I D P G u i d e - P a c k

g e n e r a l o v e r v i e w

IDPIntegrated Development Planning

idp guide pack

Publisher

Department of Provincial and Local

Government (DPLG)

Mr E Africa, Ms Esme Magwaza,

Mr Yusuf Patel

Supported by

GTZ (German Agency for Technical

Cooperation)

Coordinator

Mr Yusuf Patel (DPLG)

Team of Authors

The revised IDP Manual was designed by

the Decentralised Development Planning

(DDP) Task Team on basis of the IDP

Assessment process (1998/99), and a

series of IDP-related policy research

papers (1999/2000).

Maria Coetzee (CSIR)

Marc Feldman (Development Work)

Katharina Huebner (GTZ)

Musa Majozi (DPLG/GTZ)

Yusuf Patel (DPLG)

Dr Theo Rauch (GTZ)

Editing and Layout

Simeka TWS Creative

Vira Denton

Printing

Govenment Printers – Brian Brown

IDPIntegrated Development Planning

Better ServiceDelivery

Local EconomicDevelopment

SpatialIntegration

PartnershipApproach

Monitoring andEvaluation

Capacity Building

ImplementationManagement

PovertyReduction

SustainableMunicipal

Development

SoundEnvironment

IDP

INTEGRATED DEVELOPMENT PLANNING SYSTEM

FOREWORD

Local government is a key role-player in the development process of South Africa. The transformation process

to establish non-racial and viable municipalities is a crucial strategic move towards enabling local government to

fulfil its developmental role.

Major steps of this transformation process were:

• providing a clear and motivating policy framework through the White Paper on Local Government;

• the re-demarcation process which resulted in more viable municipalities; and

• providing a new legal framework for local government by launching the Municipal Structures Act and the

Municipal Systems Act.

With the local government elections held on 5 December 2000 the transitional phase has come to an end and

the local government system can now start operating on a solid basis.

Integrated development planning is one of the key tools for local government to cope with its new

developmental role. In contrast to the role planning has played in the past, integrated development planning is

now seen as a function of municipal management, as part of an integrated system of planning and delivery.

The IDP process is meant to arrive at decisions on issues such as municipal budgets, land management,

promotion of local economic development and institutional transformation in a consultative, systematic and

strategic manner. Integrated Development Plans, however, will not only inform the municipal management; they

are also supposed to guide the activities of any agency from the other spheres of government, corporate

service providers, NGOs and the private sector within the municipal area.

During the past period of office most of the transitional local authorities were already involved in preparing IDPs

(many of them went just as far as preparing LDOs). This was done under difficult circumstances. A conclusive

legal framework was not yet in place. Many local authorities (in particular the Transitional Representative

Councils) had no capacities to manage such a planning process. There was no tested planning methodology and

no comprehensive and systematic training programme. Nevertheless all who have been involved in the

previous IDP process have gone through a highly valuable learning process. And quite a few of the local

authorities have already made significant progress towards establishing a planning practice which helps to

improve implementation of projects and programmes.

Now, just in time for the newly elected councils, a fully fledged support system is in place for the forthcoming

IDP process:

• This new IDP Guide Pack, which has been developed by a special task team in DPLG with support from GTZ,

provides a tested planning and implementation management approach in a user-friendly manner. It includes

the lessons learnt from the previous IDP process.

• There is a nation-wide training programme for municipal managers, technical officers, councillors and

planning professionals which caters for participants from all municipalities.

• A nation-wide support system for local municipalities (PIMSS) is being established with district-level support

centres as a core element.

A large number of municipalities, SALGA, provincial departments of local government and a range of national

sector departments have been involved in the process which has resulted in this new IDP Guide Pack. I am

therefore confident that, as a result, these publications will be a useful guide and source of inspiration for all of

you who are involved in the IDP process in your endeavours to make IDP a tool to address the social and

economic needs of our communities more effectively.

FHOLISANI SYDNEY MUFAMADI

1

Volumes in this series include:

General Overview

Guide I: Guidelines

Guide II: Preparation

Guide III: Methodology

Guide IV: Toolbox

Guide V:Cross-Sectoral Issues

Guide VI:Implementation Management

Provides an introduction into IDP and a short summary of the IDP Guide Pack.

Provides basic guidance on purpose, contents, processes and institutional aspects of

Integrated Development Planning. The guidelines, besides providing an interpretation of

the Municipal Systems Act 2000, go beyond the minimum requirements as outlined

in the Act.

Provides assistance on how to plan the planning process. It puts strong emphasis on

clarification of roles and responsibilities, on organisational arrangements and on

alignment of planning processes on various levels.

Provides a detailed description of the phases of the IDP process and of the planning

activities in each phase with information on:

✰ the purpose (“Why?”);

✰ the required outputs (“What?”); and

✰ the recommended processes (“How?”) and institutional aspects (“Who?”).

Provides a variety of options for planning tools/techniques for crucial planning activities

with hints on the applicability of the tools.

Provides guidance on how to relate other (non-IDP- specific) general policy guidelines or

sector policies to the IDP process.

Provides guidance on:

✰ Planning implementation link.

✰ Institutional preparedness for implementing IDP.

✰ Implementation management tools.

✰ Monitoring and performance management tools.

✰ Reviewing IDPs.

2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 The new IDP guide-pack 31.2 General overview 3

2. BASICS OF IDPS

2.1 What is Integrated Development Planning? 4i. What is Integrated Development Planning? 4ii. What is the legal status of IDPs? 4iii. What is the life span of an IDP? 4iv. How long does it take to complete the process? 4v. What are the core components of an IDP? 4vi. Who is responsible for managing the process? 5

2.2 Why is it necessary to do IDPs? 52.3 Who should participate and why? 72.4 What are the roles and responsibilities of different

spheres of government? 8

3. AN OVERVIEW OF THE GUIDES

3.1 Introduction 103.2 A short description of each guide 10

i. Guide I: General IDP guidelines 10ii. Guide II: Preparing for the IDP 11iii. Guide III: IDP methodology 11iv. Guide IV: IDP toolbox 12v. Guide V: Sectoral and cross-cutting policy guidelines 12vi. Guide VI: IDP Implementation and Monitoring 12

4. OVERVIEW OF THE PLANNING PROCESS

4.1 Introduction 144.2 Preparation for the process 144.3 The methodology 14

i. Phase 1: Analysis 15ii. Phase 2: Strategies 15iii. Phase 3: Projects 16iv. Phase 4: Integration 16v. Phase 5: Appproval 17vi. Provincial Assessment 17

4.4 What an IDP might look like 19

5. IDP SUPPORT SYSTEM

5.1 Legal framework 215.2 IDP guide-pack 215.3 IDP training 215.4 IDP Planning and Implementation Management

Support System (PIMSS) 21

6. USEFUL CONTACTS

A. TABLES

Table 1: Benefits for different target groups 6Table 2: Roles and responsibilities of different

spheres of government 9Table 3: A typical IDP table of contents 19

B. DIAGRAMS

Diagram 1: Overview of the Guides 13Diagram 2: Overview of the planning process 18Diagram 3: IDP support system 20

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 THE NEW IDP GUIDE-PACK

The Department of Provincial and Local Government (DPLG) supported by German Technical Cooperation (GTZ)

has produced an IDP Guide-pack to assist municipalities with the Integrated Development Planning process to

produce Integrated Development Plans (IDPs).

Unlike the old version of the IDP manual, the new guide-pack attempts to be a more user-friendly document by:

(a) Splitting information into context- and target group-specific packages, i.e. in six guides which can be used

independently of each other namely:

• Guide I – General IDP guidelines

• Guide II – Preparing for the IDP process

• Guide III – IDP methodology

• Guide IV – IDP Toolbox

• Guide V – Sectoral and cross-cutting policy issues

• Guide VI – Implementation and Monitoring.

(b) Avoiding planning jargon as far as possible by not suggesting specific planning techniques in Guide III.

(c) Highlighting minimum requirements for each phase of the methodology, thereby differentiating clearly

between the “musts” (resulting from legal and policy requirements) and the non-prescriptive

recommendations for those who want some hints on how to deal with a certain planning activity.

(d) Providing short answers to the following set of questions for each planning activity:

✰ Why do it? (i.e. explaining the purpose of a planning activity)

✰ What needs to be the result of the planning activity? (i.e. specifying the output)

✰ How should the process or procedure look in order to arrive at the output?

✰ Who shall be in charge and be involved?

✰ How long should it take?

1.2 GENERAL OVERVIEW

The General overview provides an overview of the IDP Guide-pack. Its purpose is three-fold:

• To provide a summary on the complete picture of the IDP process to those stakeholders who do not need a

detailed technical understanding of the IDP.

• To enable different stakeholders to know and understand their roles and hence participate effectively in the

process. This includes provincial and national departments.

• To provide a first and quick overview of the IDP process to those responsible for the management of the

process.

The executive summary is therefore meant to enable any person to get a broad understanding of the Integrated

Development Planning process. For more in-depth information role-players should refer to the specific Guides.

Four main areas are covered in this document namely:

• The basics of IDPs;

• The overview of the Guides;

• The overview of the planning process; and

• The IDP support system.

3

2. BASICS OF IDPS

2.1 WHAT IS INTEGRATED DEVELOPMENT PLANNING?

i. What is Integrated Development Planning?

Integrated Development Planning is a process through which municipalities prepare a strategic

development plan, for a five year period. The Integrated Development Plan (IDP) is a product of the

integrated development planning process. The IDP is a principal strategic planning instrument which

guides and informs all planning, budgeting, management and decision-making in a municipality.

ii. What is the legal status of an IDP?

According to the Municipal Systems Act of 2000 all municipalities (i.e. Metros, District Municipalities and

Local Municipalities) have to undertake an integrated development planning process to produce

integrated development plans (IDPs). As the IDP is a legislative requirement it has a legal status and it

supercedes all other plans that guide development at local government level.

iii. What is the lifespan of an IDP?

According to the Municipal Systems Act, every new council that comes into office after the local

government elections has to prepare its own IDP which will guide them for the five years that they are

in office. The IDP is therefore linked to the term of office of councillors. The new council has the option

either to adopt the IDP of its predecessor should it feel appropriate to do so or develop a new IDP taking

into consideration already existing planning documents.

iv. How long does it take to complete the process?

Integrated development planning is a very interactive and part i c i p a t o ry process which re q u i res involvement

of a number of stakeholders. Because of its part i c i p a t o ry nature it takes a municipality approximately 6 – 9

months to complete an IDP and this timing is closely related to the municipal budgeting cycle. However,

during this period delivery and development is not at a standstill, it continues. The IDP is reviewed annually

which results in the amendment of the plan should this be necessary.

v. What are the core components of the IDP?

The IDP is made up of the following core components:

• The analysis

– An assessment of the existing level of development, which includes identification of communities

with no access to basic services.

• Development strategies

– The municipality’s vision (including internal transformation needs).

– The council’s development priorities and objectives.

– The council’s development strategies.

• Projects

• Integration

– A spatial development framework.

– Disaster management plan.

– Integrated financial plan (both capital and operational budget).

– Other integrated programmes.

– Key Performance Indicators and performance targets.

• Approval

In a nutshell, Integrated Development Planning is about the municipality identifying its priority

issues/problems, which determine its vision, objectives and strategies followed by the identification

of projects to address the issues. A very critical phase of the IDP is to link planning to the municipal

budget (i.e. allocation of internal or external funding to the identified projects) because this will

ensure that implementation of projects and hence development is directed by the IDP.4

vi. Who is responsible for managing the process?

Integrated Development Planning is not just about spatial planning and therefore its management

should not be delegated to the municipal Planning Department or to consultants. It is a mechanism

to manage the affairs of the municipality and its municipal area, and hence holds a very high status

within a municipality. In terms of the Municipal Systems Act, 2000, the Executive Committee or

Executive Mayor has the responsibility to manage the preparation of the IDP or assign this

responsibility to the municipal manager. In most municipalities, the IDP coordinator, linked and

reporting directly to the office of the municipal manager and the Executive Committee or Mayor, is

appointed to manage the process.

2.2 WHY IS IT NECESSARY TO DO IDPS?

Preparing an IDP is a legal requirement in terms of the Municipal Systems Act (MSA), however that it’s

not the only reason why municipalities must prepare the plans. Under the new constitution,

municipalities have been awarded major developmental responsibilities to ensure that the quality of life

for its citizens is improved. The new role for local government includes provision of basic services,

creation of jobs, promoting democracy and accountability and eradication of poverty. Preparing and

having the IDP therefore enables the municipality to be able to manage the process of fulfilling its

developmental responsibilities.

Through the IDP, the municipality is informed about the problems affecting its municipal area and, being

guided by information on available resources, is able to develop and implement appropriate strategies

and projects to address the problems.

Here is why every municipality should have an IDP:

➺ It helps to make more effective use of scarce resources by:

– focusing on identified and prioritised local needs taking into consideration local resources;

– searching for more cost-effective solutions; and

– addressing causes, rather than just allocating capital expenditure for dealing with symptoms.

➺ It helps to speed up delivery by:

– providing a tool which guides where investment should occur;

– getting the buy-in of all relevant role-players for implementation;

– providing deadlock breaking decision-mechanisms; and

– arriving at realistic project proposals taking into consideration limited resources.

➺ It helps to attract additional funds:

Where there is a clear municipal development plan, private investors and sector departments are

willing and confident to invest their money because the IDP is an indication that the municipality has

a development direction.

➺ It helps to strengthen democracy and hence institutional transformation because decisions are made

in a democratic and transparent manner, rather than by a few influential individuals.

➺ It helps to overcome apartheid legacy at local level by:

– promoting integration of rural and urban areas, different socio-economic groups, places where

people live and work etc.; and

– facilitating redistribution of resources in a consultative process.

➺ It promotes intergovernmental coordination by:

– facilitating a system of communication and coordination between local, provincial and national

spheres of government.

5

6

The IDP also provides specific benefits for different target groups, namely:

Table1: Benefits of an IDP for different target groups

In the absence of an IDP, a municipality would act in an ad hoc, uninformed and uncoordinated manner which

would lead to duplication and wastage of limited resources. Furthermore, the lack of a municipal tool to guide

development would result in other spheres of government imposing their development programmes, which

might not be priority for a municipal area.

Stakeholder Benefits

(a) Municipal

council

Enables the municipality to:

• Obtain access to development resources and outside investment;

• Provide clear and accountable leadership and development direction;

• Develop a cooperative relationship with its stakeholders and communities;

and

• Monitor the performance of officials.

(b) Councillors • Provides councillors with a mechanism of communicating with their

constituencies;

• Enables councillors to represent their constituencies effectively by making

informed decisions; and

• Enables councillors to measure their own performance.

(c) Municipal

officials

• Provides officials with a mechanism to communicate with the councillors;

• Enables the officials to contribute to the municipality’s vision; and

• Enables officials to be part of the decision-making process.

(d) Communities

and other

stakeholders

• Gives them an opportunity to inform the council what their development

needs are;

• Gives them an opportunity to determine the municipality’s development

direction;

• Provides a mechanism through which to communicate with their

councillors and the governing body; and

• Provides a mechanism through which they can measure the performance

of the councillors and the municipality as a whole.

(e) National and

Provincial

sector

departments

• A significant amount of financial resources for the implementation of

projects lie with sector departments. The availability of the IDP provides

guidance to the departments as to where their services are required and

hence where to allocate their resources.

(f) Private sector • The IDP serves as a guide to the private sector in making decisions with

regard to areas and sectors to invest in.

2.3 WHO SHOULD PARTICIPATE AND WHY?

➺ As mentioned before, the integrated development planning process is participatory in nature and requires

input from various role-players, namely:

• The officials

Integrated development planning is not a function of the municipality’s Planning Department. Everything

that all departments do including treasury and human resources, has to be guided by the municipality’s

management tool which is the IDP. As a result all departments have to get directly involved in the

integrated development planning process.

