrated.


Indeed, it is quite paradoxical that
Hillbrow was originally excluded since,
not only is this area now very
significantly integrated; it also happens
to be the one central Johannesburg area


in which white attitudes are most
favourable to integration (Schlemmer
and Stack, 1989). Likewise, it is
paradoxical that one of the few
integrated neighbourhoods that has
actually expressed a desire to become a
Free Settlement Area - Pageview - was
also excluded.


It should be clarified that these remarks
are not a plea for bigger as opposed to
smaller FSA's. On the contrary, they
simply serve to highlight the arbitrary
nature of FSA boundaries. For example,
after an outcry Hillbrow itself is now the
subject of an FSA investigation, but it
must be emphasised that these are
necessarily arbitrary boundaries.
Research has shown, for example, that
there is hardly a Witwatersrand
neighbourhood today that does not have
some level of black occupance (apart of
course from domestic servants)
(Schlemmer and Stack, 1989). So simply
expanding the FSA boundary is not a
sufficient response.


Free Settlement Areas have harmful
implications for local government, as any
local government which has studied the
issue now understands. FSAs perpetuate
the failed experience of advisory
'management committees' in local
government, lead to a further
fragmentation of decision-making and
duplication of effort at local level,
threaten the juridical status of existing
local governments and do not provide tor
meaningful non-racial local government
alternatives.


There has been the suggestion that FSA
legislation could provide an avenue
towards the realisation of 'open cities'
but it is important to notice the
limitations of this route. For example, a


GROUP AREAS Issue Focus 58




Central Johannesburg Free Settlement Areas


Proposed February 1990


Melrose Bird
Sanctuary


Saxonwold
ZOO


Orange Grove


Westcliff


Bezuidenhout Valley


Mayfair
Fordsburg


GROUP AREAS Issue Focus 59




Free settlement
areas are a
largely
parochial
response to
change which
ignore the
reality of
widespread
integration


For those who
look forward
with vision to a
non-racial
future, they
must wonder
why this
complex route
is being followed


recent statement by the relevant Minister
has been interpreted as a significant step
towards the reality of 'open cities' in the
near future (Sunday Times, 04/03/1990).
It is important to note precisely what the
Minister said:
" 'there was nothing in the FSA


legislation which forbade the
conversion of an entire local authority
into a free settlement area' (Citizen,
28/02/1990)';


" 'however, this would have to be dealt
with by the Free Settlement Areas
Board which had to weigh up a
number of factors before making a
recommendation to the government'
("Citizen, 28/02/1990, emphasis added);


" 'the government would require
reliable evidence that a request for
"open" cities was not simply a
"political move" by the local authority,
but the genuine desire of the majority
of a city's inhabitants' {Sunday Times,
04/03/1990);


" 'areas or suburbs within cities might
wish to retain an ethnic character and
the free settlement areas legislation
would allow this' {Sunday Times,
04/03/1990);


" 'there were problems over the laws
governing local government and
government would "look at" the Local
Government Affairs in Free
Settlement Areas Act' {Sunday Times,
04/03/1990)


" 'voting rights at local government
level had to be structured to protect
minority rights' {This Week in
Parliament,
No3/1990).


These comments and qualifications
indicate the wide difference in
interpretation between current
government positions, and what is
commonly understood by the phrase
'open cities'. FSA's, then, are a largely
parochial response to change which
ignore the reality of widespread
integration. The concept of FSA's is once
again a futile exercise in 'social
engineering', with the notion being that
an 'Official Board', be it Group Areas or
Free Settlement, can regulate the complex
dynamics of everyday life.


Free Settlement Areas are also an
arbitrary policy which treats citizens
unequally, based upon ad hoc reactions
to the past. For those who look forward
with vision to a non-racial future, the
questions must become: Why go this
complex route? Why manage the
transition to post Group Areas Act cities
like this?


Official Policy
The current official policy position on
Group Areas and Free Settlement is
complex and ambiguous. Some
examination of this position will help to
clarify why it is important to press for the
urgent repeal of the Group Areas Act at
this time.


The official policy position has of course
been marked by certain recent legal
changes, including the Free Settlement
Areas Act, the Local Government Affairs
in Free Settlement Areas Act and other
modifications or attempted modifications
to the Group Areas Act (e.g. the attempt
to 'decriminalise' transgressions of this
Act by establishing a body of officials to
'negotiate' with transgressors).


Looked at as a whole, these changes
together with a number of recent
statements by government
spokespersons (see box) provide an
impression of a number of policy themes.


