1

2

THE GENESIS

The city is arguably humankind’s greatest achievement. It enabled natural and human

resources to be concentrated in a defined geographical space, thereby creating

efficiencies in the movement of people, goods, and services and the promise of a better

life.

The city, in any specific context, is shaped by the economic, social, and political conditions

that prevail within that space. South Africa is no exception. However, our cities reflect the

racial divisions that were promoted by the policy of separate development, and which

created inherent inefficiencies and massive socio-economic inequalities based purely on

the colour of a person’s skin. The “grand apartheid” plan, realised in the form of the Group

Areas Act (1950), led to the widespread ethnic cleansing of entire neighbourhoods, with

new, racially classified residential areas separated by “buffer strips” of industry, forestry,

and simple distance. Forced removals were the order of the day, and continued for

decades.

Indigent Africans specifically were subjected to a raft of legislation for three generations

that restricted not only their right of occupation of land but also their movement: The 1911

Native Labour Regulation Act, the 1913 Land Act, the 1923 Natives (Urban Areas) Act, the

1934 Slums Act, the 1951 Prevention of Illegal Squatting Act, the 1952 Urban Areas Act,

the 1952 Blacks (Abolition of Passes and Co-ordination of Documents) Act (otherwise

known as the Pass Law), the 1959 Promotion of Black Self-Government Act, and the 1970

Black Homeland Citizenship Act. Act. They were pushed beyond the periphery of our

cities, out of sight but just far enough that they could provide a pool of cheap labour to

keep the wheels of the apartheid economy well oiled. Those who were “surplus to

requirement” were banished to the “Bantustan” homelands, largely barren cast-offs of land

that did not even have homogenous boundaries.

As the grand apartheid plan cemented, popular resistance was ruthlessly crushed. The

1960 Sharpeville massacre and the 1976 Soweto riots are but two landmarks that remain

imprinted in our global memory of a pariah state that was held together by securocrats in

the police and army. The July 1985 State of Emergency was a watershed moment in an

unsustainable trajectory for the country. While the African National Congress sought to

intensify the armed struggle and economic sanctions from without, the United Democratic

Front (UDF) internally was the first broad opposition platform for decades that had both

mass support and an amorphous ability to frustrate the apartheid regime and render the

townships ungovernable.

The government was rapidly losing its iron grip. It could not keep the lid on popular

resistance. Africans began moving into our towns and cities in search of economic

opportunity, which led to an explosion of informal settlement. On 1 February 1985, the

government announced a moratorium on the relocation of black people living in areas

zoned for whites. In the face of local and international criticism, and the sheer tenacity of

3

communities to resist relocation, sweeping liberalisation of the previous restrictions on the

movement and residence of blacks was promised.

In KwaZulu-Natal there was an added factor to accelerated urbanisation, as the

government sought to use the Inkatha Freedom Party as a surrogate force to undermine

the UDF, and terrorise and kill suspected ANC supporters. Whole communities fled so-

called “black-on-black” violence and sought sanctuary in our urban areas. It was in this

context that the Built Environment Support Group was born.

THE RESISTANCE YEARS: 1983 - 88

The 1980s was a time of hope and expectation, as well as great social stress, as the

apartheid regime began loosening its grip. One of the symptoms of the meltdown was that

people were able to move around more freely. Land invasions became prevalent in the

greater Durban area, where the then-University of Natal’s Durban campus is located. The

broader conflict in KwaZulu-Natal

between the Inkatha Freedom Party

and the African National Congress

affected numerous other urban and

peri-urban areas and caused

massive displacement of individuals,

households, and whole communities.

The provincial capital,

Pietermaritzburg, and surrounding

areas suffered the infamous “7 Day

War” in 1990. Informal settlements

comprising women, children, and

elderly refugees sprung up in

marginal locations across the city. Protest march during the 7 Day War.

People were living in desperate poverty in these turbulent circumstances. They had very

little access to resources to provide for themselves and their dependents. In response to

the human suffering in the many new settlements in and around Durban, the University of

Natal Appropriate Housing Technology Unit (UNATHU) was formed as a volunteer

organisation around 1982. It aimed to assist communities through the provision of

technical support. A site near the squash courts on the Durban Campus was acquired

from the University in order to test appropriate building technology that could be used in

the townships and informal settlements.

Experimental housing was built on the site, testing different materials and new housing

concepts. UNATHU was dissolved in 1992 after vagrants moved into the houses and the

university felt that it could no longer support the project.

4

BESG was established in 1983. It was initially a volunteer organization and, like UNATHU,

the initiative of academics in the Faculty of Architecture and Allied Disciplines at the

University of Natal Durban. Its self-appointed task was to support and defend the rights of

those in poverty living in the urban areas. Its principle aim was to offer advice and support

in matters concerning the built environment to communities who did not have the

resources to obtain such advice themselves. The BESG Charter, adopted on the 12 March

1986, stated:

1. “The Built Environment Support Group will promote and defend the rights of those

living in the townships and other newly-settled areas in and around Durban BESG

also declares itself to be an association of academic staff and students of the

University of Natal

2. “BESG affirms its belief in the value of people and their environment, and declares

its interest in the development of both BESG is concerned with and for the built

environment as it affects individuals and communities who are disadvantaged.

3. “BESG therefore seeks to:

a.) “Offer advice and support in matters concerning the built environment, to individuals

and communities who are unable to recruit the necessary skills and expertise from

their own resources, and who cannot afford to obtain such services on a normal

commercial fee paying basis.

b.) “Promote more general awareness of built environment issues.

4. “BESG will endeavor to work with individuals and organizations and encourage the

development of appropriate resources within the community concerned.

5. “As a condition of its participation, BESG will seek to ensure that potential projects

are based upon genuine need, and that their fulfillment will contribute towards the

general upliftment of the individual or community concerned.

6. “As a further condition of participation, BESG will seek to ensure that the community

organizations with whom it proposes to work have been established through an

acceptable democratic process.”

The beginnings of BESG’s outreach work in communities can be traced back to a

settlement named St. Wendolins near Pinetown, owned by the Mariannhill monastery and

occupied by African residents. The apartheid government planned to rezone this

settlement and declare it an Indian area. This would have resulted in thousands of

residents being evicted from their homes.

A number of academics from the University conducted a study on the effects of the

proposed removals on the community. The fieldwork was carried out by nurses and a

young researcher named Protas Madlala, who later became BESG’s first employee. The

results of this study proved overwhelmingly that the proposed forced removals would

adversely affect the community. It provided the basis for a Supreme Court action on the

community’s behalf, resulting in the government’s plans being overturned.