• The councillors

Councillors have to play a leading role in the IDP process. Not only is the IDP a mechanism through

which they have to make decisions, it also contains their constituency’s needs and aspirations.

Councillors have to participate therefore to ensure that their communities’ issues are well reflected and

addressed.

• The municipal stakeholders

The IDP is about determining the stakeholder and community needs and priorities which need to be

addressed in order to contribute to the improvement of the quality of life. Community and stakeholder

participation in determining those needs is therefore at the heart of the IDP process. The Constitution

and the Municipal Systems Act clearly stipulates that the municipality must mobilise the involvement

and commitment of its stakeholders by establishing an effective participatory process. The municipality

should in particular ensure participation of previously disadvantaged groups e.g. women, the disabled

etc. so that their voices could be heard.

In the case of stakeholder groups that are not organised, the NGOs or other resource persons play a

critical role to advocate the interests of those groups. The nature of the IDP process is therefore such

that it allows all stakeholders who reside or conduct business within a municipal area to contribute to the

preparation and implementation of the development plan.

By abstaining from participating, stakeholders empower other people to make decisions on their behalf,

which decisions might not be in their interest.

• Provincial and National sector departments

The IDP should guide where sector departments allocate their resources at local government level. At

the same time, the municipality should take into consideration the sector departments’ policies and

programmes when developing its own policies and strategies. It is in the interest of the sector

departments, therefore to participate in the integrated development planning process to ensure that

there is alignment between its programmes and that of municipalities.

➺ PRINCIPLES OF PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

Since the IDP involves participation of a number of stakeholders, it is crucial for the municipality to adopt an

appropriate approach and also put in place appropriate structures to ensure effective participation. Here are

some principles on participation:

• The elected council is the ultimate decision-making forum on IDPs. The role of participatory democracy is

to inform, negotiate and comment on those decisions, in the course of the planning/decision-making

process.

• Public participation has to be institutionalised in order to ensure that all residents of the country have an

equal right to participate. Institutionalising participation means:

– setting clear minimum requirements for participation procedures which apply for all municipalities by

means of regulations; and

– providing a legally recognised organisational framework.

7

• Structured participation: Most of the new municipalities are too big in terms of population size and area

to allow for direct participation of the majority of the residents in complex planning processes.

Participation in integrated development planning, therefore, needs clear rules and procedures specifying

who is to participate or to be consulted, on behalf of whom, on which issue, through which

organisational mechanism, with what effect.

• Diversity: The way public participation is institutionalised and structured has to provide sufficient room

for diversity, i.e. for different participation styles and cultures. While there has to be a common

regulatory frame for institutionalised participation in the country, this frame has to be wide enough for

location-specific adjustments to be made by provinces and municipalities.

• Promotion of public participation by municipal government has to distinguish between:

– creating conditions for public participation, which is a must for all municipalities (in line with the MSA);

and

– encouraging public participation, which should be done in particular with regard to disadvantaged or

marginalised groups and gender equity in accordance with the conditions and capacities in a

municipality.

Guide I provides more guidance on public participation, namely:

• Tools, procedures and mechanisms for a structured process of public participation;

• Guidelines for creating conditions for public participation;

• Guidelines on the encouragement of public participation; and

• Guidelines on phasing public participation.

2.4 WHAT ARE THE ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF DIFFERENT SPHERES OF GOVERNMENT?

The responsibility to prepare and adopt IDPs lies with municipalities. However integrated development

planning is an inter-governmental system of planning which requires involvement of all three spheres of

government. Some contributions have to be made by provincial and national government to assist municipal

planning.

The different roles and responsibilities between the three spheres include:

8

Sphere of

governmentRoles and responsibilities

LOCAL

(a) Local

municipality

(b) District

municipality

(c) Metros

To:

• Prepare an IDP

• Adopt an IDP

• Prepare an IDP

• Adopt an IDP

• Provide support to poorly capacitated local municipalities

• Facilitate the compilation of a framework which will ensure coordination

and alignment between local municipalities and the district

• Prepare an IDP

• Adopt an IDP

Table 2: Roles and responsibilities of different spheres

9

PROVINCIAL

(a) Department

of Local

Government

(b) Sector

Departments

To:

• Coordinate training

• Provide financial support

• Provide general IDP guidance

• Monitor the process in the province

• Facilitate coordination and alignment between district municipalities

• Facilitate resolution of disputes between municipalities

• Facilitate alignment of IDPs with sector department policies and

programmes

• Assess IDPs

• Provide relevant information on sector department’s policies, programmes

and budgets

• Contribute sector expertise and technical knowledge to the formulation of

municipal policies and strategies

• Be guided by municipal IDPs in the allocation of resources at the local level

NATIONAL

(a) Department

of Provincial

and Local

Government

(b) Sector

Departments

To:

• Issue legislation and policy in support of IDPs

• Issue Integrated Development Planning Guidelines

• Provide financial assistance

• Provide a national training framework

• Establish a Planning and Implementation Management Support System

• Provide relevant information on sector department’s policies, programmes

and budgets

• Contribute sector expertise and technical knowledge to the formulation of

municipal policies and strategies

• Be guided by municipal IDPs in the allocation of resources at the local level

3. AN OVERVIEW OF THE GUIDES

3.1 INTRODUCTION

The IDP Guide-pack is made up of 6 Guides, namely:

• Guide I – General IDP guidelines

• Guide II – Preparing for the IDP process

• Guide III – IDP methodology

• Guide IV – IDP toolbox

• Guide V – Sectoral and cross-cutting policy guidelines

• Guide VI – Implementation and Monitoring

Each one of the Guides, at different points of the IDP process, contribute to the preparation of an integrated

development plan that municipalities can implement and use as a management tool for the municipal area. It is

important for the people responsible for the management of the IDP process to be familiar with what each

Guide contains, and also to know how to apply it during the IDP process. The Guides need not be used in any

particular sequence. They should be interacted with regularly at different stages in the process.

There are many role-players in an IDP process, each one of them with specific roles and responsibilities that

they fulfil. Some of the Guides are targeted at specific role-players who fulfil specific roles in the process.

However all other role-players should have access to all the Guides should they require more in-depth

understanding of the content of each Guide.

3.2 A SHORT DESCRIPTION OF EACH GUIDE

i. Guide I: General IDP guidelines

✰ Purpose

Guide 1 provides more in-depth information on the purpose and practice of integrated development

planning. It has the following purpose:

• To create better awareness of the relevance and benefits of IDP; and

• To provide clear guidance on the IDP process, expected outcomes and interrelationships with other

processes which can help to fulfil the legal minimum requirements of the Municipal Systems Act.

✰ Target group

The municipal managers and IDP managers require a clear understanding of Guide 1 in order to be

able to properly coordinate and manage the process, whereas the professional planners and

facilitators need it to be able to appropriately lead the process. Other actors must understand the

context of integrated development planning and how they can contribute effectively.

✰ Content of the Guide

The following outline is contained in Guide I:

• Why Integrated Development Planning guidelines?

• Purpose of municipal Integrated Development Planning

• Consideration of existing national policy guidelines

• Implications of municipal Integrated Development Planning on an inter-governmental system of

development planning

• Aligning municipal sector planning and integrated development planning

• Roles and responsibilities of district and local municipalities10

• Organisational arrangements for Integrated Development Planning

• Planning approach and methodology

• Public participation in the integrated development planning process

• Support systems for municipal planning

• Assessment and approval of IDPs

• Legal status of IDPs.

✰ Where to consider in the IDP process

Guide I is useful to refer to during the preparation stage.

ii. Guide II: Preparing for IDP

✰ Purpose

Before any municipality could commence with the planning process, it has to do some preparation.

The purpose of Guide II is to assist municipalities with the preparation for the integrated development

planning process in order to:

• Ensure a well organised planning process with adequate and effective involvement of all relevant

actors

• Ensure that the IDP becomes a tool for institutional transformation

• Help municipalities to plan the process in line with the requirements of the Municipal Systems Act.

✰ Target Groups

The target groups for this Guide are: the municipal managers and IDP managers – to be able to

organise and manage the process accordingly, the professional planners – to be able to apply it in a

flexible and creative manner, and other actors – to get an overview in order to be able to fulfil their

roles in a competent manner.

✰ Contents of the Guide

Guide II provides guidance on:

(i) Process plan

(ii) Framework for IDP

(iii) Distribution of roles and responsibilities

(iv) Organisational structure

(v) Organising participation

(vi) Alignment and Assessment

✰ Where to consider in the IDP process

Understanding Guide II is necessary before the commencement of the planning process. It assists

municipalities to prepare for the processes and the structures it will need to follow and set up for the

planning process. At the same time, Guide II is useful as a reference during the IDP process.

iii. Guide III: IDP methodology

✰ Purpose

The purpose of Guide III is to provide the municipality with methodological guidance for doing IDP.

The contents are summarised in section 4 i.e. planning process.11

✰ Target group

Guide III is targeted at those role-players who require a detailed and technical knowledge of the IDP

process because of the role that they play. The IDP manager requires a good understanding of Guide

III in order to be able to properly organise and manage the process. Professional planners and

facilitators also need a clear understanding to be able to lead the process and produce relevant

documentation.

✰ Where to consider in the IDP process

This Guide is the crux of the planning process. It should be used in each phase of the planning

process.

iv. Guide IV: Toolbox

✰ Purpose

Guide IV is the toolbox which provides different analytical and decision-making planning tools and

techniques which can be applied during the planning process. The tools are optional and differ with

regard to applicability in different types of municipalities.

✰ Target group

The target group for Guide IV is professional planners and facilitators who have the responsibility of

applying the provided tools.

✰ Where to consider in the IDP process

Guide IV has to be used in conjunction to Guide III. The tools are used at different stages of the

planning process and in some cases the same tool can be used on a number of occasions.

v. Guide V: Sectoral and cross-cutting policy guidelines

✰ Purpose

The purpose of Guide V is to make municipalities aware of other national and provincial principles and

programmes that should be taken into consideration when preparing municipal development plans.

✰ Target group

The target group includes municipal managers and IDP managers, as they have to ensure that the

relevant policies and programmes are considered in the municipal IDP and professional planners and

facilitators who need to know how the requirements can be accommodated in the process.

✰ Where to consider in the IDP process

Guide V has to be used in conjunction with Guide III.

vi. Guide VI: IDP Implementation and Monitoring

✰ Purpose

The purpose of Guide VI is to guide municipalities on how to manage the implementation of IDPs.

✰ Target groups

The target groups are those that are charged with ensuring that implementation occurs in line with

the IDP i.e. Municipal Manager and Treasurer, and Heads of Departments and their officials

responsible for managing implementation of specific projects.

✰ Where to consider in the IDP process

The Guide should be considered during the implementation and the monitoring and review phases.

12

13

Diagram 1: overview of the guides

Guide I: General IDP Guidelines

Provides you with basic guidance on purpose, contents and institutional

aspects of IDP, which go beyond the minimum requirements as outlined in

the Municipal Systems Act.

Guide II: Preparing for IDP

Helps you to plan the planning process.

Guide IV: Toolbox

Offers you a variety

of options for

planning tools/

techniques to use

for each process.

Guide VI: Implementation and

Monitoring

Information about:

• Planning-Implementation links

• Institutional preparedness

• Management tools

• Monitoring and performance

Management tools

• Reviewing IDPs.

Guide V: Sectoral

and Cross-cutting

policy guidelines

Offers you guidanceon how to relate other(non-IDP-specific)general or sectorpolicies to theIDP.process.

Guide III: IDP

Methodology

Information about:

• required outputs

• recommended

processes to

guide you through

the process.

14

4. AN OVERVIEW OF THE PLANNING PROCESS

This section provides a summary of the planning methodology that is recommended in the Guide-pack.

The detail on the methodology is contained in Guide III.

4.1 INTRODUCTION

Strategic planning general occurs in a cycle which is made up of four main stages:

• Planning – identification of issues, objectives and strategies.

• Resource allocation – human and financial resources are committed to the projects.

• Implementation – the actual execution of the projects which address the objectives.

• Monitoring and review – during planning performance indicators are formulated to monitor

implementation and its impact. The outcome of monitoring sometimes results in the adjustment of the

plan and implementation programme.

The integrated development planning process also follows a similar cycle and logic in the process outlined

below.

4.2 PREPARATION FOR THE PROCESS

• “IDP process plan”

There is some preparatory work that needs to be done prior to the commencement of the planning

process. Preparation involves the production of an “IDP process plan”. The programme is necessary to

ensure proper management of the planning process. It must contain the following:

– Institutional structures to be established for management of the process

– Approach to public participation

– Structures to be established for public participation

– Time schedule for the planning process

– Roles and responsibilities (who will do what)

– How the process will be monitored.

• “The framework for Integrated Development Planning”

Also as part of the preparation stage, the district council, in consultation with its local municipalities must

adopt a framework for integrated development planning. The framework determines procedures for

coordination, consultation and alignment between the district and the local municipalities and therefore

binds them both. The framework guides each local municipality in preparing its process plan.

Guide II provides detailed guidelines on preparing for planning.

4.3 THE METHODOLOGY

The Integrated Development Planning methodology consists of the following phases:

• The Analysis

• The Strategies

• The Projects

• The Integration

• The Approval

15

i. Phase 1: Analysis

✰ Process

The analysis phase deals with the existing situation. It is the focused analysis of the type of problems

faced by the people in the municipal area. The issues normally range from lack of basic services to

crime and unemployment. The problems identified are weighed according to their urgency and /or

importance to come up with those to be addressed first i.e. priority issues.

In identifying the problems, the municipality considers people’s perceptions of their problems and

needs, but also facts and figures. It is important during this phase that the municipality understands

not only the symptoms, but also the causes of the problems in order to make informed decisions on

appropriate solutions. Stakeholder and community participation is very critical in this phase. The

municipality must not make assumptions on what the problems are in its area. The people affected

should be involved in determining the problems and the extent of the problems.

It is important to determine the priority issues because the municipality will not have sufficient

resources to address all the issues identified by different segments of the community. Prioritisation

assists the municipality in allocating the scarce resources to those issues highlighted as more

important and /or urgent.

The municipality must be aware of existing and accessible resources and of resource limitations so

that realistic solutions are decided on.

✰ Outputs

The outputs of this phase are:

• Assessment of existing level of development

• Priority issues or problems

• Information on causes of priority issues/problems

• Information on available resources.

ii. Phase 2: Strategies

✰ Process

Once the municipality understands the problems affecting the people of the area and its causes, it

must then formulate the solutions to address the problems. This phase includes the formulation of:

• The vision – The vision is a statement indicating the ideal situation the municipality would like to

achieve in the long term. This is the situation the municipality would find itself in once it has

addressed the problems identified in Phase 1.

• The development objectives – once the priority issues are identified in Phase 1, they need to be

translated into objectives. Development objectives are statements of what the municipality would

like to achieve in the medium term in order to address the issues (problems) and also contribute to

the realisation of the vision. In other words the objectives should bridge the gap between the

current reality and the vision.

• The development strategies – Once the municipality knows where it wants to go (vision) and what

it needs to achieve to realise the vision (objectives), it must then develop strategies. Development

strategies provide answers to the question of how the municipality will reach its objectives. They

are strategic decisions about the most appropriate ways and means to achieve the objectives.

• Project identification

Once strategies are formulated, they result in the identification of projects.

Public participation takes place in Phase 2 in the form of a public debate on the appropriate ways

and means of solving problems.