Flexibility


The Free Settlement Areas Act and other
variations are designed to allow for some
flexibility in the application of the former
Act. In the words of a high level
government spokesperson: 'The Free
Settlement Areas Act does not replace the
provisions of the Group Areas Act, but
provides greater flexibility alongside the
rather inflexible provisions and
enforcement of the latter' (R Meyer, RSA
Policy Review
2(5), 1989:4).


During the course of the debate on the
Free Settlement Areas Bill it was stated,
however, that Free Settlement Areas
would be declared only in exceptional
circumstances (Hansard, 26 August 1988,
Col 15718).


Since then, the government's position has
evolved to include an ambiguous
endorsement of applications for the
opening of entire municipal areas (but
with qualifications, and the suggestion
that FSA legislation provides an interim
measure to manage the transition to the
repeal of the GAA) (see box on
government statements).


Unworkability


It has been noted by a Deputy Minister
that the reason for the required flexibility
is that the original Group Areas Act is
currently unworkable: 'If one considers


11
GROUP AREAS Issue Focus




the implementation of the Group Areas
Act in its current form the fact of the
matter is that it cannot be implemented
successfully because a large sector of the
community finds it unacceptable' (R
Meyer, Hansard 1988, Col 165; see also
1988 statements by C Heunis and R
Meyer in box).


O p t i o n s
The unworkability of the Group Areas
Act is envisaged as being solved by the
application of the Free Settlement Areas
option in grey areas. At a political level,
this is conceived as providing for options
between 'own' and 'shared'
communities: 'We also accept the
principle - in fact we are embodying this
principle in legislation - that alongside
the general pattern of own residential
areas, own community life and so on,
there are also the needs of other people
who do not want that, and that provision
should also be made for the fact' (C
Heunis, Hansard, 22 March 1988, Col 4477.


Similar views are expressed by R Meyer
(.RSA Policy Review 2(5) 1989) and the
National Party's new 'Action Plan'
(1989:2). The above position has recently
been restated, in another form, by
Minister Kriel (Sunday Times, 04/03/90).


Experimentalism


Current government policy also appears
to be such that it is treating the free
settlement concept as something of a
sociopolitical experiment: 'Government
accepts that through the implementation
of the Free Settlement Areas Act it will
gradually discover the reaction of the
South African population to open
residential areas where people can settle
freely. One possibility is that free
settlement areas will be 'open' in the full
sense of the word and there will therefore
be residential areas of various population
groups; another is that such areas will
mainly be inhabited by a specific
population group'.


The same government spokesman noted
that the actual outcome in free settlement
areas will influence perceptions on the
need for the Group Areas Act itself (R
Meyer, RSA Policy Review, 2(5), 1989:9).


Negotiation politics


Leading government spokespersons have
indicated that they recognise the Group
Areas Act as one of the more important


obstacles to broader political negotiations
(e.g. R Meyer cited in The Star 29/6/89,
and FW de Klerk cited in Sunday Star
17/9/89). As Schlemmer (1989) has put it
' . . . it is difficult to imagine a process of
political and constitutional negotiation
between major political contenders
getting under way while irritants and
social barriers like the Group Areas Act
and enforced school segregation exist'.


On the other hand, Minister Viljoen has
recently forecast 'that the scrapping of
the Group Areas Act would be one of the
first issues to be tackled in negotiations';
and he said that 'the government simply
asked to be given the right to argue the
merits of group rights and the possibility
of protecting them without
discrimination' (Star, 08/12/89).


Current
government
policy appears
to be treating
the free
settlement
concept as
something of an
experiment


'Own' communities


In contrast with the above, government
has repeatedly stressed the view in the
past that 'own' communities must be
maintained. During the debate on the
Free Settlement Areas Bill, for example,
the view was stated that 'the right of
every population group to an own
community life is recognised, which
includes the maintenance of a general
pattern of own residential areas'
(Hansard, 26 August 1988, Col 15717).


This point was reiterated by Viljoen and
Kriel (Sunday Times, 04/03/90, Star,
08/12/89). However, at the same time
the mechanism for maintaining 'own
communities' remains unclear since, as
early as 1987, a senior government
spokesman noted that it was not the
government's intention to remove illegal
residents in terms of the Group Areas Act
(P Badenhorst, Hansard, 11 June 1987,
Col 787)


The
government has
repeatedly
stressed the
view that 'own'
communities
should be
maintained


'Notification points'


Following the decision to withdraw the
Group Areas Amendment Bill of 1988,
government indicated an intention to
'decriminalise' the Group Areas Act. This
has led to the development of so-called
'notification points' to process
information on transgressions of the
Group Areas Act.


