Post Apartheid Metro Boundaries: Conflicts, Contestations and Compromises in Durban

Countries seeking to remake the structure of their societies have placed a strong emphasis on the development of a viable and effective system of local government. The restructuring of local government is especially significant in the context of South Africa's emerging democracy. A key component of this process has been boundary delimitation, which involved a process of spatial organisation and re-organisation. In South Africa the de-racialisation of local government represents a major challenge. Many affluent white local authorities were reluctant to give up the power and privileges of the old order and merge with previously black local authorities. Also, the socio-spatial distortions of the apartheid era need to be addressed through a more equitable distribution of resources, and the re-drawing of geographical boundaries. Attempts at municipal restructuring in South Africa have been fraught with problems and conflicts. The conflicts engendered, the negotiations, compromises, and coalitions generated constitute important areas of research. Examining and elucidating the manner in which these various forces have manifested themselves in the major metropolitan centres is the central theme of this paper. The focus of this paper is on boundary delimitation in the Durban Metropolitan area. Introduction Countries undergoing political and economic transition have placed a strong emphasis on the development of a viable and effective system of local government (Mawhood, 1993; Maharaj, 1997). A critical issue is the “nature of local territorially-based communities and their potential for democratic self-governance within the complex political and economic environment” (Sancton, 1996:277). The restructuring of local government has been primarily “influenced by economic, technological, political and ideological change”, and can “modify spatial patterns of development and disparities” (Razin, 2000:7). In South Africa the de-racialisation of local government represents a major challenge. 1 Paper presented in the IASTE conference “[un]bounding traditions: the tensions of borders and regions” held in Honk-Kong (December 2002) “Rencontres de l’innovation territoriale 2 The restructuring of local government is especially significant in the context of South Africa's emerging democracy, especially since this transformation "has taken place in a way that is probably unique from an international comparative perspective" (Swilling, Monteiro and Johnson, 1995:16). A key component of this process has been spatial re-organisation through boundary delimitation. However, boundaries are not neutral geographic lines. Boundary changes are often associated with a redistribution of political power and resources, with some institutions and parties benefiting, and others being disadvantaged (Alexander, 1982; Hasson and Razin, 1990; Keating, 1995; Cameron, 1999). Quite often boundary conflicts are associated with urban municipalities encroaching into rural areas. Unless there are redistributive transfers, urban-rural inequalities are accentuated (Razin, 2000). In a process of territorial restructuring, there are potential areas of dispute, which often reveal local, regional and national geopolitical stakes (Hasson and Razin, 1990). Therefore, local and regional spatial restructuring led to contestations and conflicts over the delimitation of new boundaries in South Africa (Ramutsindela and Simon, 1999; Narsiah and Maharaj, 1997; 1999; Ramutsindela, 2001). The conflicts engendered, the negotiations, compromises, and coalitions generated constitute important areas of research. The aim of this paper is to analyse the effects of the contemporary territorial and administrative restructuring on urban dynamics in South Africa. More specifically, the focus is on how the process of territorial restructuring impacted on metropolitan areas as well as their hinterlands. The political and economic implications associated with attempts to extend urban boundaries into rural areas will also be assessed. It is important to understand how boundary rationalisation and political power intersect. The nature, size, composition and governance of regions are constantly changing depending on the balance of societal forces and the dominant mode of accumulation (Markusen, 1978). Political, territorial and administrative reorganisation therefore needs to be theorised in terms of the articulation of a number of structures including those associated with ideology, bureaucracy, nationalism, gender and regimes of accumulation (Driver, 1991; Murphy, 1991). “Rencontres de l’innovation territoriale 3 Local Government in Transition in South Africa Since the 1990s South Africa embarked on the long journey towards reconstruction, development and planning in the post-apartheid era. Success would depend on a sensitive understanding of the "geographical legacy of apartheid and the scars it has left behind, and also to the complex local, regional and environmental diversity that characterises the South African whole" (McCarthy, 1991:23). The contemporary South African city is reflective of a discourse of apartheid urban planning characterised by racially fragmented and discontinuous land use and settlement patterns, haphazard, dysfunctional and inefficient spatial ordering, land use mismatches, low level population density and the concentration of the poor in relatively high density areas on the peripheries and the rich in the