✰ Outputs

Outputs of Phase 2 include:

• The vision

• Objectives

• Strategies

• Identified projects.

iii. Phase 3: Projects

✰ Process

Phase 3 is about the design and specification of projects for implementation. The municipality must

make sure that the projects identified have a direct linkage to the priority issues and the objectives

that were identified in the previous phases. It must also be clear on the target group (intended

beneficiaries), the location of the project, when it will commence and end, who will be responsible for

managing it, how much it will cost and where the money will come from. Furthermore targets and

indicators are formulated to measure performance and impact of the project.

✰ Outputs

The outputs of this phase include:

• Performance indicators

• Project outputs, targets, location

• Project related activities and time schedule

• Cost and budget estimates.

Designing projects requires input from specialists to work with project formulation teams.

Stakeholders and communities affected by a particular project participate in this phase on questions

related to project design.

iv. Phase 4: Integration

✰ Process

Once the projects are identified, the municipality must make sure that they are in line with the

municipality’s objectives and strategies, and also with the resource framework, and comply with the

legal requirements. Furthermore this phase is an opportunity for the municipality to harmonise the

projects in terms of contents, location and timing in order to arrive at consolidated and integrated

programme e.g. a local economic development programme.

✰ Outputs

The output of this phase is an operational strategy which includes:

• 5 year financial plan

• 5 year capital investment programme

• Integrated Spatial Development Framework

• Integrated sectoral programmes (LED, HIV, poverty alleviation, gender equity etc)

• Consolidated monitoring/performance management system

• Disaster management plan

• Institutional plan

• Reference to sector plans.

16

v. Phase 5: Approval

✰ Process

Once the IDP has been completed, it has to be submitted to the municipal council for consideration

and approval. The council must look at whether the IDP identifies the issues (problems) that affect

the area and the extent to which the strategies and projects will contribute to addressing the

problems. The council must also ensure that the IDP complies with the legal requirement before it is

approved.

Futhermore, before the approval of the IDP, the municipality must give an opportunity to the public to

comment on the draft. Once the IDP is amended according to the input from the public, the council

considers it for approval.

✰ Output

The output of this phase is an approved IDP for the municipality.

vi. Provincial assessment

Once a municipality has adopted its IDP, it must, within 10 days of adoption, submit a copy thereof,

together with the “Process plan” and the “Framework for the IDP” (in the case of a District

Municipality), to the MEC of the province for assessment. The Municipal Systems Act does not require

the MEC to approve the IDP, only to assess that the IDP complies with the requirements of the Act and

also that it is not in conflict with IDPs and strategies of other municipalities and organs of state.

17

Phase 3: Projects

Compiling ExistingData

Phase 1: Analysis

Analysing the Context of Priority Issues

Meetings with Communityand StakeholderRepresentatives

Agreeing on a vision and on objectives

Phase 2: Strategies

Debate and decision-making on appropriate strategies

Considering the relevance andapplication of policy guidellines

in the local context

Screening, adjusting,consolidating and agreeing

on project proposals

Phase 4: Integration

Compilation of integrated programmes

Inviting and incorporatingcomments

Phase 5: Approval

Adoption by the council

Diagram 2: Overview of the planning process

Agreeing on Priority Issues

Formulation of project proposals

18

19

4.4 WHAT AN IDP MIGHT LOOK LIKE

Form and content of an IDP document is largely (with exception of those contents prescribed in the Municipal

Systems Act) subject to the discretion of each municipality. Therefore, a list of contents is not prescribed.

A list of contents is, however, quite a useful tool to provide an idea of how an IDP might look. The following

example may help to get an impression, but it should not prevent anyone from developing his/her own creative

ideas.

LIST OF CONTENTS No of pages

1. The Planning Process (3 – 6)

1.1 Institutional arrangements/roles and responsibilities (1 – 2)

1.2 Process overview: Steps and events (1 – 2)

1.3 Self-Assessment of the Planning Process (1 – 2)

2. The Situation (30 – 40)

2.1 Current Reality: Basic facts and figures (3 – 5)

2.2 Summary of community and stakeholder Priority Issues (1 – 2)

2.3 Priority Issues from a Municipal Perspective (1 – 2)

2.4 Spatial Analysis: Patterns and trends (2 – 4)

2.5 Social Analysis: Poverty situation and gender-specific issues (2 – 3)

2.6 Economic Analysis: Major patterns and trends (1 – 2)

2.7 Environmental Analysis: Major risks and trends (1 – 2)

2.8 Institutional Analysis: Strengths and weaknessesof the municipal administration (1 – 2)

2.9 Priority Issues in Context: Summary reports on in-depth analysis (15 – 20)

3. Development Strategies (25 – 40)

3.1 The Municipal Vision (1)

3.2 Localised Strategy Guidelines (15 – 20)

3.3 Objectives and strategies for each Priority Issue(including objectives, available resources, alternatives taken into consideration, assessment and proposed strategy) (10 – 15)

3.4 Financial Strategy (1 – 2)

3.5 Summary list of identified projects (1 – 2)

4. Projects 1 page project format per project (see 3/3) (15 – 30)

5. Operational Strategies (16 – 25)

5.1 Operational 5-year Action Plan (1 – 2)

5.2 5-year Financial Plan (1 – 2)

5.3 Capital Investment Programme (1 – 2)

5.4 Integrated Spatial Development Framework (3 – 5)

5.5 – 5.8 Integrated Social, economic, environmentaland institutional programmes (6 – 10)

5.9 Disaster Management Plan (2 – 3)

5.10 Monitoring and information flow system (2 – 3)

(90 – 140)

20

Poverty Reduction Sustainable MunicipalDevelopment Sound Environment

Better ServiceDelivery– faster– more

appropriate– more effective

Local EconomicDevelopment

InstitutionalTransformation Spatial Integration

Monitoring andevaluation

Planning

Implementation Management

Capacity Building

Diagram 3: IDP support system

The Department of Provincial and Local Government (DPLG) has a legislative mandate to provide an enablingenvironment for municipalities to fulfil their responsibility to prepare IDPs. DPLG’s support strategy is made upof four pillars as indicated in the above diagram.

I. LEGAL AND POLICY FRAMEWORK

The Municipal Systems Act and the policy framework provide municipalities with an enabling legalframework for engaging in integrated development planning.

II. IDP GUIDE-PACK

The IDP Guide-pack provides municipalities with approaches, methods and tools for doing IDPs.

iii. IDP TRAINING

In order to increase the capacity of those involved in the IDP particularly the councillors and the officials,

DPLG has developed a national curriculum development framework which is meant to assist service

providers in developing the appropriate curriculum for IDP training.

Based on the curriculum framework and in conjunction with South African Local Government Association(SALGA), DPLG has developed an IDP training programme. The training to be provided to various ro l e - p l a y e r sis targeted training. It is based on the diff e rent roles diff e rent role-players fulfil in an IDP process and hencethe type of skills they re q u i re to be able to effectively fulfil their roles. For information on available trainingp rogrammes, municipalities can contact the DDP Task Team (See page 22 for contact details).

IV. PLANNING AND IMPLEMENTATION MANAGEMENT SUPPORTSYSTEM (PIMSS)

• What is PIMSS?

Preparation of IDPs is a new requirement for South African Local Government. The majority ofmunicipalities do not have sufficient capacity to do IDPs on their own. To support municipalities, DPLGinitiated the PIMS System. PIMSS is a national IDP support system which has been established toprovide support to municipalities in the preparation and implementation of IDPs. The core element ofthe PIMSS is the Planning and Implementation Management Support Centres (PIMS-Centres). The PIMS-Centres are established at the district council level and their mandate is to assist localmunicipalities, which have limited capacity, with the IDP process.

The PIMS-Centres are staffed by experienced professionals with qualifications and experience in localgovernment, development planning and facilitation as well as other relevant skills required for theintegrated development planning process.

• Who can benefit from PIMSS?

The establishment of PIMSS is geared towards assisting local councils, however at the same timeother stakeholders and community groups can access the PIMSS if they require any form ofassistance e.g. how to organise themselves in order to participate effectively in the IDP process. The PIMS-Centre staff would provide the assistance directly or refer a role-player to relevant serviceproviders who have the expertise.

CONCLUSION

As illustrated in the diagram, the combination of the 4 pillars of capacity-building provides an enablingenvironment which enables municipalities to produce proper IDPs which address the issues of:

– service delivery;– local economic development;– institutional transformation; and– spatial integration,which would ultimately result in the improving quality of life at a municipal level.

21

22

key departmental contact persons

N a m e P o s i t i o n Te l e p h o n e F a x E - m a i l

Mr Elroy Africa Acting DDG: (012) 334-0799 (012) 334-0763 E l ro y @ d s o . p w v. g o v. z aG o v e rnance and

D e v e l o p m e n t

Ms Esme Magwaza D i rector: (012) 334-0823 (012) 334-0612 E s m e @ d s o . p w v. g o v. z aDevelopment Planning and LED

ddp task team (idp programme)

N a m e P o s i t i o n Te l e p h o n e F a x E - m a i l

Mr Yusuf Patel DDP Manager (012) 334-0805 (012) 334-0808 Yu s u f @ d s o . p w v. g o v. z aDr Theo Rauch GTZ – DDP adviser (012) 334-0802 (012) 334-0808 Vi r a @ d s o . p w v. g o v. z aMs Musa Majozi Task Team member (012) 334-0803 (012) 334-0808 M u s a @ d s o . p w v. g o v. z aMs Vira Denton A d m i n i s t r a t o r (012) 334-0806 (012) 334-0808 Vi r a @ d s o . p w v. g o v. z aMr Marc Feldman Task Team member (011) 487-1002 (011) 487-1025 M a rc f e l d @ g l o b a l . c o . z aMs Maria Coetzee Task Team member (012) 841-2552 (012) 841-4036 M j c o e t z e @ c s i r. c o . z a

idp provincial coordinators

N a m e P o s i t i o n Te l e p h o n e F a x E - m a i l

Ms Mosa Molapo K Z N (0333) 95-2114 (0333) 42-8825 M o l a p o m @ l g h . k z n t l . g o v. z aMs Andrea Steenkamp N o rth We s t (018) 387-3605 (018) 387-3608 A s t e e n k a m p @ n w p g . o rg . z aMr Thabo Mathabathe N o rt h e rn Cape (053) 830-9538 (053) 831-2904 T m a t h a b a t h e @ p a n c m a i l . n c a p e . g o v. z aMr Eddie Scott F ree State (051) 405-4415 (051) 403-3403 D s p @ m a j u b a . o f s . g o v. z aMr Solly Maluleke N o rt h e rn Pro v i n c e (015) 295-5400 (015) 295-3463 M a l u l e k e p s @ l o c p t b . n o r p ro v. g o v. z aMs Mani Molefe M p u m a l a n g a (013) 755-3300 (013) 755-3363 M m o l e f e @ n e l . m p u . g o v. z aMr Tebogo More m i G a u t e n g (011) 355-5119 (011) 355-5262 Te b o g o @ g p g . g o v. z aMr Philip Globler We s t e rn Cape (021) 483-4326 (021) 483-4527 P g ro b l e r @ p a w c . w c a p e . g o v. z aMr Kojo Gyan E a s t e rn Cape (040) 609-5466 (040) 609-5525 G y a n @ d h l g 1 . e c a p e . g o v. z a

ddp steering committee

As above, with the following additional members:

N a m e P o s i t i o n Te l e p h o n e F a x E - m a i l

Mr Chris du Plessis D L A (012) 312-9357 (012) 312-9348 H c d u p l e s s i s @ s g h q . p w v. g o v. z aMs Lize Coetzee D o T (012) 309-3428 (012) 323-9370 C o e t z e e l @ n d o t . p w v. g o v. z aMr H Makobe S A L G A (012) 338-6700 (012) 338-6747 H m a k o b e @ s a l g a . o rg . z aMs Bev Pre t o r i u s D WA F (012) 338-8812 (012) 321-1193 P re t o r i u s b @ d w a f . p w v. g o v. z aMr Diet von Bro e m b s e n D o H (012) 421-1453 (012) 341-8893 D i e t @ h o u s e p t a . p w v. g o v. z aMs Emmarie Behre n s D E AT (012) 310-3745 (012) 320-5469

pimss national task team

N a m e P o s i t i o n Te l e p h o n e F a x E - m a i l

Marion Mbina Pimss Manager (012) 334-0788 (012) 334-0790 P i m s s @ d s o . p w v. g o v. z aNomalizo Zibi Administrator (012) 334 0788 (012) 334-0790 P i m s s @ d s o . p w v. g o v. z aKatharina Hubner GTZ junior Adviser (012) 334-0839 (012) 334-0790 K a t h a r i n a @ d s o . p w v. g o v. z aPinky Kunene Task Team member (012) 334-0788 (012) 334-0790 P i n k y @ d s o . p w v. g o v. z a vKentse Sesele Task Team member (012) 334-0788 (012) 334-0790 S e s e l e k @ w o r l d o n l i n e . c o . z aDanso Agyemang Task Team member (012) 334-0788 (012) 334-0790

other dplg programmes

N a m e P ro g r a m m e Te l e p h o n e F a x E - m a i l

K a ren Harr i s o n L E D (012) 334-0801 (012) 334-0763 K a re n @ d s o . p w v. g o v. z aSam Choshi Social Plan (012) 334-0755 (012) 334-0610 S a m @ d s o . p w v. g o v. z aR i c h a rd Kru g e r C M I P (012) 334-0744 (012) 334-0610 R i c h a rd @ d s o . p w v. g o v. z aZama Nofemela M S P (012) 334-0750 (012) 334-0610 Z a m a @ d s o . p w v. g o v. z a

Useful contacts

I D P G u i d e - P a c kG u i d e I

g u i d e l i n e s

IDPIntegrated Development Planning

4

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. WHY INTEGRATED DEVELOPMENT PLANNING GUIDELINES?

1.1 Policy context1.2 Integrated development planning experience1.3 The purpose of these guidelines1.4 The nature of the guidelines

2. PURPOSE OF MUNICIPAL INTEGRATED DEVELOPMENT PLANNING

2.1 Historical context2.2 International trends in municipal planning2.3 Existing legal and policy framework2.4 Doubts and misunderstandings2.5 Purpose

3. CONSIDERATION OF EXISTING NATIONAL POLICY GUIDELINES AND PRINCIPLES ININTEGRATED DEVELOPMENT PLANNING

3.1 What the White Paper says3.2 What the Development Facilitation Act says3.3 Integrated development planning experience to date3.4 Incorporating national policy guidelines and principles

4. IMPLICATIONS OF MUNICIPAL INTEGRATED DEVELOPMENT PLANNING FOR AN INTER-GOVERNMENTAL SYSTEM OF DEVELOPMENT PLANNING

4.1 Existing legal and policy framework4.2 Experience to date4.3 Principles of an inter-governmental planning system4.4 Guidelines for the distribution of roles and responsibilities4.5 Guidelines for linkages between the spheres of government and between municipal

and sectoral planning

5. ALIGNING MUNICIPAL SECTOR PLANNING AND INTEGRATED DEVELOPMENT PLANNING

5.1 Existing legal and policy framework5.2 Experience to date5.3 The approach to formulating alignment guidelines5.4 Guidelines for aligning municipal sector planning and integrated development planning

6. ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF DISTRICT AND LOCAL MUNICIPALITIES

6.1 Existing legal and policy framework6.2 Experience to date6.3 Principles for distribution of roles and responsibilities6.4 Guidelines for the distribution of roles and responsibilities according to planning phases

7. ORGANISATIONAL ARRANGEMENTS FOR INTEGRATED DEVELOPMENT PLANNING

7.1 Existing legal and policy framework7.2 Experience to date7.3 Principles for role distribution7.4 Guidelines for the distribution of roles and responsibilities

8. PLANNING APPROACH AND METHODOLOGY

8.1 Legal and Policy Requirements8.2 Experiences to date8.3 Principles for the planning approach8.4 Guidelines for answering the HOW-question

9. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION IN THE INTEGRATED DEVELOPMENT PLANNING PROCESS

9.1 Existing legal and policy framework9.2 Experience to date9.3 Principles of public participation9.4 The functions and context of public participation in the integrated development planning process9.5 Tools, procedures and mechanisms for an institutionalised and structured process of public

participation9.6 Guidelines for creating conditions for public participation9.7 Guidelines on the encouragement of public participation9.8 Guidelines on phasing public participation

10. SUPPORT SYSTEMS FOR MUNICIPAL PLANNING

10.1 Existing legal and policy framework10.2 Experience to date10.3 Principles of an integrated development planning support system10.4 Guidelines on roles and responsibilities within an integrated development planning support system

11. ASSESSMENT AND APPROVAL OF IDPs

11.1 Existing legal and policy framework11.2 Experience to date11.3 Guidelines for the Assessment/Approval process

12. LEGAL STATUS OF IDPs

12.1 Existing legal and policy framework12.2 Experience to date12.3 Guidelines for insuring the impact of IDPs

1. WHY INTEGRATED DEVELOPMENT PLANNING GUIDELINES?

1.1 POLICY CONTEXT

When Integrated Development Plans (IDPs) were made a legal requirement for municipalities in the Local

Government Transition Act (LGTA)/Second Amendment (1996), their conceptualisation at a policy level was very

limited. Furthermore, the requirements of integrated development planning overlap to some extent with the

planning requirements of Land Development Objectives (LDOs) as established by the Development Facilitation

Act (DFA) of 1995. The DFA Principles have provided a useful policy framework with regard to the spatial

dimension of development planning, but not beyond.