In the words of the policymakers:
Until such time as an effective and
generally acceptable measure can be
substituted, own residential areas will be
protected by the Group Areas Act. This
will be done by the firm, yet sensitive


GROUP AREAS Issue Focus 59




Some Recent Government Statements on Group Areas and Free Settlement


'As a result of the Group Areas Act and the Land Acts of 1913 and 1935, people of colour possess
and own more land than they would have possessed had it not been for the Acts' (C Heunis cited
in
The Citizen, 14 March 87).


'As long as I am head of this government I am not prepared to allow the established rights of these
communities - white, black, coloured and indian - to be undermined. These rights must be
protected ... Own residential areas are of the utmost importance particularly in the big cities, for
the protection of poor white workers' (PW Botha cited in
The Citizen, 28 March 1987).


The government is not busy with the removal of people in terms of the Group Areas Act'
(P Badenhorst,
Hansard, 11 June 1987, Col 782).


The government really has a serious intention of taking reformatory steps in the field of group
areas and the use of public amenities' (PW Botha,
Hansard, 5 October 1987, Col 6668).


'When will the Conservative Party realise that South Africa simply cannot be divided into
water-tight compartments where communities will have no contact with each other?'
(FW de Klerk cited in
The Citizen, 6 October 1987).


'Of course it is true that various groups are living together in certain residential areas, but is it not
also true that there is an oversupply of housing for one group and an undersupply for others?'
(C Heunis,
Hansard, 25 February, 1988, Col 2206).


'We also accept the principle - in fact we are embodying this in legislation - that alongside the
general pattern of own residential areas, own community life and so on, there are also the needs
of other people who do not that, and that provision should also be made for that fact'
(C Heunis,
Hansard, 22 March 1988, Col 4477).


'What is reform if not an adaptation of the status quo?... [The Free Settlement Areas Bill is] an
adaptation of the status quo to make it fairer and make provision, to a greater extent, for the
needs and choices of the communities which comprise the South African population'
(C Heunis,
Hansard, 25 August 1988, Col 15659).


'It is the actual policy of the NP to stand for own residential areas as far as possible ... the right of
every population group to an own community life is recognised, which includes the maintenance
of a general pattern of own residential areas' (G Viljoen,
Hansard, 26 August 1988, Cols 15716-17).


'The conversion to free settlement areas in existing residential areas must be subject to the support
of the vast majority of the legal occupants' (G Viljoen,
Hansard, 26 August 1988, Col 15718).


'Property value in Mayfair has increased much faster than the average for the rest of Johannesburg,
despite the influx of about 6 000 Indians into the area in recent years'
(R Meyer cited in
The Citizen, 6 July 1988).


'Once legislation has been passed the declaration of the new open residential areas can take place
on a speedy basis' (R Meyer, cited in
Business Day, 15 August 1988).


GROUP AREAS Issue Focus 62




1988 'We cannot, in any period of reform take away people's feeling of security and safety. That would
lead to chaos. They would rebel, not because they do not want reform but because their safety
and security of tenure of land are endangered' (R Meyer,
Hansard, 29 August 1989, Col 15834).


1988 'Special legislation provides for separate committees for residents in Free Settlement Areas to
facilitate negotiation with the municipality regarding matters affecting them. The general principle
of self-determination at local level, as well as separate franchise, will not be affected ... As yet no
open or free settlement areas have been identified. It will remain the exception. The existing
general pattern of separate residential areas continues. Where and how you live is your choice'
(NP newspaper, Vol7(9), September 1988).


1989 'It has to be accepted that the Group Areas Act cannot adequately be applied. The non-application
of the Act leads to reactions by some people who want to take the law into their own hands ...
Others ask whether the law could not be scrapped. But mixed living has led to over-occupation,
as in Hillbrow. The current perception, unfortunately, is that if that is how mixed conditions look,
then it is unacceptable' (R Meyer, cited in
The Star, 8 February 1989).


1989 'Free settlement areas do not nullify the principle of own residential areas. Own residential areas
still remain the basic pattern in South Africa. Free settlement areas can specifically be an
important protective mechanism for those who choose a community life of their own. Free
settlement areas will drastically reduce the pressure on own residential areas caused by
encroachment' (NP newspaper, Vol8(3), March 1989).


1989 'In no way do free settlement areas encroach upon the principle of own schools' (NP newspaper,
Vol8(3), March 1989).