core intermediate urban areas (Hindson et al, 1992:6). Local government in the apartheid city was characterised by a "complex process of functional inclusion, spatial separation, and political exclusion" (Swilling, et al. 1991:175). In the democratic era the Local Government Transition Act (LGTA) of 1994 provided an institutional base for the disbanding of race-based municipalities, scrapping of apartheid laws relating to local government, and the establishment of transitional local councils (Khan and Maharaj, 1997). About 1 260 local authorities were merged to form 843 municipalities. However, the type of local government that materialised in terms of the LGTA did not "necessarily support the notion of 'one city' or 'one tax base'" (Wooldridge, 2002:132). In many areas the spatial inscription which prescribes the separation of areas of abject poverty from areas of affluence persists (Narsiah and Maharaj, 1999). For example, there was a tendency to exclude "settlements on the periphery of the metropolis which would lower the per capita tax base, and place a strain on service delivery capacity" (Wooldridge, 2002:132). Furthermore, "hastily drawn municipal boundaries and negotiated ward boundaries produced a fragmented system, with metropolitan areas divided into impractical substructures, and some small towns and rural areas cut up like a patchwork quilt" (Cashden, 2002:162). “Rencontres de l’innovation territoriale 4 In an attempt to address these problems the White Paper on Local Government provided the foundation for a new developmental local government (DLG) system (Government Gazette, 13/3/98, p. 15). It introduced the notion of the ‘wall to wall principle’ in order to ensure that all the parts of the country, including the poor rural peripheries, will be integrated in the new demarcation process. DLG exhorts local authorities to focus on achieving developmental outcomes, such as the provision of basic infrastructure and services; the creation of integrated cities and livable environments; the encouragement of local economic development initiatives; and the empowerment of communities. Three inter-linked approaches to help municipalities to effectively play a developmental role were proposed: "integrated development planning and budgeting; performance management; and working together with local citizens and partners" (Government Gazette, 13/3/98, p.16). An important strategy to help municipalities to become more developmental is integrated development planning (IDP). Integrated development planning depends on the coordination of a range of services and regulations, including land-use planning, household infrastructure, environmental management, transport, health and education, safety and security and housing (Government Gazette, 13 March 1998, p.39). The type of municipal institutions that would best suit South African conditions was the subject of considerable discussion. The issue of their shape, size, and boundaries was directly linked to the socio-economic dynamics. There were two different perspectives with regard to metropolitan government. For those who were interested in the growth imperative metropolitan government plays a pivotal role in promoting economic development because it provides a more effective regional infrastructure for reproducing labour power as well as promoting production and distribution; offered tax exemptions and subsidies to attract investment; and facilitated the establishment of pro-growth partnerships with the private sector. Those who favoured the equity focus argued that metropolitan government could promote more equitable land use; ensure fairer taxation; improve efficiency, service provision and capacity; reduce socio-spatial inequalities and foster rational planning (PLANACT, 1992; Government Gazette, 13/3/98, pp.81-84). In South Africa the White Paper on Local Government defined metropolitan areas as follows: Metropolitan areas are large urban settlements with high population densities, complex and diversified economies, and a high degree of functional integration across a larger geographic “Rencontres de l’innovation territoriale 5 area than the normal jurisdiction of a municipality. Economic and social activities transcend municipal boundaries, and metropolitan residents may live in one locality, work in another, and utilise recreational facilities across the metropolitan area (Government Gazette, 13/3/98, p.78). Mega cities were established in South Africa's six metropolitan areas (Johannesburg, Pretoria, East Rand, Durban, Port Elizabeth, Cape Town). A two-tier system municipal system was established comprising both umbrella councils and local councils outside these metro areas. There has been concern that mega cities reduce efficiency and equity, and are also remote from the communities they serve: “Efficiency was reduced by insufficient scale and costly externalities; effectiveness was reduced by obstructive municipal boundaries and a lack of citywide coordination; and equity was lacking in intermunicipal variations in the quantity and quality of services” (Barlow, 1997:400). The focus on mega cities overlooked the potential contribution of South Africa's 500 small towns to growth and development (Centre for Development Enterprise, 1996b). The government contended that the fragmentation of metropolitan areas into single municipalities would maintain inherited social and economic inequalities (Government Gazette, 13/3/98, p. 81). There were considerable contestations over the delimitation of