Crucial elements of a policy, legal and methodological framework for IDPs were established after the IDP

process (inter-linked with the preparation of LDOs ) had already started. These are contained in the White Paper

on Local Government (WPLG, March 1998) as a general policy frame, the Municipal Systems Bill (MSB), which

is supposed to become an Act in 2000, and the Integrated Development Planning Manual (September 1998).

The White Paper presented:

i. A sound contextual justification of integrated development planning as a tool for “developmental local

government”, in particular for:

– objective-oriented resource allocation;

– institutional transformation within municipalities (integrated development planning as a means of inter-

sectoral strategic management);

– interaction with other spheres of government; and

– transparent interaction between municipalities and residents, in line with the principle of accountability.

ii. A list of policy principles that integrated development planning is expected to follow, such as basic needs

orientation, poverty alleviation and environmental sustainability.

iii. A list of methodological guidelines including prioritising, strategic focus, incremental approach, medium-term

planning and a multi-sectoral approach.

iv. A sequence of planning steps.

The Municipal Systems Bill, which defines integrated development planning as one of the core functions of a

municipality in the context of its developmental orientation, focuses on defining minimum requirements:

– with regard to the contents of an IDP; and

– with regard to the integrated development planning process.

It refers to the role of municipal planning within the overall context of co-operative government. In the chapter

on “Public Participation” the MSB defines principles, mechanisms, processes and procedures for public

participation which apply, among others, to the integrated development planning process.

Two other legal documents which resulted from the WPLG have some indirect relevance for integrated

development planning. The Municipal Demarcation Act initiated a new demarcation process that has resulted

in a dramatically reduced number of municipalities which are larger and in a better position to become viable

local government units. The Municipal Structures Act gives district municipalities more of a role in supporting

local municipalities in drafting IDPs.

The Integrated Development Planning Manual attempts to provide methodological guidance to all actors

involved in the integrated development planning process to enable them to cope with the new task. It offers a

step-by-step approach with a sequence of planning tools. In contrast to policy and legal framework documents,

it has a non-prescriptive, enabling character. It serves as a basis for training courses and for information and

advice services. It is also subject to continuous modification based on experience and new know-how.

As most of the LDO/ integrated development planning processes were started before this newly emerging

framework was put in place, the quality of the integrated development planning process and outcomes was

only to a very limited degree influenced by this framework.5

1.2 INTEGRATED DEVELOPMENT PLANNING EXPERIENCE

In most municipalities the integrated development planning processes and their outcomes, the planning

documents, fell short of the basic requirements of integrated, strategic development planning. The process

caused considerable confusion and sometimes frustration among those involved.

Rather than being used as a tool to deal with the real issues of residents and communities in a strategic,

developmental and delivery-oriented manner, many municipalities did no more than fulfil the legal requirement

through their consultants in a mechanistic manner. As a result the outcomes were often no more than

unrealistic shopping lists of investment proposals and some sort of structure plans.

These deficiencies can be attributed in part to capacity limitations in local government, an over-complicated

methodology which might encourage a mechanistic planning approach and the non-availability of appropriate

support systems which forced many municipalities to rely on planning consultants. Moreover, both the process

and the institutional arrangement of transitional local government were new to all the actors involved. A number

of deficiencies, however, are related to the absence of a clear policy framework. The transitional legislation and

the related confusion about LDOs and IDPs were certainly part of the problem. But some of the policy-related

deficiencies, as described below, still need to be addressed.

• The purpose of integrated development planning was not sufficiently clear: in some local authorities it was,

due to its close link to LDOs, perceived as a special spatial planning requirement; in others it was regarded

as a more participatory way of arriving at lists of investment projects for external financing. Hardly anywhere

was it seen as a municipal mainstream process to allocate available and accessible resources around certain

development priorities and strategies.

• As a consequence the outcome of IDPs was usually not much more than a list of project titles without

further specification and without implementation strategies. There was no evidence from most of the

planning documents that overall development policy guidelines such as poverty alleviation, economic growth

or environmental sustainability were considered.

• There was no clear and agreed procedure how integrated development planning should be inter-linked with

planning of other spheres of government and with sectoral planning. In other words, municipal planning is

supposed to be part of an inter-governmental planning system which does not yet exist. Neither is there

sufficient clarity to assist municipalities to overcome the confusion of multiple legal planning requirements.

• There was no clear statement on the way the IDPs of local and district municipalities should be interrelated

(except that they should be done at the same time and inform one another). As a consequence local

municipalities and district municipalities either did their planning in parallel without informing one another, or

local municipalities waited for the districts.

• There was no clear and realistic institutional concept related to the distribution of roles and responsibilities

for the integrated development planning process. Ambitious and vague statements saying that the municipal

governments themselves should be the owners and “drivers” of the process were not appropriate for local

authorities without professional capacity. Due to a lack of guidance on a more specific and realistic

distribution of roles and responsibilities, municipal managers tended to outsource the whole responsibility

for the integrated development planning process.

• Accordingly the question of an appropriate support system for municipal integrated development planning

had not been answered. Aside from some organisational guidance from the provinces, planning consultants

were the only accessible support system.

• Fundamental methodological questions with regard to the planning approach such as:

– prescriptive, linear and rationalistic methodologies versus interactive, negotiated, issues-focused

discussion and decision-making processes;

– the design of the planning-budgeting-implementation link; and

– the IDP – land management link etc,

were left to the technical level of consultants. They had not been not settled at a policy level.

6

• Most municipalities and their consultants were unable to organise the public participation process in a

meaningful way, as basic guidelines were missing.

• While the approval of LDOs was settled by the DFA, it was not clear on what basis and by whom IDPs

should be approved and/or assessed.

• The legal status of integrated development planning needs further clarification.

Unless such crucial policy issues are clarified, all efforts in the fields of capacity building, establishment of

support systems and refinement of planning methodology will have only a limited impact on the quality of

integrated development planning processes and their developmental outcomes.

There is a wide conceptual gap between the broad policy framework of the WPLG and the minimum

requirements defined in the MSB on the one hand, and the design of specific planning methodologies as

outlined in the Integrated Development Planning Manual, on the other. This gap must be bridged to enable

local government to make good use of integrated development planning as a tool.

1.3 THE PURPOSE OF THESE GUIDELINES

The purpose of these guidelines is to ensure that all actors involved in the integrated development planning

process (including trainers and professionals involved in the development of tools and in drawing up

regulations) understand the purpose of integrated development planning, the distribution of roles and

responsibilities, and the planning procedures. This will allow them to arrive at strategic and realistic

decisions related to people’s priority issues in a consultative and integrated manner, and implement

problem-solving measures faster and more appropriately.

These guidelines are one of the four crucial prerequisites for making integrated development planning an

effective tool for more developmental local government. The others are: methodology development;

preparation of training programmes; and the establishment of a support system.

The areas for which further policy guidance is required are related to the deficiencies outlined above.

They form the basis for the structure of these guidelines:

Chapter 2: Purpose of municipal integrated development planning.

Chapter 3: Consideration of national guidelines and principles in integrated development planning.

Chapter 4: Implications of municipal integrated development planning for an inter-governmental system

of development planning.

Chapter 5: Aligning sector planning requirements and integrated development planning.

Chapter 6: Inter-linking integrated development planning processes between district and local

municipalities.

Chapter 7: Organisational arrangements for integrated development planning within a municipality.

Chapter 8: Support systems for municipal integrated development planning.

Chapter 9: Planning approach and methodology.

Chapter 10: Public participation in integrated development planning.

Chapter 11: Assessment and approval of IDPs.

Chapter 12: The legal status of IDPs.

These areas have been subject to analysis during the integrated development planning pilot assessment

process. Some of them were explored in more detail through specific policy research studies.

7

8

1.4 THE NATURE OF THE GUIDELINES

The guidelines are meant to provide guidance and direction where required. It goes well beyond legal minimum

requirements. Its intention is to enable the responsible actors to make effective use of integrated development

planning as a tool for developmental local government. The guidelines are therefore drafted in accordance with

the following criteria:

• Flexibility: The guidelines will allow for learning processes and for the incorporation of innovations in

planning and management approaches. The framework will encourage diversity of planning styles, given the

diversity of the local realities of South African municipalities.

• A minimum degree of uniformity: The guidelines have to find the balance between providing space for

flexibility within its frame and limiting that space to ensure a certain common ground, common rules,

common language. The degree of commonality in municipal planning is determined by people’s equal

democratic rights in their society, and by the necessity for integrated development planning to form part of a

nation-wide planning system, which requires smooth interaction between and within the three spheres of

government.

• Achievable planning requirements: The guidelines have to keep planning costs low and encourage local

ownership by keeping planning requirements as simple as possible, taking the limited resources and staff

capacities of most municipalities into account. Nevertheless, it will take into consideration that a certain

quality of planning is necessary to avoid wasting money on inappropriate investments. Accordingly, planning

methods may have to differ between Category A (metropolitan) and C (district) local authorities on the one

hand, and Category B (local municipalities) on the other.

• Developmental orientation: Developmental local government is, in accordance with the WPLG, local

government committed to working with citizens and groups within the community to find ways to meet

their social, economic and material needs and improve the quality of their lives. This has implications for the

integrated development planning process (which has to involve the public) and the outcome (which has to

be related to overall developmental objectives). These guidelines are intended to help translate the required

developmental orientation of integrated development planning into practical guidelines and directions.

• Delivery orientation: Any planning guidelines have to keep in mind that planning is not an end in itself but a

tool to arrive at more appropriate, effective and faster delivery of services to the people. Keeping a close

and transparent link between planning, improved public management and delivery is, therefore, the most

important guiding principle for the guidelines.

These guidelines will enable actors involved in the integrated development planning process to look at it as not

just a capacity-consuming legal requirement, but as a tool for better management and co-ordination of decision-

making and implementation, related to public services and general development objectives within their area of

responsibility.

2. PURPOSE OF MUNICIPAL INTEGRATED DEVELOPMENTPLANNING

2.1 HISTORICAL CONTEXT

For more than five decades after the advent of municipal planning in South Africa in the 1930s, in most cases

planning at the local level:

• was very technical in nature with little or no participation from other role-players such as communities;

• focused on the controlled use of land through a range of complicated statutory mechanisms;

• furthered the aims of the Apartheid dispensation in promoting racially segregated spatial, social and

economic development;

• was based on the perceived needs of the privileged groups in society;

• predominantly sector based, with transport, land use and infrastructure plans being prepared by municipal

departments in isolation from one another;

• inflexible and of a blue-print nature;

• indifferent on issues of environmental sustainability and economic viability;

• concerned with physical development and sectorally-structured infrastructural delivery programmes by the

public sector;

• unconcerned with the social and economic dimensions of development such as poverty alleviation, social

health and welfare; and

• weak on the facilitation of private sector investment.

During the early 1990s, various negotiating forums (such as the Local Negotiating Forum and the National

Housing Forum) conceived the notion of integrated development planning in reaction to this outdated and

inappropriate way of planning. At the same time, the idea of integrated planning was gaining international

ground as a response to the fragmented, ad hoc project based approaches to planning in the 1980s, a move

towards integration in technology, and the environmentalists’ concern for a holistic perspective on

development.

The ANC Policy Guidelines for a Democratic South Africa, 1992 proposed that a new system of municipal

planning should:

• ensure maximum involvement of all communities and stakeholders;

• be directed at those in greatest need;

• strive to break down Apartheid privilege, geography and institutional structures;

• be aimed at ensuring integrated and sustainable development; and

• be focused on delivery.

By 1995 “Integrated Development Planning” had emerged as a distinct approach to planning and was being

promoted by the RDP Office and the intergovernmental Forum for Effective Planning and Development (FEPD).

The FEPD defined integrated development planning as: “...a participatory planning process aimed at integrating

sectoral strategies, in order to support the optimal allocation of scarce resources between sectors and

geographic areas and across the population in a manner that promotes sustainable growth, equity and the

empowerment of the poor and the marginalised”.

These ideas were further elaborated in the Reconstruction and Development Programme, concretised in

The Constitution and articulated further in a range of policy documents including the White Paper on Local

Government and the Green Paper on Development Planning. They were also given legal substance in

legislation such as the Development Facilitation Act, 1995, the Local Government Transition Act Second

Amendment Act, 1996, the Municipal Structures Act, 1999, and the Municipal Systems Bill, 2000.

2.2 INTERNATIONAL TRENDS IN MUNICIPAL PLANNING

i. Decentralisation of planning

International experience suggests that truly democratic and developmental local government should play an

expanding role in planning, managing and implementing development at a local level.

The international trend of “thinking globally and acting locally” has translated into a growing tendency to

decentralise government in general, and planning in particular.

– In India a constitutional amendment in 1992 provided for the substantial devolution of functions,

including that of urban planning to urban local bodies.

9

– All local authorities in Germany are required to prepare their own plans although they need to be

consistent with the plans of other spheres.

– In Malaysia local authorities prepare plans and projects that address local needs and complement

national proposals.

– Indonesia has an annual bottom-up regional development planning process, which starts at the village

level.

The South African Constitution (1996) responded to this trend by creating local government as a

distinctive, yet interrelated sphere of government with its own executive and legislative authority and an

important developmental mandate. One of the key tools for this new form of developmental local

government is the integrated development planning process.

ii. Democratisation of planning

The global democratisation trend emphasises the need for the fair and equitable distribution of resources

and services to the population as a whole. This trend also translates into the practice of participatory

planning for ordinary citizens to have a say in the real issues affecting their lives.

Participatory planning implies that individuals, groups and organisations should have access to information

relevant to development and be able to participate in decision-making processes for the areas in which they

live and work. The purpose of participatory planning is essentially to deepen democracy and represents a

shift from the concept of “government” to the concept of “governance”. The proponents of participatory

planning believe that greater local government/community interaction will result in improved planning and

development implementation especially at a local level.

In 1992, the leaders of 179 countries signed a global action plan for sustainable development called Agenda

21 based on the assumption that development issues can only truly be addressed by the participation and

co-operation of local authorities through participatory local planning processes. Local Agenda 21 suggests

that municipalities undertake a consultative planning process with their populations and achieve consensus

on the development agendas of their local communities. It regards broad public participation in decision-

making as one of the fundamental pre-requisites for sustainable development.