1989 '[With regard to the Group Areas Act and Separate Amenities Act] we are prepared to talk, enter
into dialogue and negotiate about what must happen in these spheres' (FW de Klerk, cited in
The Sunday Star, 17 August 1989).


1989 '[Dr Viljoen] said that the government simply asked to be given the right (in the negotiation process)
to argue the merits of group rights and the possibility of protecting them without discrimination...
(he) forecast that the scrapping of the Population Registration Act and Group Areas Act would be
one of the first issues to be tackled in negotiations'
(The Star, 8 December 1989).


1990 Minister Kriel said 'there was nothing in the [Free Settlement] Act to prevent the opening of an
entire local authority area' and that he had 'a sympathetic attitude regarding the opening of
municipal areas' (
This Week in Parliament, Issue No 3/90, 28/1, 28/12). Minister Kriel however
also said that 'the Government would require reliable evidence... [such as] referendums ... that a
request for "open" cities was not simply a "political move" by a local authority, but the genuine
desire of a majority of a city's inhabitants ... areas or suburbs within cities may wish to retain their
ethnic character, and the FSA would allow this' (
Sunday Times, 4'March 1990).


1990 Minister Kriel said that the implications of the National Party's five year plan (announced in 1989)
was that 'eventually the Group Areas Act will have to disappear' but it would have to be replaced
with a 'suitable alternative' (
Sunday Times, 4 March 1990).


1990 President de Klerk said that the Group Areas Act would be replaced possibly in 1991 by new
non-discriminatory measures which would ensure 'a general pattern of residential settlement....
In the interim, it is important that the application of the Free Settlement Act be continued in order to
broaden the available options immediately' (
Hansard, 19/04/1990, Cols. 6665-66)


Source: Urbanisation Unit,
Urban Foundation Research


G R O U P A R E A S Issue Focus 61




The repeal of
the Group
Areas Act
would assist in
the negotiating
process by
removing
unnecessary
discriminatory
baggage from
the table


application ofiaw and the instruments
created for that purpose:


"" identified notification points will be
created where transgressions of law can be
reported;


" the circumstances will be investigated and
an attempt made to solve the problem
without legal intervention, through a
process of assistance and negotiation with
the people involved.


" for this purpose a special housing
component has already been established in
the Department of Land Affairs;


9 should cooperation not be forthcoming
and after alternative housing, where
appropriate, has been made available,
prosecution may be instituted.
'(National
Party Action Plan, 1989:13)


In short, then, the current official policy is
complex and ambiguous, subject to many
different interpretations, and is in a state
of some fluidity. Nevertheless, it is still
based upon the maintenance of the
Group Areas Act, and the Free
Settlement Areas Act remains, for the
reasons already explained, inadequate
and unacceptable. The politics of
negotiation is now being offered as the
principal excuse for not breaking out of
this connundrum, since there appear to
be many who hold to the view that the
Group Areas Act should be a 'bargaining
chip' in the negotiation process.


However, the
repeal of the
Act is but the
first step in the
development of
a new urban
policy


Need for Repeal
A more realistic position, however,
would be that repeal of the Group Areas
Act will assist in the dynamics of the
negotiation process by removing
unnecessary discriminatory 'baggage'
from the table. In addition, however, the
position of the Urban Foundation is that
repeal is an urgent priority in order that
attention can be focused on the real
urban challenges and opportunities,
instead of petty and distracting issues of
who is living near whom.


The challenges include - unemployment,
housing shortages, low economic growth,
growing urban debt, lack of services and
facilities, an education crisis, health care
'collapse', political instability, inefficient
urban structure.


The urban opportunities that await us in
the post Group Areas period include -
9 normal land and housing markets;


" enhanced development of small
businesses;


" the realisation of the investment
potential of compact, deregulated
cities


" a growing cross-cutting urban culture;
" private sector/ community joint


development projects;
and other ventures which, together, will
assist in the creation of a shared vision of
a South African future.


In this perspective, the maintenance of
the Group Areas Act is the core policy
and legal obstacle to effective urban
management. The abolition of racial laws
is therefore essential, but cannot alone
guarantee a vibrant urban environment
with improved neighbourhood quality.


It is for this reason that the Urban
Foundation believes that the repeal of the
Group Areas Act is only the first step in
the development of a new urban policy: a
policy which would include emphasis
upon
8 'reconstructing' a more compact,


efficient South African city
" new nonracial local government


structures
" city-wide approaches to urban


challenges and opportunities
® the use of existing urban resources


and investment fully
" the possible promotion of the concept


of a charter of 'neighbourhood rights
and responsibilities'.