new local government boundaries (Cameron, 1999), and the next section illustrates this by focusing on the Durban experience. Territorial Contestations in Durban Durban is located in the province of KwaZulu-Natal (KZN), one of the most densely populated regions of the country, with one in every four South Africans living in the province. In Durban, the local state was forced to respond to a multitude of problems and demands as it attempted to come to terms with burgeoning numbers, a depressed economy, and political demands for a nonracial city. The case of Durban is important because the city has to be examined "in terms of the local conjunction of different restructuring forces (deriving from and operating at different spatial levels) with specific social, cultural, political and institutional circumstances of the locality itself" (Pillay, 1994:83). In terms of the LGTA the Greater Durban Metropolitan Negotiating Forum (GDMNF) was established in June 1994, and comprised sixty-six local authorities. One of the key issues that the Forum had to address was the determination of the boundaries of the metropolitan area. “Rencontres de l’innovation territoriale 6 The First Demarcation Process In September 1994 the GDMNF accepted provisional boundaries for a greater Durban Metropolitan Area, which would span the area between the Tongaat River in the north, the Umkomaas River in the South, and Cato Ridge in the west (Figure 1). In accepting these boundaries, the Forum was taking cognisance of the development realities of the region, as well as the objectives of the LGTA. For example, an important principle approved by the Forum was that the “areas of existing local authorities should not be split up, even if this meant including politically sensitive tribal areas” (Pillay, 1999:206). More specifically, the adoption of the boundaries was based on the following considerations: i) The restructuring and amalgamation of black and white local authorities. ii) The future financial viability of the metropolitan area. iii) The functionality of the metropolitan system in economic, spatial and social terms. iv) The redistribution of resources and upliftment of disadvantaged areas. While the proposals of the GDMNF was widely accepted, there were a few dissenting voices, especially from smaller, affluent white local authorities who were reluctant to give up the power and privileges of the old order. The Borough of Westville, for example, had commissioned a study to examine the feasibility of `going it alone', and had sought advice to determine whether "the legal situation allows Westville some way or other of standing alone and retaining its identity" (Daily News, 27/10/94). Responding to criticisms that the Westville Borough's actions were `racist' and `scandalous', Mayor Nicky Armstrong stated: We are not trying to maintain a small white enclave. We want a council that will reflect the rich, multi-cultural diversity of our area, while retaining Westville's name as well as the special ambience we have here (Daily News, 27/10/94). The Forum deliberated for five months, and resolved on 21 September 1994 that the boundaries of the new metro would extend from the Tongaat River in the North, the Umkomaas River in the 2 Understanding the Durban Metropolitan Area Demarcation Process (1993-1996), Support Document 3, August 1999, p.7. “Rencontres de l’innovation territoriale 7 South, and the Tribal areas of Ximba, Qadi and Kwanyuswa in the West (Figure 1). This was submitted to the Minister of Executive Council (MEC) in charge of local government. The KwaZulu-Natal Demarcation Board, comprising 16 members was established in September 1994. However, the Board and the MEC could not reach agreement over the submission made by the GDMNF, especially the inclusion or exclusion of territory under tribal jurisdiction. In an attempt to address the impasse, the Demarcation Board initiated a process of consultation with the various stakeholders. It has been suggested that only when boundaries or other forms of territorial interventions "find political acceptability that they begin to make enormous impact and gain implementation". There were divergent views relating to the “inclusion or exclusion of tribal authority land located on the edge of the existing metro boundary ... a result of the interwoven nature of the geographic sub regions of the former province of Natal and the former homeland of KwaZulu” (Pillay, 1999:207). The exclusion of the majority of tribal areas suited the interests of the governing Inkatha Freedom Party (IFP) in KZN. A major problem was attempting to differentiate between urban and rural areas. In this regard Khan and Maharaj (1994) supported the creation of a city-region (as in most Latin American and Asian cities) that includes urbanised, peri-urban and significant tracts of rural land. This perspective opens up the prospect for integrated development by combining urban, peri-urban and rural development processes in a single institutional moment and contributes in part to the rationalisation of settlement patterns by way of addressing one of the multiple underlying causes of circulatory migration. There was a need to consider the complex and dynamic interface between rural and urban areas in terms of services, commuting patterns, development potential and community interdependence. Furthermore, attempts to define `urban' and `rural' are fraught with problems. The official definition of `urbanised' or 'extensively developed' within a local authority, is