The University was supportive of BESG’s work within the Faculty of Architecture and Allied

Disciplines, but there were some concerns regarding the political aspects of BESG’s work.

5

Those university departments whose professional views encouraged a more conservative

line in South African politics, such as the Department of Quantity Surveying and Building,

were concerned about the consequences of taking a radical line with regard to human

settlements. According to Prof Rodney Harber this created quite a divisive situation within

the Faculty.

BESG’s work grew and expanded because of its relevance to urban problems being

experienced at that time. It soon needed resources from outside the university. At the

beginning this was difficult, as BESG had no independent track record. However, it soon

proved itself and organisations such as The Rockefeller Foundation, the Ford Foundation,

the Anglo American Chairman’s Fund, and the Kagiso Trust provided BESG with financial

support.

Given the nature of its activities, BESG was subjected to routine scrutiny by the Security

Police, who warned the university about what it considered to be the anti-apartheid

activities of some BESG staff and associates. A police spy was also sent in to the

organisation, but he was soon discovered and kept away from sensitive matters.

BESG also assisted with the preparation of cost estimates relating to houses bombed during the 1985

unrest preceding the State of Emergency. This drew it further into the political limelight.

BESG played an important role in the socio-political dynamics of the period, for example in

Bambhai, where leaders of different parties were using armoured vehicles to access the

township due to the volatile political climate. It facilitated the integration of work teams,

working closely with both ANC and IFP, to build roads and install lighting.

This work was perceived to be

70% social and 30% physical in

terms of its importance. Workers

soon started getting along with

each other, even though they were

members of opposing parties. For

members of BESG it was a

question of promoting transition,

by assisting in the redevelopment

of communities affected by

violence.

House destroyed during violence in Richmond.

There were many personal touches to BESG’s work. One example is the production of a

series of handouts in cartoon style by Rodney Harber titled ‘Bonginkosi Builder’, which

illustrated various aspects and methods of building a low-cost house. Over 350 000 Zulu

copies and 300 English copies were distributed by the Rotary Club.

6

Project work at BESG fell into five main categories:

1. Policy Aid: Aid provided to community organizations in the formulation of policy and

strategies to improve their environment.

2. Community Defence: Assistance provided to communities in their struggle against

actions, which they perceive to be detrimental to their well-being and development.

3. Planning Actions: Technical assistance given to community organizations in the

range of planning issues related to their environment. This included collecting of

planning data such as surveys and interviews as well as physical plans and

proposals.

4. Community Building: Advice and assistance in the preparation of building briefs,

sketch plans and cost estimates for a range of community buildings such as clinics,

schools and halls.

5. Training: The training of

community workers in

built environmental

activities.

The organisation grew in size

as more communities began

calling for assistance. Projects

increased from twenty-eight in

1985 to forty-two in 1986/1987.

It became necessary to employ

full time staff.

Community based settlement planning in progress.

Protas Madlala was the first employee, appointed in August 1986 as Liaison Officer

responsible for liaising with communities, communicating technical advice, and forming

democratic groups in communities. He was subsequently joined by S’bu Ndebele, directly

after his release from Robben Island, Clive Forster was appointed Projects Manager in

January 1987. He determined whether groups calling for assistance fell within the

conditions of the BESG charter, and managed the technical work and related staff and

documentation. Town planning and architectural services were provided by Lulu Gwagwa,

Renėe Rayner, and Georgina Sarkin.

A full-time secretary was appointed in May 1987. An Executive Committee was formed of

Dr Errol Haarhoff (Chair), Ms Jessir Biriss (Treasurer), and Clive Forster. Other office

bearers included Prof. Mike Kahn, Dr. Mike Sutcliffe, and Prof. Dan Smit. Many of these

founding members of BESG are still household names in politics, government, and

development consulting.

During the Marianhill project. BESG provided practical support in the physical and social

upgrading of the area, and moral support to the community leadership when they met with

state officials. This had a ripple effect in other communities in the Southern Pinetown

7

area. From 1987 BESG became involved in a longer-term development project with the St.

Wendolins communities that began in supporting their struggle to secure occupational

rights to land. The leadership in the St. Wendolins area actively assisted in providing

assistance to other communities facing forced removals. BESG extended its technical

support to communities in the broader area, giving advice on alternative planning and

development options.

BESG began focusing on training and education as a means of transferring knowledge

and technical skills to communities in a sustainable way. It would continue providing the

necessary technical advice to communities, while the community itself conducted social

surveys, skills audits, and enumeration studies. BESG was further involved in the

preparation of position papers such as ‘Homelessness in South Africa’.

Toward the end of this period the “Built Environment Action Movement” emerged. Groups

within the movement comprised

young technicians from

disadvantaged backgrounds who

would get together and tender for

government projects. BESG did

not stray away from its built

environment roots and continued

building and advising on the

construction of community centres,

schools, resource centres, clinics,

and halls, amongst other things, as

well as helping communities

affected by political unrest.

In 1987 serious floods devastated Natal. The floods proved how different organisations

could work as an effective collective unit and BESG was well placed to respond, despite its

paucity of resources. During this year BESG also networked with several progressive

development organizations from across South

Africa, with the aim of establishing a national

coordinating body. It was the very early nexus

of what in the mid-1990s was to become the

Urban Sector Network.

During these years tensions such as the UDF-

Inkatha conflict made many communities

suspicious about community projects, and

BESG became more cautious about the

projects it chose to undertake. The difficultly

surrounding community improvement projects

Community celebrating project implementation

8

seemed to be too much for other organisations, and those failures undermined morale and

confidence within the group. The direction that BESG would take in future became of

concern, as it records in the 1987-1988 Annual Report:

“The difficulties involved in engagement suggest two other paths as well. The first is

greater emphasis on policy related thinking and action. As we have suggested, out

development projects are constantly constrained by this policy environment. We need to

spend more time on analyzing this environment, developing alternative policy approaches

and disseminating and acting on this information. The second path is to consider greater

involvement in project implementation. This is obviously a difficult area, not least because

of time and resource constraints.”

GROUNDWORK FOR CHANGE: 1989-93 Ongoing support was provided to communities resisting forced removals in Happy Valley,

St. Wendolins, Swapo, Bottlebrush, and other communities. It came against a backdrop of

continuing ANC-IFP conflict in the townships, particularly around the hostels, and in the

Seven Day War in Pietermaritzburg in 1990. The same year became a major milestone in

the country’s transformation history, with the unbanning of the ANC and the release of

Nelson Mandela.