Instead of diverting attention and
wasting time on a 'groupthink' oriented,
parochial, free settlement approach to the
cities, government should rather commit
itself to residential freedom for all, the
establishment of a free property market,
neighbourhood quality and upgrading,
enforcement of democratically
formulated 'rules' to prevent decline of
urban neighbourhoods, and a proactive
wider urban policy.


All of this will not be possible until the
Group Areas Act is repealed, and until
there is a clear commitment to address
urban residents' needs and aspirations in
direct terms, instead of through a
distracting, racially-based framework. fl©M


11
GROUP AREAS Issue Focus




CONCLUSION


PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT
By Ann Bernstein and Jeff McCarthy


The Urban Foundation


The repeal of the Group Areas Act
is the critical first step (and only the
first) in an incremental process of
I adding the structural changes
necessary to create more efficient,
equitable and compact cities better
able to provide jobs, services and
shelter for an expanding urban
population. In this concluding
article, the authors examine some of
the important urban planning and
management issues involved in
achieving these aims in a
post-Group Areas era.


he maintenance of the Group Areas
Act has been the core policy and


legal obstacle to effective urban
management in South African cities,
since separate residential areas form the
basis for dividing functionally integrated
cities along racial, political,
administrative and financial lines.


We have no doubt that the Group Areas
Act will go, but what are some of the
urban planning and urban management
issues that await us in the post-Group
Areas Act era? For decades South African
cities have been planned and governed as
if they were small, colonial towns, but the
realities are now becoming so obviously
at variance with this supposition that a
complete policy realignment is needed.


Together with the repeal of a wide range
of discriminatory legislation, a new
proactive policy framework will be
required to meet the emerging
urbanisation and development
challenges. This will include the
establishment of non-racial local
government as a critical first step (see
later), but this article is not so much
about local government policy as it is
more concerned with a national urban
policy in a post- Group Areas period.


The Urban Foundation and Private Sector
Council on Urbanisation has recently
released, and is in the process of
releasing, detailed policy proposals on a
wide range of subjects relating to these
challenges (Urban Foundation, 1990). In
the context of this particular collection of
articles on group areas and
desegregation, however, it is possible to
isolate a number of policy 'signposts' that
are of special relevance to national urban
planning in a post-Group Areas era.


South Africa's metropolitan areas are
expected to double their population sizes
in the next 25 years, and this will lead to
metropolitan areas on a scale hitherto not
envisaged in South Africa the PWV
metropolitan region, for example, is
expected to reach 16 million persons by
2010 (Urban Foundation, 1990b). Issues
of racial segregation can seem parochial,
and even a distraction, in the context of
the planning and development
challenges that lie ahead for such
metropolitan areas; and yet, at the same
time, the legacy of the Group Areas Act
and the divided cities of our past provide
part of the context for the future
development challenge.


South Africa's
metropolitan
areas are
expected to
double their
population
sizes in the
next 25 years,
with the PWV
region reaching
16m by 2050


GROUP AREAS Issue Focus 63




Reconstruction
New
development
in South
African cities
should be
channeled
towards more
compact,
integrated,
accessible and
productive
urban systems


It is clear that
a new,
non-racial
system of local
government
will have to
emerge in a
post-Group
Areas period


Post-apartheid metropolitan planning
frameworks cannot, unfortunately,
assume a tabula rasa cities that are
wiped clean of an apartheid past. There is
considerable social investment in existing
urban form, and what is required is a
planning approach that builds
post-apartheid cities out of the
opportunities and constraints imposed
by the past. In other words, what is
required is a new urban policy which
aims to reconstruct South African cities
into fundamentally different
growth-oriented and inclusive cities.


To some extent, the simple repeal of the
Group Areas Act and the emergence of
non-racial local government structures
will assist in this process. However,
given a legacy of deliberate segregation,
buffer strips, consciously fragmented
townships, etc., a programme is now
required to specifically channel new
development in every South African city
and town away from dispersed and
racially divided urban growth patterns,
towards more compact, integrated,
accessible and productive urban systems.


This programme should include, for
example, inner-city development on a
non-racial basis; high density infill
development; and multi-purpose
development corridors [see data base]
connecting previously segregated parts
of the city. It should also pay special
attention to reinforcing the natural
economic efficiencies of cities, and
encouraging developmental relationships
between the informal sector, smaller
businesses and larger firms. Practical
consolidation of the informally housed
populations of our cities should also
become a major priority of urban policy.