In South Africa, all development related legislation passed since 1994 requires participative processes in

plan formulation. The Municipal Systems Act (2000) redefines the concept of a municipality to include the

community, which emphasises the need for the collaborative setting of local development priorities.

iii. Changing conceptions of government

Currently government tends to be seen as an “enabler” of service delivery to its citizens. Municipalities are

regarded as vehicles for local economic development, implying that they should create the climate and

conditions that are favourable to investment and economic growth. Municipalities should increasingly seek

to establish partnerships with other stakeholders in the provision of services through ensuring interaction

and communication and the building of alliances around local development.

In the South African situation, local economic development is regarded as an important outcome of the

integrated development planning process. The municipal planning process should create the platform for

putting development issues on the development agenda of the municipality and creates opportunities for

establishing co-operation and partnerships in support of local development.

10

iv. The pursuit of sustainability

Another international trend, the pursuit of sustainable development, promotes the importance of integrating

environmental concerns into social and economic development decision-making processes.

According to Local Agenda 21 and the international Habitat Agenda, “development should support

community life and power and distribute the benefits of development equitably, in order to sustain them

over the long term”. Continued economic growth is commonly held to be unsustainable unless it

compliments and augments the processes of ecological and community development.

Sustainable development best practices are not isolated to first-world countries like Canada, Australia and

New Zealand. The UNDP is just one of a host of major international role-players that promotes people

centred development in support of sustainable development in developing countries.

– The city of Curitiba in Southern Brazil has been widely lauded as a model of sustainable planning and as

a “third world City that really works”.

– Calcutta in India has attracted worldwide attention with sustainable solutions to the treatment and use of

sewage.

– The City of Greater Montego Bay in the West Indies developed a community driven integrated

development plan and is regarded as a model for the sustainable development of both urban and rural

towns in Jamaica.

The sustainability debate has been taken up in various legal and policy documents in South Africa such as:

– the national development principles contained in the Development Facilitation Act;

– the definition of developmental local government in the White Paper on Local Government;

– Habitat and Local Agenda 21 initiatives driven by the National Department of Housing and the

Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism;

– the Green Paper on Development and Planning; and

– the National Environmental Management Act.

v. The search for integration

The international search for integration is based on the premise that improved integration will contribute to

the more effective and efficient use of scarce resources. Some international examples of integrated

planning initiatives include:

– The formulation of an Integrated Development Plan for the Tibetan Refugee Community;

– The Regional Cities Integrated Development Programme in Thailand;

– Decentralised Integrated Development Planning Processes in Ghana;

– The Integrated Development of Small and Medium Towns in India; and

– The Integrated Development Programme for Belvedere on the Eastern Caribbean.

The search for integration in South Africa with its heritage of inequitable growth and development, and its

reality of countless demands and limited resources, is probably more complex and pronounced than anywhere

else in the world. South Africa can hardly afford expensive development mistakes. Instead, it needs to achieve

integration through integrated development planning with the view to harness the countries scarce resources in

a coherent and purposeful manner.

11

12

2.3 EXISTING LEGAL AND POLICY FRAMEWORK

According to the Constitution (sections 152 and 153), local government is in charge of the development

process in municipalities, and it is in charge of municipal planning. The constitutional mandate to relate its

management, budgeting and planning functions to its objectives gives a clear indication of the intended

purposes of municipal integrated development planning:

– to ensure sustainable provision of services;

– to promote social and economic development;

– to promote a safe and healthy environment;

– to give priority to the basic needs of communities; and

– to encourage involvement of communities.

The WPLG is in line with the spirit of the constitution as it considers integrated development planning explicitly

as a tool for developmental local government. Besides relating integrated development planning to the

developmental outcomes which are largely in line with the objectives stated in the constitution, the WPLG

outlines why integrated development planning is considered a necessary tool to achieve these purposes.

Integrated development planning will:

– help to align scarce resources behind agreed policy objectives and programmes;

– make sure that actions are prioritised around urgent needs;

– ensure the necessary integration with other spheres of government, it will serve as a tool for

communication and interaction with them; and

– serve as a basis for engagement between local government and communities/residents1.

The MSB confirms the nature of integrated development planning as a legal requirement. With regard to the

purpose it refers to the Constitution.

According to the existing legal and policy framework, despite its legal status, it is clear that municipal integrated

development planning is not an end in itself, but a necessary tool to assist local government to achieve its

developmental outcomes or objectives.

The reasons for allocating the developmental role and the responsibility for integrated development planning to

the local government sphere, in spite of its capacity limitations, are:

• its relative closeness to the communities and residents, local places and conditions; and

• that it is the appropriate place from which to co-ordinate investment and the activities of different sectors

and actors in terms of location and time.

2.4 DOUBTS AND MISUNDERSTANDINGS

In spite of the fact that the Constitution, together with the WPLG, provide clear information about the purpose

of municipal integrated development planning, there are various doubts and misunderstandings among both

local government representatives and planning professionals:

• Some people doubt whether it is appropriate to spend more resources and time on planning when people

on the ground are anxiously waiting for delivery.

• Some people doubt whether it is worthwhile to do all this planning when there are hardly any financial

resources for development available, especially in most local municipalities.

• Others doubt whether planning is really a useful tool to achieve developmental outcomes.

1Other tools are performance management and co-operation with local citizens and partners (public participation and municipal servicepartnerships).

13

• Many officials at provincial and national level still tend to assume that integrated development planning is

exclusively related to local governments’ own budgets and activities.

• Due to its close interrelation with LDOs, many people (especially local government officials) associate

integrated development planning with spatial planning which has little to do with their field of responsibility.

Thus, integrated development planning is sectoralised.

• For many municipalities, the main purpose for drawing up IDPs (besides the fact that it is a legal

requirement) is to compile a list of investment projects for external funding, in particular for infrastructure

projects funded by DPLG.

Such misinterpretations and concerns demonstrate that more clarification on the purpose and rationale of

integrated development planning is necessary to convince some of the crucial role-players of the relevance and

usefulness of integrated development planning as a tool for social and economic development.

2.5 PURPOSE

The purpose of integrated development planning is faster and more appropriate delivery of services and

providing a framework for economic and social development in a municipality. A range of links exist between

integrated development planning and its developmental outcomes, which have great relevance, in particular in a

context of financial crisis of municipalities, urgency of service delivery, and employment generation. Integrated

development planning can contribute towards eradicating the development legacy of the past, making the

notion of developmental local government work and fostering co-operative governance.

i. Eradicating the development legacy of the past

• Integrated development planning is a mechanism to restructure our cities, towns and rural areas.

Apartheid planning entrenched the ideology of separate development in spatial development patterns.

Integrated development planning will redress these spatial imbalances and promote integrated human

settlement through:

– ensuring a shared understanding of spatial development opportunities, patterns and trends;

– the localisation of spatial development principles that promote integrated and sustainable development;

– the formulation of specific strategies aimed at the spatial restructuring of cities and towns; and

– the formulation of a spatial development framework that provides a spatial overview of planned public

and private sector investment.

• Integrated development planning is a mechanism to promote social equality.

The planning process is participatory in nature and allows for local processes of democratisation,

empowerment and social transformation. The integrated development planning process is designed in such

a way that all role-players and stakeholders have a voice in the issues affecting their lives.

• Integrated development planning is a weapon in the fight against poverty.

Integrated development planning should address severe social and economic imbalances such as the

urban/rural divide as well as adverse conditions affecting marginalised groups on the grounds of race,

gender, age or disability.

The Constitution requires that “a municipality must structure and manage its administration and budgeting

and planning processes to give priority to the basic needs of the community and to promote the social and

economic development of the community”. The strategies, projects and programmes that are generated

through the integrated development planning process must be assessed in terms of the extent to which

they assist in empowering and improving the living conditions of the disadvantaged.

The holistic, integrated and participatory nature of integrated development planning allows poverty

alleviation to be addressed in a multi-faceted way. The IDP can do this through:

– focusing on areas of greatest need;

– prioritising projects that focus on the plight of the poor and the marginalised;

– addressing landlessness through implementing appropriate land reform initiatives;

– promoting local economic development; and

– preparing spatial frameworks that mainstream the poor into the economy.

• Integrated development planning is a catalyst in the creation of wealth.

Integrated development planning can assist in the promotion of socio-economic development through:

– levering funds from the other spheres of government, donor organisations and investors by defining and

packaging attractive projects and programmes;

– facilitating the creation of an environment that is conducive to private sector investment and the general

promotion of local economic development; and

– proposing direct interventions in the economy through, for example, providing incentives, developing

economic infrastructure, and buying, developing and leasing or selling land.

ii. Making the notion of development local government work

• Integrated development planning is a device to improve the quality of people’s lives through the formulation

of integrated and sustainable projects and programmes.

Integrated development planning is a cross-cutting process that integrates and co-ordinates all development

dimensions and sectors. The planning process:

– facilitates the formulation of integrated development strategies;

– considers the social, economic and environmental sustainability of development strategies;

– facilitates the process of making trade-offs between sectors through improved inter-sectoral prioritisation

processes; and

– ensures that all dimensions of development are adequately considered in the process of formulating

integrated and sustainable project and programmes.

• Integrated development planning lays the foundation for community building.

Integrated development planning is the platform for building a sense of community ownership within a

municipal area through:

– creating a shared vision for the future development of the municipal area;

– providing a public arena for discussion and making of trade-offs;

– nurturing common agreement around the most strategic and pressing development priorities in the

municipal area;

– transcending party political debates in order to harness support behind commonly agreed development

issues;

– providing a sound base for building partnerships around development; and

– fostering a shared understanding of cross-cutting development priorities such as poverty alleviation, local

economic development and environmental sustainability.

14

• Integrated development planning is a strategic framework that facilitates improved municipal governance.

Integrated development planning provides a strategic framework that facilitates improved municipal

governance through:

– linking, integrating and co-ordinating plans and development proposals and other strategies, plans and

frameworks for the municipality;

– acting as the policy framework and basis on which the annual budget for the municipality must be

based;

– acting as a strategic framework for the decision-making processes of the council;

– providing the strategic framework for the development of operational systems such as financial

management, procurement and land-use management;

– aligning the financial resources and human capacity of the municipality with the implementation of

strategies, projects and programmes that will address the prioritised needs of the most deprived, and

maintain the existing infrastructure and economic activities in the municipality;

– assisting municipalities to focus on the environmental sustainability of their delivery and developmental

strategies;

– providing a clear, common orientation for the administration by allowing the municipal manager and

council to provide guidance and exercise control in relation to agreed and transparent objectives and

targets; and

– creating is a useful frame for implementation management, especially in municipalities with limited

management capacities.

• Integrated development planning is an agent of local government transformation.

The integrated development planning process and the transformation of local government are to some

extent in a “chicken and egg situation”. Some institutional transformation is required to ensure the

successful preparation and implementation of the integrated development planning process. The planning

process, however concerns itself with determining the strategies and functions that will require

amendments to municipal structure and form.

The integrated development planning process should result in a set of operational strategies that will ensure

that municipalities are able to deliver effectively and efficiently on the development priorities, objectives,

strategies, projects and programmes identified in the municipal planning process. The planning process will

promote institutional transformation in line with agreed priorities and objectives in order to give full effect to

local government’s new developmental mandate.

• Integrated development planning is a conduit/channel for attracting investment.

The integrated development planning process will create a climate of investment confidence by elaborating

clear and agreed upon medium term financial and capital investment plans.

– Integrated development planning is meant to inform municipal, provincial, national budgets and

programmes as well as funding agencies, residents of a municipality and anybody from outside who may

consider living or investing in the municipal area. It has neither an exclusively local government, nor an

exclusively external focus.

– The planning process should produce appropriate and feasible project proposals that will enable the

speedy allocation and utilisation of funds by various bodies. This will enable the integrated development

planning process to create frameworks for investment by putting in place clear targets and timeframes

for the implementation of projects and programmes.

15

– South Africa has more funds available for financing projects at the local level than can be made use of.

This is due to a lack of good project proposals or business plans. Many local and international funding

agencies are desperately looking out for feasible project proposals. Such proposals (which should be

more than wish lists with project headings) require planning. Thus, the crucial bottleneck for delivery is

not finance but proper planning.

• Integrated development planning is an instrument to ensure more effective and efficient resource allocation

and utilisation.

IDPs enable municipalities to weigh up their obligations and systematically prioritise programmes and

resource allocation. In a context of great inequalities, IDPs serve as a framework for municipalities to

prioritise their actions around meeting urgent needs, while maintaining the overall economic, municipal and

social infrastructure already in place.

Where (financial) resources are available in abundance, there is little need for proper planning. The scarcer

the resources, the more relevant is planning, as planning means thinking systematically about alternative

ways to make use of scarce resources in the most beneficial manner. Preconceived standard solutions are

usually too expensive for municipalities, which are short of funds. Planning facilitates appropriate solutions,

by evaluating problem-solving alternatives in a participatory process. Poor communities cannot afford to do

without planning. IDP assists a municipality in allocating its scarce resources in a focused and sustainable

way.

• Integrated development planning is a vehicle to fast-track delivery.

The integrated development planning process puts in place a systematic and consultative process that:

– ensures a well informed, speedy, but sustainable decision-making process;

– minimises delays due to conflicts and non-acceptance during the implementation process;

– ensures the effective and efficient management and utilisation of financial and human resources in

support of implementation; and

– lessens situations where funds allocated for service provisions cannot be used in time due to a shortage

of professionally sound and approved project proposals.

• Integrated development planning is a barometer for political accountability and a yardstick for municipal

performance.

The IDP is tied to a political term of office, therefore:

– a municipal council and councillors can be held accountable for its implementation;

– communities may use the IDP as a yardstick to measure the performance of politicians; and

– councillors may use it as a way of measuring the effectiveness and efficiency of the administration and

to give effect to their political mandates.

Local government will constantly be challenged to motivate development decisions in the context of limited

resources. The integrated development planning process should provide the local authority with a clear,

objective and rational framework to guide development decisions and to create a basis from which to

measure the performance of the municipality.

iii. Fostering co-operative governance

• Integrated development planning is a mechanism for alignment and co-ordination between spheres of

government.

IDPs are vital tools to ensure the integration of local government activities with other spheres of

development planning at provincial, national and international levels, by serving as a basis for communication

and interaction. 16

17

• Integrated development planning is a mechanism for alignment and co-ordination within spheres of

government.

Within the municipality the IDP plays the role of providing a basis for engagement between officials,

councillors, citizens and other stakeholders. Since this engagement is focused around practical concerns

such as budget allocation, it should do far more than provide a talk-shop. In the longer term this

engagement should promote more strongly networked localities, and also the building of alliances that

would make the new definition of “municipality” in the Municipal Systems Bill a reality.

IDPs serve as a basis for engagement between local government and citizens at local level, and with various

stakeholders and interest groups. Participatory and accountable government only has meaning if it is related

to concrete issues, plans and resource allocations.

3. CONSIDERATION OF EXISTING NATIONAL POLICY GUIDELINES

AND PRINCIPLES IN INTEGRATED DEVELOPMENT PLANNING

3.1 WHAT THE WHITE PAPER SAYS

The WPLG, in section B on “developmental local government”, states all national development policy

guidelines that are of particular relevance for local government. They are largely based on the constitution and

on fundamental national policy frameworks such as the Reconstruction and Development Programme (RDP)

and Gowth, Employment and Redistribution strategy (GEAR). They form the normative framework for the

contents of IDPs. These development policy guidelines and principles can be summarised as follows:

• Orientation towards people’s needs.

• Poverty alleviation with special consideration of marginalised and disadvantaged groups and gender equity.

• Environmentally sustainable development and a safe and healthy environment.

• Economic growth with creation of income and employment opportunities.