In 1989, the demand to support communities affected by civil violence in and around

Pietermaritzburg necessitated the establishment of a branch office in the city. The Happy

Valley informal settlement in Woodlands was formed largely by women and children

fleeing ANC-IFP violence in the Maqongqo (Table Mountain) area some 20km away. They

had occupied a marginal sliver of land between a major public road and a railway line, and

were subject to repeated police harassment at the instigation of the local City Council. It

was one of the first in a series of defence actions to secure the right of indigent

communities to live in the city, particularly in the northern areas, which provided ready

opportunities for work-seeking.

Change provides space for innovation. This made it easier for BESG to operate and take

on a new range of work rooted in community participation in development, and extend into

rural communities. It was a time of piloting housing projects. From 1990 BESG provided

technical support to several communities who were able to access “site and service”

projects via the Independent Development Trust. It undertook its first large-scale

infrastructure upgrading project at Piesangs River, Durban North, in 1990: This was

followed by projects in Luganda and Zilweleni, Southern Pinetown, in 1991.

9

These communities were amongst

the first in the country to act as

community-based developers,

pioneering new approaches to

community driven planning and

development, mediated by BESG’s

technical support. In 1992, BESG

launched the Housing Training

Programme, aimed at transferring

skills to community members acting

as housing advisers and domestic

labour contractors.

The rapidly changing political environment meant that past state policy on urban

development was in complete flux. BESG made contributions to the development of

national and local government policy toward the end of this period. At local level,

Pietermaritzburg Co-ordinator Anton Krone participated in the City Council’s Low Income

Settlement Task Team, established to respond to the rapid urban influx of people from

areas affected by chronic poverty and /or civil conflict. It was one of the first initiatives at

local level where there was a genuine attempt to achieve inclusive solutions to the

development challenges facing our cities. Norah Walker, then full-time Director, served on

the National Housing Forum that created the National Housing Subsidy Scheme.

RECONSTRUCTION AND DEVELOPMENT: 1994-99 South Africa held its first free elections in April 1994. The democratisation process provided

rich opportunities for development, growth, and diversification. The incoming ANC

government committed to an ambitious programme to transform the country in its first 5 years of

office – the Reconstruction and Development Programme (RDP). Among many other pledges, it

committed to building 1 million homes. BESG became a significant player in community-based,

low-income housing and infrastructure development in this period.

The National Housing Subsidy Scheme was adopted as the instrument to address a key pillar of the Freedom Charter to provide “housing for all.” It provided a government grant to enable the poorest of the poor to access services such as water and sanitation, and “assistance toward a basic shelter.” The rationale for this policy was to enable the fiscus to be spread to as many households as possible. Many of the communities whom BESG had defended from the police and bulldozers had

developed a deep mistrust of their local municipalities. They knew that BESG had staff

An informal settlement in Piesangs River, Durban

10

with technical as well as organisational development1 skills, and approached BESG to

assist them in accessing housing subsidy and driving their own development. .

In 1994 the Happy Valley informal settlement in Woodlands, Pietermaritzburg, became the

first in situ upgrading project to be undertaken under the new National Housing Subsidy

Scheme, in association with a community based partner, Ntuthukoville Development Trust.

The project was officially opened by National Housing Minister Sankie Mthembi-

Mahanyele in 1995.

Ntuthukoville was also the location

for a pilot project in “mutual help”

housing delivery. Developed for self-

build projects in Costa Rica, it simply

adapts the contractor-built approach

of training households in co-

operative production teams, which

shortens the pre-construction

training. The trick to quality control

is that no-one knows which house

they will be allocated until the last

roof tile is in place. Ntuthukoville mutual help housing – 42m² owner built

In late 1994 and early 1995 BESG secured housing subsidies for three projects in the

northern areas of Pietermaritzburg – Azalea (later to be renamed Tamboville), Q-Section,

and Thembalihle. The Q-Section community lived in a blue gum plantation that was too

steep to develop, and negotiated to “buy in” to land adjacent to the other two communities.

A city councillor then persuaded the communities that housing was too complex for them

to manage, and promised that their development would be fast-tracked if they asked the

City Council for help.

In similar manner as the government turned to the private sector to deliver the majority of

its 1 million RDP houses, the municipality did not have any experience or capacity and

contracted BESG to manage the development, known as Glenwood 2. It was the largest

public housing project ever undertaken by the city, comprising 1500 households in the first

three phases. Our current Executive Director, Cameron Brisbane, spent 9 years

managing the project, continually unblocking bureaucratic obstacles and navigating issues

of contention between the municipality and resident communities.

In 1996 BESG supported the Southern Pinetown Joint Venture (SPJV) Housing Project. It

was one of the first housing projects approved nationally under the Consolidation Subsidy

1 Referred to by some Non-Governmental Organisations as “Institutional Social Development.”

11

mechanism, for households who had previously received serviced sites from the IDT, and

was driven by a consortium of community-based development organisations (CBDOs).

In the years leading up to and in the early part of the new dispensation, BESG had formed

informal alliances with seven other NGOs located in the main urban centres of the country,

that largely shared common interests in human settlements, governance, and sustainable

livelihoods work. They also shared a common funder in the European Union (EU), which

encouraged like-minded NGOs to establish more formal networks or structures that could

be funded collectively. This gave birth to the Urban Sector Network in 1995. The Network

handled R35m of funding in its 9 years of collective existence. Many of the partners

continue to collaborate on national platforms and projects to this day.

Those heady years were fruitful grounds for experimenting with innovative development

models that had emerged from other countries in the South, as well as alternative models

of tenure to “one house, one plot.” This resulted in several innovative projects:

The Pietermaritzburg Northern Areas Housing Support Centre, which was only of only

two such centres in KZN piloted to assist beneficiaries with free plans and construction

advice and materials supply. Established in 1997, it was an organic model developed

with the resident communities of Glenwood 2, most of whose housing subsidy had

been spent on high quality infrastructure, leaving them with insufficient funds for a

formal house. The aim of the Housing Support Centre was not only to help households

stretch their subsidy to at least an extension, or stabilising an informal wattle and daub

structure against storm damage. It had the secondary aim of building and consolidating

design and construction knowledge within communities, so that they could improve or

extend their house over time as household resources permitted.

The Ubunye Co-operative Housing project, which was the first “transitional” housing

project in KZN province. Redeveloped

from a former working men’s hostel in

the Pietermaritzburg CBD, it was

designed to provide affordable,

secure, short-life housing for transient

persons and families.

The Community Based

Maintenance (CBM) programme,

which provided a street cleaning,

grass cutting, refuse collection,

Politicians do their bit to promote CBM

12

roads maintenance, and environmental

education services to 4600 households in

Msunduzi, when the municipality did not have

the resources to extend conventional

maintenance and refuse collection services to

newly developed areas in the city. The project

was case-studied by the then-Department of

Provincial and Local Government as a model

for alternative municipal service delivery, and

won awards from the Impumelelo Innovations

Trust, the Green Trust, and the World Bank

Development Marketplace.