There are many existing apartheid-
created 'gaps' in the urban fabric where
planning of this kind can immediately
begin. For example, in Johannesburg
there are segments of unused mining
land between Soweto and white suburbs,
and these may be suited to the
multipurpose development corridor
concept, which would meld the city's
segregated suburbs back together again.
Similar possibilities exist on the
farmlands between black and white
residential areas to the north of Durban.


Other prospects include infill
development - perhaps along the lines of
the 'cities-within-cities' planning concept


[see data base] - in areas from which
forced removals have occurred in the
past. Examples of such localities are the
Cato Manor area of Durban, or the
District Six/Woodstock areas of Cape
Town. Apart from the fact that such
developments would be important
symbolic interventions aimed at the
deliberate reversal of the apartheid
planning legacy, they would also
contribute towards the realisation of a
more compact, efficient and equitable
urban form and assist in breaking down
barriers to inter-racial movement and
communication.


Of course, given the anticipated scale of
urbanisation, infill development alone
will not absorb the full weight of
numbers, and there will of necessity be
much expansion of the urban fringes.


What is not required in this process,
however, is the deliberate
deconcentration of industry and
lower-income settlements beyond the
urban fringe, as has tended to be the case
until now. Botshabelo, some 60km east of
Bloemfontein and the Winterveld
informal settlement, some 30km north of
Pretoria, are examples of this unfortunate
trend. The costs to the poor and society at
large of this type of development are
enormous, not least because of the
extraordinary commuting times and
costs that are imposed upon people
living there (Figure 1).


Rather than the expensive creation of
'new towns' and decentralisation and
deconcentration points then, policies
should in future be designed to make
maximum use of all existing urban
investment. This applies to both physical
plant (e.g. existing cities, schools,
technical training colleges, recreational
amenities) and urban management
personnel (town clerks, city engineers,
etc). It also applies to the easing of
restrictions on land use and
development, which will enable market
forces to play a more constructive and
creative role in the rational, efficient
allocation of land to more intensive and
productive use.


Urban Quality
Cities, and the quality of life that they
offer, are not simply determined by
physical considerations. Indeed, given
the legacy of the past, new urban policy
frameworks would be incomplete


11
GROUP AREAS Issue Focus




without a national commitment to five
nationwide priority action programmes,
with specified target goals to ensure:


" permanence, security of tenure and
opportunity to upgrade then-
conditions where appropriate for
millions of inhabitants of informal
housing;


" security against crime for all urban
dwellers;


" environmental protection and
neighbourhood upgrading in the cities
and towns;


" sufficient trained management
resources (town clerks, engineers,
community organisers) for the cities
and towns;


" sufficient finance and appropriate
new vehicles for urban development.


These will have to be programmes
instituted by national political leadership
with a view to enhancing urban quality
in the period of uncertainty that will
follow the repeal of Group Areas. They
are also important national urban policy
goals in their own right.


It is clear that a new, non-racial system of
local government will have to emerge in
a post-Group Areas Act period, and it is
preferable that a process of local
government change should proceed
interactively with national constitutional
change. In practice, this means that
current local initiatives concerned with
restructuring local government towards
new, non-racial forms should be
encouraged and supported by the
political centre. The present system of
local government cannot form the basis
for sound urban management, yet world
experience shows that it is just such
sound management that distinguished
positive from negative urban outcomes
in rapidly urbanising societies.


A related point is that community
participation (defined here as -
democratic, representative local and
central government; participation in key
decision making between elections; and
participation of the relevant community
in development projects) and active
involvement is essential for effective
urban and rural development policy, and
this will be an especially important
consideration in a period of post-Group
Areas urban reconstruction. In respect of


TWO URBAN PLANNING CONCEPTS
The
notions of 'cities-within-cities' and 'mixed use activity
corridors' provide two possibilities for metropolitan spatial
planning in the post-Group Areas period. As Smit and Todes
(forthcoming) point out, these concepts originated with
Currie (1978) and Dewar et a! (1978), but each offers a way
of managing the densification and re-integration of South
African cities in the future.
In terms of the 'cities-within-cities' concept metropolitan
growth is accommodated in a 'cluster of compact, walkable,
planned communities of sufficient size to be true cities (say
400 000 to 500 000 in developing countries)' (Currie, 1978,
p. 182). The idea is such that cities-within-cities would cluster
around the metropolitan core to yield a compact overall
metropolitan form, and each city-within-city would be
relatively self-contained with a complex land-use mix.


