Isandla Institute, supported by a number of civil society partners, has produced a joint civil society submission, which addresses four key areas of intervention which we believe start to address some of the significant challenges facing the backyard housing market. These key areas include access to basic services for backyard residents living on both public and private land; tenure (in)security for both landlords and backyard residents; enabling the right to self-build as an integral part of the right of access to housing; and, the importance of promoting safe neighbourhoods through an area-based violence prevention approach.

Isandla Institute, supported by a number of civil society partners, has produced a joint civil society submission, which addresses four key areas of intervention which we believe start to address some of the significant challenges facing the backyard housing market. These key areas include access to basic services for backyard residents living on both public and private land; tenure (in)security for both landlords and backyard residents; enabling the right to self-build as an integral part of the right of access to housing; and, the importance of promoting safe neighbourhoods through an area-based violence prevention approach. For more details, see the civil society submission here and an animation that distils the main arguments.

Amid the growing discourse around self-build, especially in the context of fiscal constraints and the de-prioritisation of new large-scale public housing projects, there is an opportunity for self-build to be enabled and supported through Housing Support Centres, to tap into latent willingness and agency of communities for incremental top-structure consolidation. Housing Support Centres can be an important element in shifting the housing focus beyond just site-and-service and towards housing consolidation in both informal settlements and in established neighbourhoods where backyard housing is providing/can provide affordable housing for rent. Based on the Enhanced People’s Housing Process (EPHP) as a local self-build precedent, and other examples of current and proposed models for support centres, both locally and in other global South locations (Brazil and India), Isandla Institute has proposed a municipal-led Housing Support Centre model that could provide a variety of possible housing support needs across different housing/settlement typologies, in partnership with provinces, NGOs, the private sector, and academic institutions.

Amid the growing discourse around self-build, especially in the context of fiscal constraints and the de-prioritisation of new large-scale public housing projects, there is an opportunity for self-build to be enabled and supported through Housing Support Centres, to tap into latent willingness and agency of communities for incremental top-structure consolidation. Based on the Enhanced People’s Housing Process (EPHP) as a local self-build precedent, and other examples of current and proposed models for support centres, both locally and in other global South locations (Brazil and India), Isandla Institute has proposed a municipal-led Housing Support Centre model that could provide a variety of possible housing support needs across different housing/settlement typologies, in partnership with provinces, NGOs, the private sector, and academic institutions. This proposition paper is distilled from a research paper, Enabling the right to build through Housing Support Centres, 2022 (see here)

Amid the growing discourse around self-build, especially in the context of fiscal constraints and the de-prioritisation of new large-scale public housing projects, there is an opportunity for self-build to be enabled and supported through Housing Support Centres, to tap into latent willingness and agency of communities for incremental top-structure consolidation. Based on the Enhanced People’s Housing Process (EPHP) as a local self-build precedent, and other examples of current and proposed models for support centres, both locally and in other global South locations (Brazil and India), Isandla Institute has proposed a municipal-led Housing Support Centre model that could provide a variety of possible housing support needs across different housing/settlement typologies, in partnership with provinces, NGOs, the private sector, and academic institutions. For more details, see an animation and proposition paper here, which are distilled from a  longer research paper (see here)

In 2021, Isandla Institute sourced a legal opinion from a Senior Counsel, focusing on the obligations and powers of municipalities to provide basic services for backyard dwellers on private land. This showed that there was no legal obstacle to providing these services. Based on this, Isandla Institute commissioned a paper from an experienced journalist, which was informed by interviews with stakeholders, on the impact of backyard housing on water and sanitation infrastructure, to further inform debate. While local government has a clear constitutional responsibility to supply all backyard residents with basic services, the question of the how burns. This report’s conclusion is that the servicing of backyard units is about changing mindsets, institutional processes, and moving towards more evidence-based strategic infrastructure planning to address the increased densification and urbanization that are at the heart of the infrastructural shortfalls in low-income areas.

We have updated the Planning 4 Informality webtool. It tracks the progress of metros in response to informal settlements & backyard housing, based on annual reviews of municipal documents. See it here: https://bit.ly/3HTmwod & read our latest blogpost here: https://bit.ly/3HCnkxy

The South African National Development Plan (NDP) promotes the creation of spaces that are liveable, equitable, sustainable, resilient and efficient, and that support economic opportunities and social cohesion. Area-based violence prevention interventions (ABVPI) offer both a set of protocols and methodologies (i.e. a codified practice) and an approach to spatial development that takes safety and resilience as the intended outcomes and so aligns with this vision. Taking this process forward, questions are raised about how partnerships can be developed, frameworks adapted and resources allocated in order to enable ABVPI. The brief includes the topics of integrating ABVPI into informal settlement upgrading; funding ABVPI using public funds, specifically conditional grants; and reflections on the importance of partnership in ABVPI.

This Practice Brief draws on the presentations and discussion at the webinar 'Building Safer Neighbourhoods Together', held on 05 August 2021. The webinar, which brought together representatives from national, provincial and local government and civil society organisations, was convened by Isandla Institute as an implementation partner of the Safer Places: Resilient Institutions and Neighbourhoods Together (SPRINT) project.