The Shayamoya social (rental) housing project,

comprising 320 walk-up flats in Cato Manor,

was an attempt to move away from the “one

house, one plot” mindset and experiment with

medium density rental housing. It was opened by National Housing Minister Sankie

Mthembi-Mahanyele and Provincial Housing Minister Dumisani Makhaye in 2002.

BESG not only acted as a development resource organisation for communities. It used its

development work to disseminate pro-poor development practice, and undertook research

to advocate changes in enabling policy, where existing policy was found wanting or was

“missing the target.” It is a contentious area of work. Our knowledge, services, and ability

to innovate solutions to development and service delivery challenges are highly rated and

valued. However, when our research and documentation of good practice appears to be

overtly or indirectly critical of government, in the interests of securing basic socio-

economic rights, our work is frequently the subject of hostility.

An example of this was a 2000

national research study entitled

“Toward the Right to Adequate

Housing,” which captured

graphically the consequences

of poorly located, under-sized,

and badly built “RDP” housing.

The government knew about

many of the shortcomings that

had arisen in the rush to build a

million homes, and introduced

national norms and standards

for subsidised “RDP”

A community workshop on the Right to Adequate Housing

13

housing at the same time the study was being undertaken. It regulated a minimum house

size of 30 m² and a maximum quantum of subsidy that could be spent on infrastructure

(services). While most of BESG’s findings resonated with the shift in government policy,

the funding intermediary for the study had commissioned a public relations company to

secure headlines for the work it was financing. One such headline in a weekend

newspaper declared, “Government housing delivery a failure” and prominently featured

BESG’s research. It took two years and the personal intervention of the Director of the

Urban Sector Network to thaw the entire network’s relations with the Director-General of

the Department of Housing as a result of that one article. Two years after that, much of

the vision in the Right to Adequate Housing became official policy in the form of Minister

Lindiwe Sisulu’s “Breaking New Ground.” Such is the nature of advocating on behalf of

those who have no voice.

THE CONSOLIDATION YEARS: 1999 – 2004

BESG continued to consolidate its housing support work in this period. However, a major

paradigm shift was forced on the organisation with the promulgation of the Public Finance

Management Act (PFMA) 1999 and the Municipal Systems Act (MSA) 2000. The latter

gave the mandate for development to local government, the tier of government “closest to

the people.” It put local municipalities into a driving seat for which they were poorly

equipped. As the former Minister of the RDP, Jay Naidoo, reflected after the event,

government administration was not designed to innovate but to regulate. While BESG

continued work on the Glenwood 2, Southern Pinetown consolidation, Shayamoya, and

other housing projects, the tide was turning as far as entry into new projects was

concerned.

The communities of Woodstock and Peter Hey informal settlements in Pietermaritzburg

had been relocated en masse to

Glenwood 2 in terms of a High Court

eviction order sought by the

Ratepayers’ Association in the

upmarket Indian suburb of Mountain

Rise in 1997. The communities were

moved onto pegged sites in the areas

known as North East Sector 2, which

became Phase 4 of Glenwood 2. The

Development Committee found their

way to BESG via the neighbouring

communities, whose leadership had

participated in monthly project

Application based development prior to the PFMA.

14

management meetings at the municipality’s offices since shortly after the development

commenced.

In the same year, the Pietermaritzburg office of BESG was approached by the Peace

Valley 2 informal settlement in Plessislaer, to assist them is securing housing subsidy for

an in situ upgrading of the area. Both communities selected to work with BESG to help

them develop their areas under a

national policy known as the People’s

Housing Process (PHP).

Contrary to official policy, which reduced

the concept to a materials supply

process for households undertaking

self-build housing, BESG and other

affiliates of the Urban Sector Network

had used PHP as a tool for community

development and empowerment. The

PFMA and MSA unintentionally but

effectively closed down that space. No waiting for the government for residents of

Peace Valley 2

The North East Sector 2 (NES2) Development Committee, which had facilitated the

peaceful mass relocation to Glenwood 2 on the promise of development in 1997, was

forced onto its back feet. The ANC caucus on the Pietermaritzburg-Msunduzi Transitional

Local Council was concerned about the amount of co-financing that had been put into the

previous phases of Glenwood 2, at the expense of what it saw as higher development

priorities in the Edendale Valley. It had already caused phase 3 of Glenwood 2 – the

Thembalihle upgrade – to be delayed by nearly two years over a fight for resources for

bulk services.

In 2001, Council commissioned a study into whether it would be cheaper to relocate the

NES2 community and avoid having to co-finance an upgrade of the area. BESG was

commissioned to undertake the study, the findings of which were that Glenwood 2 as a

whole was inherently expensive in terms of the national norms and standards for housing

subsidy, but that the community was strongly resistant to be relocated a second time.

The Peace Valley 2 (PV2) community was initially told that the area they occupied could

not be developed for housing as it was an industrial area. In 2000, the provincial

administration, which owned the bulk of land underlying the settlement, stated in writing

that it had no objection to the land being rezoned “special residential.”

Both communities – NES2 and PV2 – were ready for development. Both projects had been

prioritized in the municipality’s Integrated Development Plan (IDP). The communities had

opted to work with BESG utilising the People’s Housing Process, in order to extract value

15

from their housing subsidy. However, by the time they were ready for development, the

MSA and PFMA had come into effect. Both projects were put out to open tender by the

municipality.

Against competition from the private sector, BESG won both proposal calls in 2001 and

2002 respectively. Bureaucratic obstructions were encountered immediately. A company

competing for the NES2 contract attempted to block BESG’s appointment, citing that its

non-profit status meant that it did not qualify to tender under Black Economic

Empowerment regulations, as it had no shareholders. NES2 was then starved of funding

for bulk and connector services, as a result of which it took two years for BESG’s

appointment as Implementing Agent to be confirmed.

The PV2 project was subject to continual changes in town planning design. The

community had been settled over a period of over 15 years. Many households had

relatively large plots and a significant minority had formal structures that cost more than

the value of a government subsidy. In spite of this, the municipality tried to force its own

norms and standards for low income housing that were designed for “greenfield” projects

on vacant land. By 2004, BESG had resolved the myriad bureaucratic challenges and

secured conditional approval for both projects.