Curries' ideas have been implemented in Bogota, Columbia,
where urban development has also been successfully linked
to an economic growth strategy for the country as a whole
(Urban Foundation, 1990a).


The implementation of a cities-within-cities approach would
also make sense in many South African cities - for example,
in the Cato Manor area of Durban where a yawning gap has
been inserted into the metropolitan fabric, as a result of
Group Areas removals, at a distance of some 7km from the
heart of the CBD.
The mixed use activity corridor concept derives from
metropolitan planning ideas developed specifically in a
South African context first by Dewar et al (1978) and later by
Mills (1987) and Naude (1987). The concept provides a
general approach towards managing metropolitan growth in
South Afican cities, and takes its cue from the existing spatial
forms of those cities. The emphasis is upon promoting the
growth of mixed usage corridors between the disparate parts
of our cities - corridors which would act as 'seams', tying
together these disparate parts. A variety of measures are
envisaged to encourage such corridors to be areas of
intra-metropolitan movement, meeting and interaction.
Public facilities, commercial and small business activities
and high density residential development, for example,
would be encouraged into such 'seams', many of which
would be areas previously used to discourage interaction
between group areas.
R E F E R E N C E S


Currie, L., 1978: 'Cities-ivithin-cities' , in Habitat Conference Secretatiat (eds.),
Aspects of Human Settlement Planning, Pergamon, N e w York.
Dewar,D. , Uvtenbogart , R Hutton-Squire, M Levy, C. and Mendis, P., 1978:
Housing: A Comparative Evaluation of Urbanism in South Africa, David Philip,
C a p e Town.
Mills, S.J. 1987: The Year 2000: Possible alternatives for the physical form and
structure of the Johannesburg metropolitan region,
Urban Foundation,
Johannesburg.
Naude, A.H., 1987: Urbanisation and transport in the PW'V region: Implications of
alternative urban structures,
Urban Foundation, Johannesburg .
Smit , D.P. and Todes, A. 1990: 'An evaluation of approaches to metropolitan
spatial management in South Africa' , SA Geographical Journal ( forthcoming).
Urban Foundation, 1990a: Policy Overview: The Urban Challenge, Urban
Foundation, Johannesburg.


GROUP AREAS Issue Focus 65




FIGURE 1 : INCREASE IN RAIL COMMUTERS TO THE
PRETORIA REGION ; 1969-1977 -1987


X o t e that because black settlement in the region has been largely
constrained to areas behind the Bophuthatswana boundary, the flows
from this area have increased greatly over time. Moreover, these people
are commuting across areas between Pretoria and Bophuthatswana which
are currently underdeveloped or are in low-intensity small-holding use.
Source
Olivier, JJ and Booysens, j j . 1983. "Some impacts of black commuting on
Pretoria", in South African Geographical Journal Vol 65-. p l24134 .


urban economic and financial policy, for
example, if services are to be introduced
at a level which is both, affordable and
popularly acceptable, community
participation in their development is
essential.


Even with the best designed policies,
tensions can be expected over the levels
of state assistance to various groups. If
policies are imposed upon groups
without their consent, these tensions
could erupt into active resistance. Indeed,
it is not only servicing issues which will
require community participation in
future. In the absence of active


community participation in urban
development projects - for example
urban renewal in the inner-city or
development projects in potential infill
areas of the city - these are likely to be
laden with controversy, and will not
meet the social needs for which they
should be designed. In the post-Group
Areas era therefore, special emphasis
should be placed upon community
participation in planning and
development.


Housing
There is, at present, a housing surplus for
whites and housing shortages for other
groups. The removal of the Group Areas
Act will assist in restoring the balance
between supply and demand forces
within the housing market as a whole. In
addition, price distortions which have
arisen due to differential supply
constraints such as the higher prices
per unit land in 'Coloured' and Indian
group areas by comparison with white
areas should be ameliorated following
the repeal of the Act.


Nevertheless, it is critical to bear in mind
that there is already an enormous
shortage of low-cost housing
(approximately 850 000 units) and that
our metropolitan areas will be doubling
their population by the year 2010. In a
context of such scale, the normalisation of
supply and demand forces operating
with respect to the existing housing stock
in the post-Group Areas era will be a
relatively minor adjustment. The really
important housing challenges that lie
ahead in the post-Group Areas period
concern the mechanisms necessary to
activate a massive supply of low-cost
housing and associated services and
facilities. There is no technical reason
why South Africa cannot meet this
challenge, but policies will clearly have to
be adjusted to facilitate and activate
low-income housing supply.