• Involvement of residents, communities and stakeholders.

• Sustainability of services, municipalities and settlements.

3.2 WHAT THE DEVELOPMENT FACILITATION ACT SAYS

The DFA, which is explicity referred to in the WPLG, adds some specific spatial development principles such as:

• integrated and liveable settlements;

• compact towns and cities (instead of urban sprawl);

• maximum use of existing infrastructure and services (rather than duplication); and

• equal consideration of formal and informal settlements.

As integrated development planning contributes to social and economic development, it must take these

principles into consideration.

3.3 INTEGRATED DEVELOPMENT PLANNING EXPERIENCE TO DATE

Most IDPs developed in 1998/99 did not reflect these guidelines and principles, nor any other explicit

normative points of reference. Aspects like social differentiation (e.g. disadvantaged groups or gender

differentiation), affordability and sustainability were frequently not addressed at all. There seemed to be a lack

of knowledge on how to consider such policy guidelines and principles, in the planning process.

18

3.4 INCORPORATING NATIONAL POLICY GUIDELINES AND PRINCIPLES

Without going into procedural and methodological detail, these policy guidelines can provide some general

guidance and direction on ways and means of considering national development policy guidelines and

principles in municipal integrated planning.

• The principle of basic needs orientation has to be considered in the integrated development planning

approach by:

– identification of service gaps for basic services as part of the analysis;

– differentiation of priority needs assessed during the public participation phase by social strata, gender

and location, and classification of needs as basic or non-basic;

– making sure that a basic needs orientation is reflected in the objectives; and

– making sure that strategies are explicit with regard to the proposed ways of catering for basic needs-

related services.

In other words: IDPs have to give explicit answers about the degree to which, and how, they intend to

improve basic needs satisfaction.

• The policy guidelines of poverty alleviation and gender equity have to be considered by:

– including socio-economic and gender-specific differentiation of problems, needs and potential as part of

the analysis;

– identifying poverty groups and other specific problem groups in the analysis;

– encouraging the participation of poverty groups, special problem groups, women, youth etc., in the

public participation process through legitimate representatives, advocates or competent resource

persons;

– setting target group specific objectives, and by making sure that these objectives do address major

poverty issues, issues of crucial problem groups and crucial gender imbalances;

– assessing alternative strategies by considering their impact on poverty alleviation and gender equity;

– considering poverty and gender issues when designing project proposals (costs, location, accessibility

etc.); and

– designing the system of rates and tariffs in a gender and poverty sensitive manner.

IDPs, consequently, have to give an explicit answers on the expected contribution to poverty alleviation,

gender equity and crucial concerns of specific problem groups, and on how the municipality intends to

address those issues.

• The principles of environmental soundness and sustainability have to be incorporated by:

– identification of environmental degradation and risks during the analysis;

– involvement of competent stakeholders and/or resource persons in charge of environmental concerns in

the public participation process;

– making sure that major environmental problems and threats are reflected in the objectives;

– assessing alternative strategies by considering their environmental impact; and

– considering environmental aspects when designing project proposals.

In short, IDPs have to give an explicit answer on how the municipality will deal with environmental problems

and avoid negative environmental impact.

• The policy guidelines related to promotion of economic growth, income and employment generation have to

be considered by:

– an analysis of economic structures, trends and potentials during the analysis, at least in category A and C

municipalities (for smaller category B municipalities this task may be too ambitious);

– involving the business community (including informal sector representatives) in the public participation

process;

– making sure that each municipality establishes an employment generation/LED strategy as part of its IDP

(category B municipalities may be given guidance through joint district-level strategy workshops to

comply with this task);

– deciding on measures for improving the institutional framework for private investment and for informal

sector activities; and

– deciding on areas for municipal service partnerships and on measures to promote such partnerships.

In other words: IDPs have to include an LED promotion strategy.

• The principle of involvement of residents, communities and stakeholders in all municipal processes will be

dealt with in detail in chapter 9 of this policy framework.

• The principle of sustainability of services, settlements and municipalities has to be addressed by:

– analysing cost-coverage rates for various services and problems and potential related to administrative

efficiency and effectiveness of service delivery during the analysis;

– addressing issues related to financial sustainability and cost-effectiveness and payment for services

during the public participation process;

– drafting objectives that take sustainability into consideration;

– deciding on alternative strategies on the basis of sustainability-related criteria; and

– considering financial sustainability when designing project proposals (service standards, etc.).

In short: IDPs must avoid the compilation of mere wish lists, and must be explicit on how the municipality

will make services as cost-effective as possible, and thereby affordable and sustainable.

• The DFA principles of integrated, liveable and compact towns and cities and of equal consideration of formal

and informal settlements have to be addressed in IDPs by:

– identifying problems and dynamics in the spatial system and the settlement patterns during the analysis;

– defining spatial development objectives and related spatial development strategies for the municipality;

– deciding on alternative locational options based on consideration of the DFA principles; and

– defining the land-use management tools to be applied to influence the spatial pattern in line with the

DFA principles.

In other words: IDPs have to include spatial considerations and have to be explicit on how to promote

development in line with basic spatial development principles as outlined in the DFA.

Only by considering these national development policy principles and guidelines, can IDPs become a useful

tool for sustainable municipal development that addresses the most urgent needs (through explicit

consideration of the basic needs of the poor) on the basis of utilising economic potential and of increasing

cost-effectiveness.

19

20

4. IMPLICATIONS OF MUNICIPAL INTEGRATED DEVELOPMENT

PLANNING FOR AN INTER-GOVERNMENTAL SYSTEM OF

DEVELOPMENT PLANNING

4.1 EXISTING LEGAL AND POLICY FRAMEWORK

The constitution wants “distinct, but interdependent spheres” of government. This implies that each sphere

is in charge of planning for the activities that are its responsibility, but that at the same time these activities, and

the corresponding plans by which they are guided, have to be aligned to one another.

The WPLG becomes more explicit on the distribution of roles and responsibilities, as well as on the way they

should be interrelated. It requires a mutual alignment, rather than a one-directional top-down or bottom-up

alignment. In this alignment process, local level planning has to be informed by national and/or provincial

policies, principles, strategies and standards, but the programmes of the other spheres of government must be

integrated and co-ordinated at the local level with due consideration for local needs, priorities and resources.

This applies to sectoral programmes as well as to multi-sectoral strategies. While the WPLG thus provides a

clear framework for inter-governmental interrelations, it is not very specific in saying what this means for the

system of development planning.

The MSB (draft 13-4-2000) does not go much further, saying that “the planning undertaken by a municipality

must be aligned with, and complement, the development plans and strategies of other affected municipalities,

organs of state of the province within which the municipality is located, and national organs of state ...” It does

not specify how this alignment (which can only be seen as a mutual process, given the participatory process of

planning required by the MSB) is to be achieved. It tends to put the responsibility for alignment on the

municipality, by asking it to adjust its plan if it is not aligned with development plans and strategies of other

organs of state.

4.2 EXPERIENCE TO DATE

Taking the distribution of government revenue between the spheres of government into account, IDPs can only

become powerful tools for developmental local government and for the required integration and co-ordination of

all government programmes within their jurisdiction, if there is:

– a significantly increased degree of fiscal decentralisation which would give IDPs more power to influence

delivery, and/or

– a well-designed and enforced inter-governmental planning system which would give IDPs more influence on

the way other spheres of government (including sector departments) spend their funds within

municipalities.

If both prerequisites are missing, IDPs will be a toothless tool and a useless exercise with little relevance for

delivery and little appreciation at local level.

There is another problem, closely related to the absence of fiscal decentralisation and/or an inter-governmental

planning system. As long as the implementation of IDPs depends on undefined ways of providing funds for

implementation of proposed projects, the incentive system for local councils will contradict the rules of

strategic planning. Rather than looking for the most cost-effective solutions and making strategic choices for

the best use of limited resources, councils tend to submit lengthy wish-lists because the system requires you

to ask for double what you really need in order to get anything at all. This incentive system discourages any

attempts at making best use of scarce resources.

21

4.3 PRINCIPLES OF AN INTER-GOVERNMENTAL PLANNING SYSTEM

1. National development guidelines and principles have to inform development planning in all spheres.

2. Each sphere has its own distinct developmental tasks and related planning tasks corresponding to the scale

of operations and the area of jurisdiction.

3. The needs, priorities and resources of municipal residents and the local conditions must inform

developmental activities at local level. Consequently, they will have to inform the planning processes of all

spheres of government and all sectors as far as these are in charge of implementing or financing projects at

local level.

4. Municipal integrated development planning as a tool to integrate and co-ordinate implementation in terms of

geographical space and time has to inform, and be informed by, the planning of other spheres of

government, including sectoral/departmental planning of line agencies.

5. The necessary mutual alignment between national principles/guidelines, sectoral planning requirements

(standards, provincial strategies) and local needs, conditions and resources, must be accomplished by the

“counter currency principle”. According to this principle, decisions at different levels/of different spheres of

government have to inform one another mutually, and be mutually binding. For example, local government

has to participate in the decision-making processes of the national or provincial spheres whenever their

decisions are likely to affect the local sphere. The decisions are binding on the local level and the national or

provincial sphere will have to advise the local sphere on how these decisions are to be incorporated into

local decisions. Such local decisions will then be checked for compliance with national/provincial decisions,

by organs of the provincial/national sphere in which the local sphere has to be represented.

These principles reflect a synthesis between top-down and bottom-up planning philosophies.

4.4 GUIDELINES FOR THE DISTRIBUTION OF ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

i. The national sphere should provide:

• A framework for sectoral, provincial and municipal planning to ensure orientation towards:

– a normative framework consisting of common policy guidelines and principles;

– general strategic guidelines with regard to sectoral strategies (focal sectors); and

– spatial macro-strategies (focal locations).

• Co-ordination and prioritisation of programmes and budgets between sectors and spheres in line with the

framework.

From the perspective of municipal integrated development planning, there is no need for an overall multi-

sectoral national development plan. But there may be national sector investment strategies, with objectives

and targets for public investment and services of national and provincial departments.

ii. The provincial sphere should provide:

• a more specific framework, i.e. a joint point of reference for all sector departments and all municipalities

consisting of:

– a provincial development strategy with mid-term objectives and targets for public investment and

services within a province (including a mid-term financial framework for investment and regionally

adjusted minimum standards and norms) and with provincial-scale projects and programmes; and

– a spatial macro-framework for all sectors and municipalities.

The provincial framework may include specifications of the national legislative framework related to certain well-

defined minimum requirements that reflect regional conditions.

22

• Co-ordination of sectoral programmes and of district programmes as well as alignment between municipal

planning and sectoral planning.

iii. The local government sphere has to elaborate a 5-year IDP as part of an integrated system of planning and

delivery, which serves as a frame for all development activities within the municipal area and which

accordingly informs:

– the annual budget of the municipality;

– the budgets and investment programmes of all sector departments (national and provincial) which

implement projects or provide services within the municipality;

– the business plans of the municipality;

– land-use management decisions;

– economic promotion measures;

– the local authority’s organisational set-up and management systems; and

– the monitoring and performance management system.

Consequently, the sphere of local government is the major arena of development planning. In the local arena

people’s needs and priorities and local conditions have to be linked, with national guidelines and sectoral

considerations, to specific projects and programmes.

4.5 GUIDELINES FOR LINKAGES BETWEEN THE SPHERES OF GOVERNMENT AND BETWEEN MUNICIPAL

AND SECTORAL PLANNING

The linkages should follow the principle of mutual information flow and checks and balances (counter-currency

principle) between the spheres, rather than a one-way information line. The system of linkages must consist of

the following components:

i. National and provincial (sectoral) frameworks with involvement of representatives from the other two

spheres of government. These frameworks (including legal planning requirements of the various sectors)

inform municipal planning.

ii. Relevant subject matter specialists from sector departments (provincial and national) to provide technical

guidance and/or initiate relevant studies for the integrated development planning process. The necessary

consultation link between local municipalities and representatives from provincial and national levels will be

arranged at the district/regional level.

iii. IDPs (with attached sector specific plans according to requirements) will be submitted to the provincial MEC

for local government for assessment. The assessment process is to fulfil three different functions:

• checking compliance with legal requirements and crucial policy guidelines;

• providing professional feedback related to methodological quality standards of the planning process and

the IDP document (as part of a learning process); and

• assessment of the feasibility and viability of the proposed projects and programmes by an alignment

committee composed of representatives of provincial and national departments (based on written

comments).

The provincial MEC may delegate these assessment and alignment functions to sub-committees at

district/regional level.

23

iv. The provincial MEC for Local Government (with the support of the alignment committee) should give

feedback to the municipalities on IDPs with regard to:

– compliance with legal and policy requirements;

– methodological aspects of the planning document;

– feasibility and viability of the proposed projects or programmes; and

– decisions made with regard to incorporation of proposals in provincial/national sectoral budgets.

The results of this alignment process should inform the plans/budgets of the provincial and national sector

departments involved.

v. Sector departments (provincial/national) will finance and/or implement projects/programmes in or with the

municipalities, in line with their commitments and according to the agreed distribution of roles and

responsibilities.

It is up to provincial regulations to determine which of these interactions is carried out through written

communications and which require joint meetings. This should be done in the spirit of keeping co-ordination

efforts on a manageable level.

This planning system will ensure that municipal planning and sectoral planning are:

– informed by the same legal and policy frameworks and macro-strategies;

– mutually inform each other; and

– inform budgets and business plans of municipalities and of provincial and national departments.

5. ALIGNING MUNICIPAL SECTOR PLANNING AND INTEGRATED

DEVELOPMENT PLANNING

5.1 EXISTING LEGAL AND POLICY FRAMEWORK

The MSB states that development strategies must be aligned with national or provincial sectoral plans and

planning requirements. It also establishes that a single, inclusive and strategic plan must be adopted which

links, integrates and coordinates plans.

National sector legislation contains various kinds of requirements for municipalities to undertake planning.

Sector requirements vary in nature in the following way:

(a) Legal requirements for the formulation of a discrete sector plan (such as water services development plans).

(b) A legal compliance requirement (such as the NEMA and DFA principles).

(c) A requirement that planning be undertaken as a component of, or part of, the IDP (like housing strategies

and targets).

(d) More a recommendation, than a requirement, which is deemed to add value to the municipal planning

process and product (like Local Agenda 21).

The following table summarises the requirements using this categorisation:

5.2 EXPERIENCE TO DATE

Municipalities were confused about how to accommodate the multiple legal requirements in procedural and

substantive terms. Very few municipalities attempted alignment between water services development planning

and integrated development planning, for example. Those that did, found it extremely difficult. Secondly and

more generally, in addition to difficulties arising from legal requirements for sector planning, sectoral integration

was not achieved. In some places it was attempted but old practice and lack of appropriate inter-sectoral

procedures complicated the task. In addition, insufficient project definition prior to the completion of the IDPs

meant that most municipalities never got to the point of dealing with projects in a multi-sectoral way.

Category of requirement Sector requirement

Requirement for a distinct plan Water services development plan (WSDP), integrated

transport plan (ITP), integrated waste management plan

(IWMP), Land Development Objectives (LDOs) -–to be

replaced by spatial planning requirements as part of IDP.

Requirement for sector

planning to be incorporated

into IDP

Housing strategies and targets, coastal management

issues, LED strategies, integrated infrastructure planning,

spatial framework, integrated energy plans (IEPs).

Requirement that IDP complies NEMA principles, DFA principles, EIPs and EMPs.

Value adding contribution Local Agenda 21.