However, the lesson learnt form these prevarications was that the new public procurement

regime was antipathetic, if not hostile, to community-driven development. While the new

procurement regime provided for several contracting strategies, the KwaZulu-Natal

Department of Housing was fixated on one called “turnkey contracting.” In simple terms it

means, “We’ll give you development rights and you call us when you are ready to

handover the keys.”

This relieved local municipalities of any real responsibility for development – the precise

intention of the MSA -- and transferred it to “Implementing Agents.” In theory it meant that

government could turn over projects faster using the production efficiencies of service

providers who are profit-driven, and who

have capital reserves to carry both

operational costs and manage

development risk.

In this paradigm, communities were no

longer seen as partners in development

but rather a “social risk” that had to be

mitigated – along with land-legal

challenges, access to bulk services,

geotechnical and other variables. BESG

was no longer a support organisation to

communities but rather a

Public procurement model – the state calls the

shots and the community is marginalised.

16

THE EARLY YEARS

Community leaders debatedevelopment options Women in construction circa 1995

RDP Minister Jay Naidoo visits Ntuthukoville. Labour based construction Piesangs River

Out with the old, in with the new Getting down to the basics

17

THE LATER YEARS

Housing training for government officials, 2006 SELAVIP house North East Sector 2, 2008

Deepening Democracy Project, 2011 Tackling climate change, 2012

18

service provider to a local municipality whose agenda was frequently at odds with indigent

communities and who, at least in the Msunduzi context, did more to frustrate that facilitate

development in the city.

At the same time, staff from the Durban office were engaged in township housing work in

Fredville, near Cato Ridge, and contracting to eThekwini (Greater Durban) Municipality to

undertake Area Based Planning, which was a tool to integrate development planning

based on a hierarchy of development needs across spatial boundaries. In Msunduzi,

BESG was contracted by the municipality to undertake a community-based mapping

exercise of land ownership and tenancy across three wards of Edendale township that had

been in private ownership prior to the 1913 Natives Land Act, as a precursor to the

Greater Edendale Land Reform Programme. Also in 2004, BESG was sub-contracted by

the Durban University of Technology to run a course in housing development and

management for provincial and local government officials over a three year period.

In the tradition of reflective learning, BESG refocused its housing work that relieving

shelter poverty in isolation of other forms of deprivation was not the answer to creating

sustainable human settlements. As the research project “Toward the Right to Adequate

Housing” had shown, housing had the potential to further entrench poverty: RDP

townships on the periphery of cities left people without access to jobs, health, and

educational facilities – to which they then had to pay to travel. Households became liable

for rates, service charges, and maintenance, which they could ill afford.

HIV and AIDS were reaching epidemic proportions and the combination of health

vulnerability, poverty, and the effects of inadequate housing were exacerbating community

and household health problems. Moreover, KwaZulu-Natal, which had the highest

incidence of HIV and AIDS in the country, saw an explosion in child headed households.

BESG’s response was to adopt a sustainable livelihoods framework as a strategic tool in

development planning and implementation, and developing community resilience to both

day-to-day challenges and shocks, such as the loss of a breadwinner. This resulted in

several new strands of work:

1. BESG assisted in the

formation of food

gardening groups on land

that could not be utilised

for housing; housing

stokvels (savings clubs) to

enable people to extend

their starter homes

incrementally; and other

19

poverty alleviation initiatives.

2. BESG responded to the incidence of child-headed households, and subsequently other

vulnerable children, by pioneering work in “special needs” housing – supported housing

for vulnerable groups who do not qualify under the standard rules of the national

housing subsidy programmes, but who nonetheless qualify for shelter assistance under

Sections 26 and 28(1) of the Constitution. The initiative was built of the back of the

KZN Department of Housing’s 2000 “Policy for housing and AIDS.”

Imperfect as the enabling policy was, in 2004 BESG launched the first special needs

housing project, securing housing subsidies for the redevelopment of the Mildred Ward

Centre in Woodlands, when Pietermaritzburg Children’s Homes consolidated its three

residential operations on one site. It was also a leading member of the Msunduzi AIDS

Partnership from 2001 until its demise in 2005, and wrote up the partnership as a model

for collaboration between government and civil society in addressing one of the biggest

challenges threatening the health and social fabric of the city and indeed the province.

While BESG continued to enjoy an excellent professional reputation over this period, there

were signs of tension within the organisation. In 2000 BESG had employed its first

Executive Director from outside the existing staff establishment, from a consulting

background. It was an unhappy marriage, built on an agenda that tried to blend internal

transformation with corporatisation. In the process an expectation of great changes had

been raised and dashed, as the staff without exception lost confidence in the

organisation’s leadership.

Organisational change was undoubtedly necessary. There had appeared to be a glass

ceiling where Africans, with some notable exceptions, were restricted to positions of

administration and community work, while technical and management posts were largely

held by whites and Indians. That simply reflected the history of race and educational

opportunity that prevailed in the country. The challenge was to redress the inequalities of

the past while still being able to deliver on commitments to funders and communities.

Two task teams were established to manage BESG through this turbulent time: A

Management Team, which saw a return to the type of collective decision making that

marked BESG’s nascent years, and a Transformation Team. In 2002 a new Executive

Director took up post who fuelled huge expectations and spectacularly failed to deliver.

After he engineered a proposal to retrench all staff and make everyone apply for new jobs,

staff revolted and compiled a dossier of allegations that was submitted to the Board of

Directors. The Executive Director disappeared without trace after losing a constructive

dismissal claim at the CCMA.

In the interim the organisation had become overstaffed. The staff complement had grown

as a consequence of the rapid growth of its work in low-income housing projects, but its

exposure to projects that were becoming bogged down in bureaucracy and incapacity at

20

local government level was starting to bleed the organization. From 2002 to 2004 BESG

suffered the loss of substantial capacity and intellectual memory within the organization

through natural attrition. By late 2004 half of the remaining operational staff in Durban was

being deployed to help manage projects in Pietermaritzburg, commuting daily in company

time and vehicles. It was an unsustainable situation.

CRISIS AND TURN-AROUND: 2005-2009

By May 2005, BESG faced a combination of a liquidity and institutional crisis. Planned

income was not forthcoming, and the Board was forced to enter into consultations with

staff around retrenchments. That resulted in the closure of the Durban office five months

later, followed by a labour dispute that nearly resulted in the complete closure of the

organisation. Thanks to the generosity of a key donor, BESG was able to consolidate its

remaining staff and operations in Pietermaritzburg, and begin a process of healing and

rebuilding. With fewer resources than it had enjoyed in past years, a small staff

determinedly worked to redevelop the organisation and increase its visibility both in local

communities and in the broader stakeholder environment.