It is clear that in meeting the demands for
post-Group Areas planning and
development, greater allocations of
financial resources will have to be made
to urban development. At various points
in South African history, specialist
institutions have been created by the
state for particular development
purposes. One may cite as examples the
Industrial Development Corporation, the
National Finance Corporation and the
Development Bank of Southern Africa. In


11
GROUP AREAS Issue Focus




each case, seed capital (in a single sum or
series of instalments) has been made
available on concessionary terms on the
condition that the institution would ,
operate on a commercial basis as soon as
possible. This principle could now be
applied to urban development in the
form of a Cities Development Fund.


The Cities Development Fund could, for
example, 'kickstart' private sector
support for creative new urban
development that will be required in the
post-Group Areas era, provide general
development capital for the provision of
services, as well as making available a
per capita subsidy to municipalities
containing neighbourhoods that fall
below certain minimum standards of
service provision. At the local level,
urban development corporations or
consortiums involving private,
community and local government
representatives could become channels
for major private sector investment in the
cities, as well as utilizing finance from the
(. ities Development Fund. Finally, at the
local government level, effective local
urban management will require greater
decision-making autonomy and finance.


Policy Process
There are, of course, a wide range of
other policy issues raised by the prospect
of post-Group Area planning, but to
conclude this brief article we would
prefer to emphasise aspects of the process
of arriving at a post-apartheid urban
policy framework.


As has been remarked in a previous
paper (Bernstein,1989), it is possible to
envisage three stages in the formulation
of a new. urbanisation strategy for the
country:


'The first phase ivas marked at the one end
(post-1976) by the opening up of the
entire debate in the establishment - the
irreversibility of black urbanisation - and
could be said to have culminated with the
legislative abolition of influx control in
June 1986 and the partial restoration of
limited citizenship to black people. The
second phase the substance of which was
always inherent in the debates on the
abolition of influx control but is now more
clearly focused, is characterised by a
multi-faceted debate concerning where
and hoio black urbanisation should occur.
It is only ivhen this question is
satisfactorily resolved that a number of


current disputes (forced removals, shack
demolitions, Group Areas Act, etc.) ivill
fall aivay. The third phase, again implicit
in the debates that ivill have to occur on
the location and method of urbanisation,
concerns decision-making: this addresses
who formulates policy on urbanisation,
ivho implements such policy, and what
priority is this to be allocated in national
expenditure'.


As was remarked in that article, there is,
of course, nothing inevitable in moving
from one phase to the next, and had the
political realities of South African been
different, it would have been preferable
to start with phase three. In formulating a
specifically post-apartheid urbanisation
strategy and parallel concepts of urban
planning and urban management,
however, it is critical that non-racial and
democratic processes operate to
determine final policy outcomes.


The policy proposals which have been
developed and put forward by the Urban
Foundation and Private Sector Council
on Urbanisation, and which have been
briefly alluded to here, have been widely
tested and revised in the light of
commentary received from numerous
discussion groups. This has included
months of discussions with black
community organisations, trade unions
and similar bodies.


Nevertheless, it is important to see the
proposals for what they are: as one
contribution to a national debate on the
future of the cities and the development
process in South Africa. The negotiation
of a non-racial, democratic political
future and the promotion of a
development process that expands the
opportunities and level of material
well-being available to all are
co-requisites for the realisation of the
society to which most of us aspire. Of one
thing, however, we remain sure - neither
will be possible until there is an
unambiguous commitment to the repeal
of the Group Areas Act and related
discriminatory legislation. Qg^


R E F E R E N C E S


Bernstein, A. "Focus on the Cities - towards a new
national agenda", Social Dynamics, 15(1), 94-110.


Urban Foundation - Policies for a N e w Urban Future 2:
Policy Overview: The Urban Challenge, Johannesburg:
Urban Foundation/Private Sector Council on
Urbanisation, 1990a.


Urban Foundation - Policies for a N e w Urban Future 1:
Demographic Trends, Johannesburg: Urban
Foundation/Private Sector Council on Urbanisation,
1990b.


Important
housing
challenges
that lie ahead
concern the
activation of a
massive
supply of
low-cost
housing and
associated
services


It is critical that
non-racial and
democratic
processes
operate to
determine the
final policy
outcomes


GROUP AREAS Issue Focus 67




This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons
Attribution - Noncommercial - NoDerivs 3.0 Licence.


To view a copy of the licence please see:
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/