24

25

5.3 THE APPROACH TO FORMULATING ALIGNMENT GUIDELINES

i. The intention of sector alignment

The approach to sector alignment is intended to be a practical guide for municipalities to fulfil the range of

planning requirements imposed by national government sector departments. The approach does not

address the multiple legal requirements themselves – being a methodological guide, as opposed to

recommendations for legal rationalisation, it cannot. It works within the existing legal parameters and

proposes ways and means that municipalities can simplify their planning processes, while still conforming to

the legal requirements. The approach to alignment is intended to create links and dialogue between the IDP

and sector planning processes.

ii. Responding to the diverse status of requirements

Sector requirements in national legislation vary in status. For example at the time of writing:

– The Department of Land Affairs had not yet finalised a White Paper on Development and Planning or a

national spatial planning law. Another example is that while the Department is clear that land reform

planning needs to be incorporated into the IDP process, there was not yet policy clarity on planning for

land reform.

– The Department of Water Affairs and Forestry has final legislation, policy guidelines, local government

support instruments such as manuals and implementation experience. Accordingly, the approach to

aligning water services development plans and IDPs is relatively well developed.

– The Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism’s requirements for conformity with EIPs and

EMPs had not yet had the benefit of implementation experience. The local government impact was

therefore unclear. Another example is that some of the sub-sector planning requirements are still the

subject of an unfolding legislative process, such as oil spill contingency plans.

iii. The scope and application of requirements

The sector requirements incorporated within the approach are national in scope. Provincial requirements

have not been addressed. The requirements of six national departments were assessed for alignment

namely:

– The Department of Water Affairs and Forestry.

– The Department of Transport.

– The Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism.

– The Department of Housing.

– The Department of Land Affairs.

– The Department of Provincial and Local Government.

However, the guidelines are sufficiently broad and inclusive of departments with significant requirements as

to be adequate. Municipalities could apply the approach proposed to whatever sectors emerge as significant

in the local priorities, as well as for sectors with requirements for the production of a plan. To aid in this

application, municipalities may want to consider a broad, two-fold differentiation of sectors:

(a) Firstly, those sectors that are delivery, output or target focused (such as water, housing or infrastructure).

(b) Secondly, those that are more process and principle orientated (such as environment and spatial

planning).

iv. The focus of alignment

The guidelines for alignment adopt as their focus aligning the planning processes within the municipal

sphere of government i.e. alignment between sectors at local government level (although the requirements

themselves have originated in national policy and law). This means that the approach does not directly

address alignment within sectors between spheres of government, although reference is made to when

such co-ordination is required for the aligned sector/IDP planning processes. In other words, aligning water,

transport or housing planning with the IDP process falls within the focus, while housing sector alignment

between local and provincial government does not. Although provision of information on the availability of

housing subsidies is required in the IDP process, indicating a need for aligning provincial multi-year housing

plans with the housing targets incorporated in the IDP. Intra-sectoral communication is assumed to be the

responsibility of sectors themselves, rather than of the IDP process, although an aligned IDP process will

greatly assist in this regard.

v. The need for strategic and implementable IDPs

An IDP has to include a considerable degree of technical and organisation detail in order to ensure:

– a truly participatory approach which means involving residents/potential users in decisions about location,

standards, responsibilities and costs, rather than leaving such crucial decisions to technicians of line

agencies;

– strategic planning, part of which is making technological and institutional choices which relate to aspects

such as cost-effectiveness, satisfaction of basic needs, poverty alleviation, gender impact, environmental

impact and other developmental principles;

– that the plan can actually inform the budget and help speed up and improve implementation, which

means specifying quantity, quality, timing, costs and responsibilities;

– multi-sectoral integration and co-ordination which requires that project and programme proposals

elaborated by technical teams have to be presented to the overall IDP committee for discussion and

amendment to ensure co-ordination and compliance with overall objectives and strategies; and

– that the plan can form a suitable basis for performance management – an IDP has to be more than a

macro-strategy framework for detailed sectoral and technical plans.

On the other hand, there are some pragmatic considerations that need to be taken into account:

– Time frames

Not each project can be designed with the same degree of detail within a given period.

– Volume of planning documents

Integrated development planning documents should not be too long. The plans should be user-friendly

documents for multi-sectoral management and monitoring. They should serve as a political reference

documents to be used by municipal managers, councillors, and an informed and interested public, rather

than by sector specialists.

An IDP, therefore, should include a short overview of all projects and programmes with:

– targets and indicators;

– major activities;

– timing; and

– costs and budget.

26

27

5.4 GUIDELINES FOR ALIGNING MUNICIPAL SECTOR PLANNING AND INTEGRATED DEVELOPMENT

PLANNING

i. Relevance and municipal priorities

Attempts to align sector requirements and the integrated development planning process are bound to comeup against the tension between fulfilling legal requirements and promoting local priorities. However, thistension can be overcome and a compromise reached by applying the concepts of “relevance”, “aligned andincorporated” and “aligned and parallel”.

The manner in which alignment is addressed in a municipality depends on the relevance of the sector in thatmunicipal context. Relevance is about the extent to which a particular sector features as an element, or aselements, of multi-sectoral IDP priorities and IDP projects. If a sector, or aspects of a sector, are related topriorities or projects, then the sector will be incorporated into the integrated development planning process.In this case, if there are legal requirements for municipal planning in relation to the sector, then theserequirements could be undertaken as part of the IDP process. However, if a sector, or aspects of a sector,for which there are municipal planning requirements does not emerge in relation to the priorities andprojects, then a parallel sector planning process will need to be organised and managed for those aspects ofthe sector which fall outside of the IDP process. These cases are summarised in the following diagram.

CASE A

CASE B

ii. Alignment phase by phase

The following table provides an indication of how sector alignment could occur in each phase of the IDPprocess. (This is addressed in greater detail in Guide 3).

IDP Process Sector Planning

IncorporatedSector

Planning

IDP Process Parallel Sector Planning

IncorporatedSector

Planning

Phase I: Analysis In-depth analysis ofpriority issues – sectoralanalysis where relevantto IDP priorities

In-depth analysis of priority issues –incorporation of aspects of sector informationand analysis requirements where appropriateto IDP priorities; agreement to parallel processwhere all requirements are not relevant to in-depth analysis of IDP priorities

Phase II: Strategies

Phase IV: Integration Integrated sectorprogrammes

Integrated sector programmes

For sectors in general For water, transport and waste m a n a g e m e n t

Phase III: Pro j e c t s Involvement of relevantsector expertise indesign of projectproposals

Drafting of WSDP, ITP and IWMP based onIDP projects, parallel process for additionalplan requirements not covered by IDPpriorities and projects

28

iii. Keeping abreast with change

Municipalities need to be aware of the different status of requirements, conform to those that are final and

incorporate those that arise as significant in the local planning process. It will be necessary to keep abreast

of unfolding legal and policy processes that finalise some requirements which were being developed at the

time of drafting this manual.

6. ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF DISTRICT AND LOCAL

MUNICIPALITIES

6.1 EXISTING LEGAL AND POLICY FRAMEWORK

The present legislation requires District Councils and Local Municipal Councils to do integrated development

planning. According to the Municipal Structures Act Amendment Act, a district municipality is responsible for

integrated development planning for the district municipality as a whole, including a framework for integrated

development plans of all municipalities in the area of the district municipality. The Municipal Structures Act

further states that this framework binds both the district municipality and the local municipalities in the area of

the district municipality.

This district IDP Framework must at least:

• identify the plans and planning requirements binding in terms of national and provincial legislation on the

district municipality and the local municipalities;

• identify all matters that must be included in the district IDP and local IDPs and that require alignment;

• specify the principles to be applied and the approach to be adopted in respect of those matters; and

• determine procedures for consultation between the district and local municipalities in the process of drafting

their respective IDPs as well as procedures to effect changes to the framework.

These legal requirements have to be seen in the context of the results of demarcation which imply a

fundamental change in the relationship between district councils and local councils. While in the past each of

them was, by and large, in charge of different geographical areas (local municipalities for the towns, district

councils for the rural areas), in future they will share responsibilities for the same areas, due to the

establishment of wall-to-wall municipalities. Local planning and district planning will differ by geographical scale

rather than by location. As a consequence, relations between District Councils and Local Municipal Councils

will have to change fundamentally. The interrelations will have to intensify.

6.2 EXPERIENCE TO DATE

While it is clear that district planning and planning of local municipalities have to inform each other, the

legislation is far from clear on how they should be aligned with one another. Consequently, there is a need for

clarification if confusion is to be avoided when the newly elected councils get involved in integrated

development planning.

As the relationship between the capacities of local and district municipalities differs widely from place to place,

the guidelines have to be somewhat flexible, but at the same time they have to ensure that a new type of

relationship between district and local councils is established which is in line with the new distribution of roles

after demarcation.

29

6.3 PRINCIPLES FOR DISTRIBUTION OF ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

There are four crucial criteria to be taken into account for an appropriate distribution of roles between the two

tiers of local government. The tension between planning at the scale that is closest to the people and achieving

optimal use of capacity and resources in an environment with severely limited capacity and resources is

summarised in the four criteria listed below:

i. Closeness to people and places

Appropriate planning has to take the realities and needs of the people and the conditions of different

locations into account. The scale at which district-level planning in South Africa will have to take place (areas

with close to a million people and more than 10 000 km2 on average) is too large for that type of local level

planning.

ii. Capacities and costs

Many local municipalities face serious capacity constraints. Therefore, it may be useful to allocate certain

challenging tasks, which require scarce resources, to a higher level rather than trying to provide such scarce

and expensive resources in each small place.

iii. Link to management of delivery and institutional transformation

Planning decisions have to be transformed into budgets and business plans by those charged with

implementation. The planning process is also meant to influence the management of implementation. Since

this link is crucial for improved delivery, local municipalities have to be involved in planning their projects and

programmes.

iv. Co-ordination

The district level will be the forum where inter-local co-ordination and co-ordination between local

municipalities and provincial/national sector departments will have to take place.

6.4 GUIDELINES FOR THE DISTRIBUTION OF ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES ACCORDING TO PLANNING

PHASES

The synchronisation of planning activities between district and local municipalities is essential to ensure that the

planning activities occur and outputs are available more or less simultaneously so that the joint and

complimentary responsibilities of the municipalities can be undertaken for all and by all responsible, at the same

time. This approach will avoid duplication of the required joint processes and maximise the use of limited

human resource capacities. It will also ensure consultation between the local and district municipalities and over

decision that effect and are binding on both.

The distribution of key roles and responsibilities for the district and local municipalities in the planning phases

are outlined in the table below.

30

S t r a t e g i e s To:• Define a local vision

and set of objectives.

• Participate in districtlevel strategyworkshop.

• Determine localstrategies per priorityissue on the basis ofthe district levelanalysis.

To:• Define a district vision and set of

objectives.

• Provide an event for a joint strategyworkshop with local municipalities andprovincial and national role-players therebyproviding an organisational framework foraligning strategies.

• Determine cross-boundary and districtstrategies per priority issue.

P ro j e c t s To:• Design local council

projects per strategy.

To:• Design district council projects per

strategy.

I n t e g r a t i o n To:• Compile a set of local

IntegratedProgrammes formanagingimplementation.

To:• Compile a set of district Integrated

Programmes for managingimplementation.

• Align and assess the Capital Investmentand Implementation programmes of localand district municipalities.

A p p ro v a l To:• Ensure that the IDP is

adopted by the LocalCouncil.

To:• Ensure that the IDP is adopted by the

District Council.

• Align the IDPs of the municipalities in thedistrict council area and with the otherspheres of government.

1Distribution of roles and responsibilities between local and district municipalities.

7. ORGANISATIONAL ARRANGEMENTS FOR INTEGRATED

DEVELOPMENT PLANNING

7.1 EXISTING LEGAL AND POLICY FRAMEWORK

The WPLG emphasises the need for transformation of the municipal administrative system without proposing

any specific organisational arrangements. Considering the diversity of conditions, it is left to the municipalities

to develop an institutional plan that proposes appropriate arrangements. Specifically, with regard to the

development of an IDP, the WPLG stresses that this process should not be “farmed out” to consultants, but

should “be managed within municipalities to provide a way of enhancing the strategic planning capacity of the

administration, building organisational partnerships between management and labour, and enhancing synergy

between line functions” (WPLG, p.28).

Planning Phase At Local Level At District Level

Analysis To:• Determine local

issues, problems,potentials andpriorities.

To:• Determine district scale issues, problems,

potentials and priorities.

• Consolidated the analysis results of thedistrict and local municipalities and definecommon priority issues.

31

While the WPLG requires integrated development planning to be managed within a municipality without saying

by whom, the MSB is slightly more specific. It states that the Executive Committee of the municipal council (or

the Executive Mayor, or – in absence of both – an appointed committee or councillors) must manage the

drafting of an IDP and assign responsibilities in this regard to the municipal manager.

The spirit of the political and legal framework is quite clear: IDPs should be an intense part of municipal

management and of an integrated system of planning and delivery. The full responsibility is within the

municipality and its organs.

7.2 EXPERIENCE TO DATE

Most municipalities outsourced their IDPs and handled them as tasks quite separate from their usual municipal

management process. The municipal administration, or the councillors, or both, were not involved in the

process.

This way of handling the planning task was partly a result of confusion regarding the exact nature of the roles

and responsibility of municipalities. Furthermore, many municipalities were concerned about the challenge of

drafting IDPs on their own, which would have exceeded their capacities in terms of time and professional

qualifications. The confusion was related to the lack of a clear definition and separation of the tasks of:

– managing a planning process, and

– providing professional planning and facilitation services.

While rejecting the unrealistic expectation that they become development planners, most municipal managers

also avoided coping with the realistic challenge of managing planners, and organising the planning process.

7.3 PRINCIPLES FOR ROLE DISTRIBUTION

The distribution of roles and responsibilities within a municipal planning process has to be guided by democratic

principles on the one hand, and by the guideline of aiming at an integrated system of planning and delivery on

the other.

The new democracy in South Africa represents a synthesis between the system of a representative democracy,

where elected bodies like councils have to decide or to finally approve decisions, and a corporatist, negotiating

type of democracy, where decisions are arrived at through public discussion and processes of negotiation. For

the integrated development planning process, this understanding of democracy means that:

– the process is not just a planning process within municipal government, but a forum for discussions and

negotiations of various municipal stakeholders, and

– the final decision and the accountability is with the municipal council as the elected body answerable to the

public on the utilisation of public resources.

The establishment of an integrated system of planning and delivery (or planning and implementation

management) requires the full involvement of those in charge of municipal management in the planning

process.

For the integrated development planning process, this implies that:

– the process has to be managed by somebody from within the municipal government, acting on behalf of the

Municipal Manager (CEO), who has been assigned the powers to get all relevant actors from within

municipal government on board, and

– there has to be a special multi-sectoral IDP committee or task team which has to include all municipal heads

of department and at least those councillors sitting in the Executive Committee as a basis for institutional

transformation within the municipal administration.

Unless these prerequisites are fulfilled, integrated development planning has little chance of becoming a useful

tool for democratic and developmental local government.

32

7.4 GUIDELINES FOR THE DISTRIBUTION OF ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

The actual distribution of roles and responsibilities may vary between different categories and types ofmunicipalities, according to the available human and institutional resources. As long as they are in line with theprinciples, allocations of roles and responsibilities to various role-players may differ slightly. Nevertheless, theproposed role distribution will serve as a guide for the majority of category B municipalities.