BESG’s work around vulnerability, HIV/AIDS, and human settlements received its first

dedicated funding in 2006, through its long-standing participation in the Children in

Distress (CINDI) Network. The Child Advocacy Project was a joint project between CINDI,

BESG, Lawyers for Human Rights, and the Pietermaritzburg Child and Family Welfare

Association. The Child Advocacy Project encompassed a combination of interventions

that was best realised in partnerships rather than trying to be a jack-of-all-trades. It led to

several new strands of work:

1. Underpinned by a research study of unregistered

child-care facilities2 and in conjunction with

partners from the social development sector,

BESG developed a set of models to provide

alternatives to institutional care for orphaned and

vulnerable children. The first demonstration

project, of transitional housing for children

awaiting placement in foster care, was

developed for Pietermaritzburg Child Welfare in

2006.

2. It developed a programme of tenure security

training, focusing on the importance of having a

will, in association with Lawyers for Human

Rights. It had become official government policy

2 “No Place Like Home” (BESG 2007)

21

that beneficiaries of housing subsidy projects should take out a will when they

applied for their subsidy. However, there was no incentive for Implementing Agents

to do the work, no compliance monitoring, and much traditional resistance to the

idea, as a result of which women and children were too frequently left without

protection when a household head died.

3. In recognition of the poverty that continued to afflict communities, BESG developed

a livelihood security programme to help

enhance the resourcefulness and resilience of

vulnerable households to address everyday

needs and challenges and also withstand

shocks such as storm damage or the loss of a

breadwinner. It used a holistic approach to

strengthening the resilience of vulnerable

households through training and support in

food gardening, nutrition training, water

management, erosion control, access to free

basic services, and health and safety in the

home. For the poorest of the poor, it was what

Housing Minister Lindiwe Sisulu embraced in

the 1994 Breaking New Ground strategy – to

move away from RDP housing delivery and

toward building “sustainable human

settlements.”

The Livelihood and Tenure Security

Programme was significant not only for its content, but also its methodology. It marked a

break away from “training workshops” that were intended purely to disseminate information

on the workings of local government, the various housing policies and programmes, and

so forth. It was replaced by a concept of “participatory learning,” which combined training

with development facilitation practice that had been the driving force for innovation in our

housing. While BESG provided the context and initial content, participants were

encouraged to be players as well as learners.

This contributed to a process of continually enriching our training material, based on

participants’ life experiences. When you have access to few resources, you either give up

in despair or wait for government handouts, or you learn how to make optimal use of what

is available to you. It was the beginning of what became a cornerstone of both our

housing and governance work over the next 5 years – building the notion of self-reliance

and active citizenship.

BESG’s involvement in the Child Advocacy Project led to new collaborations in its own

housing work. In July 2006, one Howard Mkhize walked into BESG’s office with a

summons to appear in court on behalf of 1000 families who had been living on private land

22

in Mkondeni, an industrial estate on the edge of Pietermaritzburg. The landowners had

been served with an environmental health notice and responded by making an application

for the eviction of the entire community. An eviction order was granted, without the

community having alternative land on which to settle. BESG’s new-found partnership with

Lawyers for Human Rights led to the latter arranging pro bono legal representation to take

the matter to the Supreme Court of Appeal in Bloemfontein in 2009. The Supreme Court

overturned the eviction order and joined Msunduzi Municipality to the action, which was

referred back to the Pietermaritzburg High Court. .

There was an unintended side-effect of this legal process. The original trial judge, in

addition to granting an eviction order, had directed that no building or building repairs

could be carried out in the settlement. In conjunction with the community leadership,

BESG had secured funding from SELAVIP, a South-South solidarity organisation based in

Chile, to repair 40 of the most dilapidated shacks where the occupants were too old or

infirm to address their own housing

needs. The project could not go ahead

without BESG and Mkondeni Sacca

being held in contempt of court.

An appeal was made to SELAVIP to

allow the funds to be transferred for the

same purpose to the North East Sector

2 housing project. It provided a much-

needed boost to that community, which

was being destabilized by the

continuous delays on the part of

Msunduzi Municipality in securing

environmental authorization to proceed

with development.

Volunteers from FNB Insurance Brokers at the

SELAVIP “Build-a-thon”

This period saw BESG achieve an important balance in its core programmes of:

Building sustainable human settlements, and;

Promoting good governance.

The programmes are inter-linked by the premise that service delivery to the poor can best

be realised by the demonstration of innovative solutions to development needs – both

human and physical – and government embracing the challenges of development in a

transparent and participatory manner.

In response to the wave of service delivery protests that directly followed the 2006 local

government elections, BESG re-branded its governance programme the “Deepening

Democracy Project.” What started as a small training programme, to enable communities

to understand the workings of developmental local Government, evolved over the next

23

three years into a dominant programme with multiple donor funding aimed at local

government transformation.

Strengthening of local government is based

on the premise that it is the closest sphere of

government to the people, and is therefore

most readily able to identify, prioritise and

implement programmes and projects to

address local development needs. The

project was given added impetus in 2008 by

the deliberations of a group of eminent

persons across South African Society, who

produced the Dinokeng Scenarios3, and in

2009 in the adoption of the government’s

National Turn-around Strategy for Local

Government.

BESG maintained a low profile in advocacy-

based research, partly undertaken in-house

and partly outsourced. Two important

studies were undertaken in 2006 and 2007

respectively:

Community theatre was one method of building

capacity to engage with local government.

Blockages to PHP projects in KwaZulu-Natal, commissioned by the People’s Housing

Partnership Trust, an arm of the National Department of Housing.

The right of access to free basic services in Msunduzi Municipality, in a study titled

“Seen but not heard.”

BESG also returned to the national policy arena in this period. In 2007, it joined the

Transitional and Special Needs Housing Forum, a broad cross-sectoral grouping of

government and NGOs involved in providing or supporting non-standard housing

interventions for vulnerable groups. The Forum was hosted by the Social Housing

Foundation (SHF), another arm of the National Department. Sadly and without sound

reason, the special needs agenda was dropped when in 2009 the SHF was wound up and

re-established as the Social Housing Regulatory Authority.

The second area for national collaboration was in the rewriting of the national PHP policy.

A group comprising former USN partners, the Utshani Fund, and several other

development practitioners, were aggrieved that PHP had been corrupted by private

3 www.dinokeng.org.za

24

companies into a labour- and materials- supply process, without any consideration to

community empowerment and sustainability. Over 2007, the group drafted an alternative

vision and policy framework, titled “Community Driven Housing Initiatives.”

It initially received a frosty response from the Minister’s Special Adviser, who had a single

agenda of ”numbers, numbers, numbers” (of housing units). There was a perception that

PHP was too slow – in spite of a wealth of research that demonstrated the inextricable

linkage between community empowerment and the elusive target of “building sustainable

human settlements.”

The draft policy was adopted in its entirety by MinMEC4 in August 2008, with only a

change of title – Ministers wanted to retain the notion of a housing programme “for the

people”, and re-branded the new policy the “Enhanced People’s Housing Process

(EPHP).” Following its adoption, several members of the group, including the current

Executive Director of BESG, were co-opted by the National Department onto the EPHP

National Reference Group, to

help in guiding the roll-out of the

policy. Ironically a change in

Minister, a re-branding of the

Department from “Housing” to

“Human Settlements,” and a

reduction in departmental budget,

caused the slow death of civil

society participation in the

Reference Group over the

ensuing years, and a failure of

many provinces, including KZN,

to implement the policy. Communities doing it for themselves: Ntuthukoville in 1995.

In January 2008, in preparation for its long-awaited housing projects being unblocked,

BESG established a separate trading company, BESG Development Services. The

primary objective was to contain development risk and ring-fence our donor funding from

any hostile raiding, although in 2010 it was promoted expressly to generate income from

consulting work in order to replace the anticipated exodus of donor funding.

By 2009, BESG had emerged from the ashes of its near-collapse 4 years earlier on a

steady, planned growth trajectory and a new cutting edge to its core programmes.

4 The Committee of provincial Housing MEC’s chaired by the National Minister.

25

A NEW MATURITY: 2010 AND BEYOND

While many NGOs were beginning to feel the effects of the global recession and flight of

donor funding from South Africa, BESG managed to weather to storm at least for the next

four years. This pays testament to the value and relevance of its work in post-apartheid

transformation in an ever-changing political and social landscape. Internally, the

organisation had reached a new maturity. The days when the boundaries between the

Board of Directors and staff were blurred, and decisions were made on grounds that were

not always in the best interests of the organisation, was well and truly a thing of the past.

The Board was professionalised and active in its oversight role.

The Deepening Democracy Project moved into high gear, with the launch of a Strategic

Partnership with uMgungundlovu District Municipality (UMDM) in 2010. The launch was

held at a Civic Reception in

the presence of French

Ambassador to South Africa,

Jacques Lapouge, amid much

hype over the pending contest

between the two countries at

the FIFA Football World Cup.

The partnership saw the

UMDM ramp up public

participation in its affairs, and

create space for local

government officials to be

exposed to best international

practice in participatory

development and budgeting.

The French Ambassador with UMDM and BESG leadership

at the launch of the Deepening Democracy Partnership

The partnership is aimed at building civil society capacity and active citizen participation in

developmental decision-making processes, and promoting civil society engagement with

local government. Regrettably a lack of political will and administrative capacity, as well as

poor development planning and resource alignment, continue to be impediments to

effective engagement.

The Project renewed emphasis on citizen empowerment as a means of realising

sustainable development. Paradoxically, as a nation, we face a self-defeating

development paradigm fuelled by alternating cycles of national and provincial, and then

local, government elections, characterised by vague promises such as “a better life for all,”

while the incidence of service delivery protests continues at an exponential rate.

While the UMDM partnership was in full bloom, Msunduzi Municipality, which had for years

acted as the “second seat of power” in the District, went under provincial administration in

26

March 2010 in the face of near bankruptcy. For the next two years, Msunduzi was ruled

with a rod of iron, causing huge public disaffection and producing little in the way of a turn-

around. In spite of this hostile environment, BESG pulled off a landmark gathering in

January 2011 in the form of the Msunduzi Stakeholder Forum. Undertakings were made

to work more closely with civil society, and indeed to embrace civil society as an asset in

the rebuilding of the city’s socio-political fabric.

The initiative created by the Forum was short-lived. Local government elections were

approaching. There was a consolidation of power within the region executive of the

governing party, and a huge backlash from ANC members and alliance partner COSATU

to what was widely perceived as an attempt to reinstate the very politicians who were held

responsible for the city’s collapse.

Another casualty of the 2011 local government elections was the Mkondeni Sacca

community. In the previous year, BESG had secured further SELAVIP grant to return to

the area with a programme of emergency housing relief. It did not give much respite to the

community, which still faced the threat of eviction. In February 2011, a high-powered ANC

delegation visited the area to assess whether it would merit having its own voting station.

The visit resulted in Finance MEC Ina Cronje, wearing her hat as “political champion of the

district,” driving a rapid intervention to provide emergency services and a long-term

resettlement plan for the community. The intervention was stillborn. The community

continues to this day to share one standpipe between 1056 households and has no

sanitation or refuse collection service.

In the meantime, in a classic case of one hand not knowing what the other is doing, the

municipality’s legal counsel had undertaken to the High Court to relocate the families to a

notoriously poorly located RDP township called France, commencing in July 2011 and due

for completion in January 2012. The relocation never happened. The new Municipal

Manger, who took up post after the provincial intervention was withdrawn in January 2012,

reverted to court with a plan to expropriate the land underlying the community. As the

record of BESG’s journey nears closure, it would appear in this instance that the

community’s distressing tale will have a happy ending.

Not so for the communities of North East Sector 2 and Peace Valley 2, who have been

waiting over 15 years for development. The development of NES2 was finally granted

environmental authorisation in March 2012. However, in May 2011, a major corruption

scandal broke out over the awarding by KZN Human Settlements of a R2.1bn rural

housing contract in Vulindlela, outside Pietermaritzburg, to a politically well-connected

developer without a tender process having been followed. BESG, who had been

undertaking Housing Consumer Education in the area, was one of a series of

complainants to the Office of the Public Protector. Officials in the Department of Human

Settlements, both nationally and provincially, closed ranks in the wake of the scandal.

BESG Development Services, which had taken transfer of the housing development

portfolio, was being tacitly frustrated in its attempt to bring NES2 into implementation, in

27

November 2011, a friendly official intimated that province wanted to pay off BESG for the

work it had done on both projects and appoint an alternative service provider. There was

a not-so hidden agenda to drive BESG out of development work in the province in

retribution for its opposition to the Vulindlela contract. There were several casualties in

province as a consequence of the contract award and investigation by the Public

Protector, and in August 2012, an appeal to the incoming MEC for Human Settlements led

to the trading entity’s reinstatement as Implementing Agent on both the NES2 and PV2

projects.

In the interim, BESG Development Services had won its first substantial contract in 2011

with the Department of Economic Development and Tourism. It developed and rolled out a

business development programme for 17 co-operatives involved in school feeding

schemes in Ladysmith/Newcastle/Dundee and surrounding areas. The contract ensured

the trading entity was a going concern, and a vital source of income generation for the

parent company. BESG continues to undertake minor consulting contracts, and in 2012

won a tender to run a Water Consumer Education programme in non-payment “hotspots”

across uMgungundlovu District.

BESG’s community housing support work continues to be financed almost exclusively

through Misereor, the German arm of the Catholic Church. Mindful of the increasing

service delivery backlogs, and the frustration that boiled over into routine protests, BESG

aimed to not only provide direct support to communities. It also aimed to impart

knowledge and basic development skills to other NGOs who encountered housing issues

in the course of their work, and to members of two dominant social movements in the form

of the Federation of the Urban and Rural Poor (Fed-UP) and shackdwellers’ movement

Abahlali baseMjondolo. The housing support programme now has several distinct

components:

1. Livelihood and Tenure Security Training, originally developed under the 2006 Child

Advocacy Project but considerably enhanced through participatory learning

processes.

2. Housing Consumer Education, for beneficiaries involved at any stage of a land

access, infrastructure, and/or housing project.

3. Housing Literacy Training for community and NGO activists.

4. Housing support interventions, for communities seeking access to participate in the

housing delivery process or seeking redress when they suffer administrative

injustice in the course of housing delivery.

This new focus has been driven

largely by the number of community

based organisations (CBOs) who wish

to engage in solutions to their

development needs, but are faced with

an indifferent bureaucracy at both the

local and provincial level, often lacking

28

in both skills and enthusiasm. The one area of disappointment has been low take-up by

the social movements – one of whom is in a delivery partnership with the National

AIDS benchmarking project for the CMRA

Department that is only concerned with counting completed housing units, and the other is

in constant conflict with the state.

BESG continued with its tradition of policy and research advocacy work. In 2010 the

organisation was commissioned by the Centre for Municipal Research and Advice (CMRA)

to undertake a benchmarking exercise to inform an AIDS intervention strategy for several

local municipalities. In 2011 the National Department of Human Settlements

commissioned the production of a paper entitled “From beneficiaries to citizens:

Meaningful communication with and participation of the poor in human settlement

development”.

Aligned to BESG’s vision of livelihood

security was the devastating impact of

climate change on vulnerable communities.

In 2010 it secured funding from the National

Lottery Distribution Trust Fund (NLDTF) to

support a climate change adaptation project

in rural communities across four midlands

municipalities -- Msunduzi, Richmond,

Impendle and Mpofana – most affected by

severe weather patterns (both drought and

flooding). The project, titled ‘Greener

Pastures,’ focuses on developing knowledge, skills and resilience to combat the storm

damage, and promote water, food, and energy security. It uses a wide range of street

theatre, participatory learning, and demonstration projects in food gardening and township

and schools tree planting programmes.

On United Nations World Habitat Day, 1 October

2012, BESG hosted a landmark event in the

Msunduzi Housing Summit. It was the first time in

the city’s post-apartheid history that a broad cross-

section of government and civil society stakeholders

had come together to share knowledge and learn

how to engage with the various infrastructure and

housing instruments available to resource the city’s

development needs.

As an extension of the Deepening Democracy

Project, BESG launched a pilot project in

Community Based Planning, titled “Leliyilungelo

Elakho” (This is your Right) in June 2013. The

29

project is jointly funded by the Foundation for Human Rights and Hivos, and aims to

promote

Msunduzi housing summit

constitutional rights for vulnerable and marginalised groups relating to access to housing,

water, food security, and basic service delivery.

BESG’s commitment to national networking, as a means of knowledge sharing and

platform building, continued to grow in this period. It joined the LandFirst Network,

designed to promote NGO collaboration in breaking the shackles of insufficient supply of

land and slow land release for development.

In light of its extensive experience in urban management and settlement work, BESG

participated in:

The Right to the City Dialogue series co-hosted by the Isandla Institute and the

Community Organisations Resource Centre (CORC), and;

The Informal Settlements Upgrading technical workshops on the role of

intermediary organisation in informal settlement upgrading projects co-hosted by

National Upgrading Support Programme (NUSP) of the National Department and

the Isandla Institute.

Undoubtedly the most active and sustained national network to which BESG is affiliated is

the Good Governance Learning Network (GGLN). It contributes regularly to the Network’s

annual publication the State of Local Government, and its online periodical, GGLN News.

WHEREIN LIES THE FUTURE?

As we close these chapters in BESG’s history, it is critical to continue looking forward with

the vision, fearlessness, and tenacity that have seen the organisation survive and remain

relevant through 30 years of the country’s history. The most immediate challenge is to ride

the wave of the global funding crisis that began afflicting the NGO sector in 2010, and will

undoubtedly be felt deeply in BESG from 2014, as two of its three major funders are

expected to redirect their energies elsewhere.

The ability to generate its own income through BESG Development Services was a well-

timed move. However, its niche work in community-driven development continues to be

frustrated by a procurement regime that is at best antipathetic and at worst hostile to

genuine partnership. The deepening schism between government and civil society is an

equally significant challenge to BESG’s future position in the development landscape.

It is too uncertain a time to speculate on the shape of these challenges post-the 2014

national and provincial elections. BESG has, however, managed to assimilate and adapt

to multiple challenges locally, provincially, and nationally, and continues to offer specialist

30

urban services which are scarce and much sought after. In its 30 years of existence BESG

has moved from being an academically driven organisation to being a practical

implementer with a sound research base. Its activities have contributed to the reshaping of

the urban policy landscape in South Africa, as well as to the practical arena of housing

delivery and various facets of community development. It is now a stable, dynamic, and

well-structured NGO that makes a significant contribution in the fields of housing,

empowerment, development, and the resolution of national urban problems.

In future BESG will continue to build on its unique heritage. In celebrating our 30th

anniversary, our Board of Directors and staff resolved to renew the organisation’s vision

and mission – the values that form its very essence:

Written by Khalil Goga and Cameron Brisbane, with contributions from Brian Bassett and

Ignatius Matanyaire. Edited by Cameron Brisbane. BESG operates a “Copy-left” policy.

Material from this and other BESG publications may be used strictly for non-profit

purposes and subject to BESG being credited as the source. BESG 2013.

HOW TO CONTACT US:

31

Built Environment Support Group (BESG)

371 Jabu Ndlovu Street

Pietermaritzburg 3201/

P.O. Box 1369

Pietermaritzburg 3200

Tel. +27- 33- 394 4980

Fax +27- 33- 394 4979

info@besg.co.za

www.besg.co.za

BESG is grateful to CPW Printers for its generous contribution

toward the production of this anniversary publication.

32