Role-players Roles and Responsibilities

Municipal Council Final decision-making/approval of IDPs

Monitoring

Councillors Linking integrated development planning process to theirconstituencies/wards

Organising public participation

Executive Committee or

Executive Mayor/Municipal

Manager/CEO

Decide on planning process: nominate persons incharge; monitor planning process

Overall management and co-ordination responsibility(to make sure that all relevant actors are involved)

IDP Manager

(nominated chairperson of IDPcommittee– from within municipality– adequate time allocation

Day-to-day management of the drafting process on

behalf of the Municipal Manager

(to ensure a properly managed and organised planning

process)

IDP Committee/Task Team

(with special sub-committees)composed of:– councillors– officials– selected public representatives

Elaboration/discussion of contents of the IDP

– providing inputs related to the various planning steps

– summarising/digesting/processing inputs from theparticipation process

– discussion/commenting on inputs from consultants orother specialists

– deciding on drafts

Planning professionals/

facilitators

They may be from the municipaladministration or contractedaccording to availability

Methodological guidance/facilitation of planning

workshops/documentation/special studies

Planning professionals may take over the role of a“secretary” of the IDP Committee/Task Team

Municipal officials

(technical officers, heads ofdepartments)

Providing technical/sector expertise and information

Preparing draft project proposals

“Civil Society”

– stakeholders– communities

Representing interests and contributing knowledge

and ideas

(see Section 8 on “Public Participation”)

33

8. PLANNING APPROACH AND METHODOLOGY

8.1 LEGAL AND POLICY REQUIREMENTS

According to the WPLG, the integrated development planning approach is to help municipalities fulfil their

developmental mandate by:

• helping them to understand the various dynamics operating within their area;

• requesting them to agree on a joint, concrete vision for the area;

• enabling them to develop strategies for realising that vision in partnership with other stakeholders;

• enabling them to align their financial and institutional resources behind agreed policy objectives and

programmes;

• ensuring the integration of local government activities with other spheres of development planning, by

serving as a basis for integration and interaction;

• serving as a basis for engagement between local government and citizens; and

• enabling municipalities to systematically prioritise programmes and resource allocations.

In short: integrated development planning needs to be a consultative, analytical, strategic and objectives-

oriented approach of decision-making on issues related to municipal development. The WPLG proposes

concrete planning steps for the process:

• An assessment of the current social, economic and environmental reality in the municipal area – the current

reality.

• A determination of community needs through close consultation.

• Developing a vision for development in the area.

• An audit of available resources, skills and capacities.

• A prioritisation of these needs in order of urgency and long-term importance.

• The development of integrated frameworks and goals to meet these needs.

• The formulation of strategies to achieve the goals within specific time frames.

• The implementation of projects and programmes to achieve key goals.

• The use of monitoring tools to measure impact and performance.

The WPLG is less clear on the “product” of the process, and on the nature of the integrated development

planning document(s):

“While the idea behind IDPs is to build up a comprehensive integrated plan, municipalities cannot plan

everything in detail in the first year. Rather, IDPs should empower municipalities to prioritise and strategically

focus their activities and resources. An attempt to plan too comprehensively may result in unrealistic plans that

lack the human and financial resources for implementation.”

The question of how comprehensive and how detailed the outcome of the integrated development planning

process should be, is still to be answered.

The MSB defines the legal minimum requirements with regard to the contents or “core components” of an IDP

which include (by and large in line with the steps suggested by the WPLG):

• a vision (internal and external);

• an assessment of the existing levels of development;

• development priorities;

• development objectives;

34

• development strategies;

• a spatial development framework;

• operational strategies;

• disaster management plans;

• a financial plan (including a 3-year budget projection); and

• KPIs and performance targets.

This list of contents provides clear indications on the design of the integrated development planning process.

8.2 EXPERIENCES TO DATE

Most municipalities and their planning consultants found it difficult to cope with the various methodological

challenges related to the requirements of the WPLG and the MSB:

• Most found it difficult to organise public participation processes in an appropriate manner.

• Many municipalities spent most of their planning funds on comprehensive, unfocused approaches of

situation analysis (usually misguided by provincial regulations which prescribed the contents of such analysis

in detail) which were not helpful for understanding the dynamics in the area.

• Most planners found it difficult to relate the results of data-based analysis and of participatory needs

analysis to each other.

• Hardly any municipalities managed to cope with drafting development strategies, making strategic choices,

prioritising systematically and answering the HOW-questions.

• Most IDPs are not concrete enough to guide implementation and are far from being a useful management

tool.

Most of the challenges were new. Appropriate training and support systems were not yet in place. The IDP

Manual, which tried to assist municipalities to cope with the new challenges with a very detailed step-by-step,

and tool-by-tool approach, turned out to be too complicated. It tended to encourage a mechanistic approach that

discouraged a broad and open strategic discussion process on the “real issues” and the most appropriate ways

and means of dealing with them.

In short: Most municipalities and their planning consultants have not yet found appropriate ways to cope with

the new challenge of combining the approaches of participatory, strategic and implementation-oriented project

planning. The available guidelines did not give an adequate answer to this crucial question.

8.3 PRINCIPLES FOR THE PLANNING APPROACH

In line with the WPLG and the MSB, the IDP approach has to conform to the following methodological

principles:

i. An IDP has to reflect the priority needs/problems of the municipality and its residents.

ii. Available resources must be used in an objective-oriented manner.

iii. The plan has to be strategic, i.e. it has to be based on a process of informed choices and searches for cost-

effective solutions with high synergy and leverage effects.

iv. An IDP has to be implementation-oriented, i.e. it has to be specific enough to inform budgets, business

plans, land use management decisions, etc.

In short: The integrated development planning process has to provide a forum for identifying, discussing and

resolving the “real issues” in a municipality (which may be over-arching issues for the whole municipality, as

well as issues of specific communities or stakeholder groups) to a level of detail which is required for realistic

costing and which helps manage the implementation process without much delay.

35

8.4 GUIDELINES FOR ANSWERING THE HOW-QUESTION

It is not the function of integrated development planning guidelines to provide methodological guidelines that

can help answer all the HOW-questions in detail. This will be done in Guide 3. However, there are some basic

questions related to the methodology which have to be considered as policy issues, and need to be dealt with

in this section.

i. Participatory approach

Municipal planning within the enlarged municipalities (with nearly 100 000 residents on average) cannot be

based on direct participation through public meetings, but requires structured participation with

institutionalised participation channels (see section 8).

ii. Analysis

This should not mean a comprehensive compilation of all kinds of data. It should, instead, be focused on

identified priority issues and help clarify the causes and dynamics of these issues. This requires an

amendment of most provincial regulations.

iii. Data-based analysis and participatory identification of problems/needs/issues

These processes must inform each other. Participatory dialogues with communities or stakeholders should

be related to facts and figures, while the priority issues resulting from participation processes should be the

topics for in-depth analysis.

iv. Objectives and strategies

The process of arriving at objectives and strategies for each of the priority issues should allow for a strategic

multi-sectoral discussion process on ways of dealing with the issues. It is meant to be a process of

discussing strategic options, taking into account policy guidelines and framework conditions.

v. Implementation orientation

If integrated development planning processes and products are to help speed up and improve delivery, if

they are to inform budgets, business plans, land use management and programmes of sector line agencies,

they must become sufficiently specific to allow for cost calculations, quantified targets and decisions on

locations. This requires decisions on, for example, technology standards and designs. Consequently,

technical project planning has to be, up to a point, part of integrated development planning, for it to become

part and parcel of the municipal management system. This implies that an IDP has to:

– include a binding spatial development framework which is sufficiently specific to form an operational

basis for speedy land management decisions and for guiding investment decisions of private and public

investors;

– include project proposals which are sufficiently detailed to allow for a feasibility and viability analysis and

can, thus, attract funds from financing institutions;

– include an action programme for economic promotion and income generation aimed at the

establishment of an attractive institutional/infrastructural environment for economic ventures;

– include clearly specified targets and indicators as a basis for transparency and accountability of local

councils and as a performance management system; and

– prepare the ground for municipal service partnerships, including community partnerships, by involving

community and stakeholder organisations in the designing and decision-making process of concrete

localised projects.

36

9. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION IN THE INTEGRATED DEVELOPMENT

PLANNING PROCESS

9.1 EXISTING LEGAL AND POLICY FRAMEWORK

The Constitution stipulates that one of the objectives of municipalities is “to encourage the involvement of

communities and community organisations in the matters of local government”.

The WPLG emphasises the issue of public participation (not only in municipal planning). It goes into some detail

on how to achieve public participation and of the role local government has to play to ensure the involvement of

citizens in policy formulation and designing of municipal programmes, as well as implementation and monitoring

and evaluation of such programmes. Public participation is meant to promote local democracy. While the

WPLG emphasises that the municipalities themselves should develop appropriate strategies and mechanisms

to ensure participation, some hints on how are given, such as:

• forums of organised formations (especially in the fields of visioning and on issue-specific policies, rather

than on multiple policies);

• structured stakeholder participation in council committees (in particular in temporary issue-oriented

committees);

• participatory action research, with specific focus groups (for in-depth information on specific issues); and

• formation of associations (especially among people in marginalised areas).

There are guidelines reflected in these hints. Firstly, participation should be a structured process rather than a

process of public mass meetings. Secondly, public participation should focus on certain specific processes, and

is not equally useful in all fields of municipal management.

Local government is not only expected to find its own ways of structuring participation, but is expected to

become active in encouraging and promoting participation, especially when it comes to the participation of

marginalised groups and women.

While the MSB defines a municipality as a “corporate entity” which consists not only of its “structures,

functionaries and administration”, but also of its “communities, residents and ratepayers”, it differentiates

clearly between the roles and responsibilities of the “governing structures” (which form a separate legal

personality), and the communities, residents and ratepayers.

The public participation chapter of the MSB is guided by the principle that formal representative government

must be complemented by a system of participatory governance. Participation in the decision-making processes

of the municipality is determined to be a right of communities, residents and ratepayers. Integrated

development planning is emphasised as a special field of public participation.

The decision on appropriate mechanisms, processes and procedures for public participation is largely left to the

municipality. The only prescribed participation procedures are the receipt, processing and consideration of

petitions and complaints and the public notice of council meetings. No procedures are prescribed for

participation in the integrated development planning process.

Municipalities are requested to create conditions for public participation and, moreover, to encourage it. The

only prescribed tool for promotion of public participation, however, is the dissemination of information on

mechanisms and matters of public participation, on rights and duties of residents and on municipal governance

issues in general.

37

9.2 EXPERIENCE TO DATE

Leaving the decision on ways and means of public participation to each municipality results in:

• completely different styles of democracy with highly diverging combinations of formal representative and

participatory governance within the country;

• helplessness and confusion on the side of most municipalities, which find it difficult to determine

appropriate procedures of their own; and

• denying residents their right to participate, by avoiding setting minimum requirements which specify that

right.

Many participation processes in the recent integrated development planning phase were organised in a way

which did not comply with any of the general principles stated in the WPLG and the MSB.

9.3 PRINCIPLES OF PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

i. The elected councils are the ultimate decision-making forum on IDPs. The role of participatory democracy is

to inform, negotiate and comment on those decisions, in the course of the planning/decision-making

process.

ii. Public participation has to be institutionalised in order to ensure that all residents of the country have an

equal right to participate. Institutionalising participation means:

– setting clear minimum requirements for participation procedures which apply for all municipalities by

means of regulations, and

– providing a legally recognised organisational framework.

iii. Structured participation: Most of the new municipalities are too big in terms of population size and area to

allow for direct participation of the majority of the residents in complex planning processes. Participation in

integrated development planning, therefore, needs clear rules and procedures specifying who is to

participate or to be consulted, on behalf of whom, on which issue, through which organisational mechanism,

with what effect.

iv. Diversity: The way public participation is institutionalised and structured has to provide sufficient room for

diversity, i.e. for different participation styles and cultures. While there has to be a common regulatory frame

for institutionalised participation in the country, this frame has to be wide enough for location-specific

adjustments to be made by provinces and municipalities.

v. Promotion of public participation by municipal government has to distinguish between:

– creating conditions for public participation, which is a must for all municipalities (in line with the MSB),

and

– encouraging public participation, which should be done in particular with regard to disadvantaged or

marginalised groups and gender equity in accordance with the conditions and capacities in a municipality.

38

9.4 THE FUNCTIONS AND CONTEXT OF PUBLIC PARTICIPATION IN THE INTEGRATED DEVELOPMENT

PLANNING PROCESS

Participation in the integrated development planning process is only one of several arenas of participatory

interaction between local government and citizens. Other means of ensuring participatory local government

are:

• offering people choices between services;

• citizen and client-oriented ways of service delivery and public administration;

• partnership between communities/stakeholder organisations and local authorities in implementation of

projects; and

• giving residents the right of petition and complaint and obliging municipal government to respond.

Participation in the development of municipal IDPs has to be seen within this wider context. It serves to fulfil

four major functions:

i. Needs orientation: ensuring that people’s needs and problems are taken into account.

ii. Appropriateness of solutions: using the knowledge and experience of local residents and communities in

order to arrive at appropriate and sustainable problem solutions and measures.

iii. Community ownership: mobilising local residents’ and communities’ initiatives and resources, and

encouraging co-operation and partnerships between municipal government and residents for implementation

and maintenance.

iv. Empowerment: Making integrated development planning a public event and a forum for negotiating

conflicting interests, finding compromises and common ground and, thereby, creating the basis for

increased transparency and accountability of local government towards local residents.

These functions must always influence the choice of appropriate procedures and mechanisms for public

participation.

9.5 TOOLS, PROCEDURES AND MECHANISMS FOR AN INSTITUTIONALISED AND STRUCTURED PROCESS

OF PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

Structured participation is largely based on the existence of a set of organisations with certain rights in the

planning process. While the organisational arrangements may differ widely in detail from area to area, the

following minimum requirements have to be regulated.

i. Ward Committees are the organisational framework through which communities in geographical areas can

participate in the planning process.

ii. Stakeholder organisations which represent certain social, economic, gender or environmental interests have

to be registered as “Stakeholder Associations” (at municipality level) through which they can participate in

the planning process.

iii. The council and the chairperson of the IDP Committee have to make sure that all relevant groups and all

social strata are given the opportunity to be adequately represented. Unorganised groups should be

represented by “advocates” (e.g. social workers, NGOs, resource persons who did studies on such groups,

etc.).

iv. All Ward Committees and Stakeholder Associations should be represented on the “Representative IDP

Forum” which will form a formal link between the municipal government and the public. The Representative

IDP Forum should be a permanent organisation which is also in charge of monitoring the performance

during IDP implementation. Meetings of the IDP Forum have to be attended by the IDP Committee

members and by the councillors.

39

v. IDP committees and their technical, project/programme-related sub-committees or task teams may include

representatives from ward committees and stakeholder associations or resource persons from civil society if

the municipality considers it appropriate. Such representatives may be permanent (sub-) committee

members or be invited on a temporary issue-related basis.

For category A and C municipalities, different institutional arrangements will apply. While districts can build on

the participation processes of the local councils within the area of jurisdiction, metropolitan municipalities may

need one additional stage of participation on a sub-metropolitan level.

9.6 GUIDELINES FOR CREATING CONDITIONS FOR PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

The MSB requires municipalities to disseminate information on processes and procedures and on matters of

concern. Transforming this general requirement to the integrated development planning process means that

each municipality has to follow at least the following procedures.

i. The residents have to be informed on the integrated development planning process as a whole, and on

crucial public events related to that process through:

– public announcements (appropriate media to be determined in the “work plan”); and

– ward committees and stakeholder associations.

ii. Councillors have to inform the communities within the area of the ward, through a public ward-level

meeting.

iii. The Representative IDP Forum has to be involved at least once in each major stage of the drafting process.

iv. The community and stakeholder representatives have to be given adequate time (2-4 weeks) to conduct

meetings or workshops with the groups, communities or organisations they represent, before the issue is

dealt with by the Representative IDP Forum. This is to give a fair opportunity for legitimate representative

participation, but it does not necessarily involve the municipal governments in community- or stakeholder-

level workshops.

v. Draft planning documents have to be accessible for every resident, and everybody has the right to submit

written comments. There must be a time period of at least four weeks for ward committees, stakeholder

associations and interested groups and residents to discuss the draft document publicly, and to comment on

it before the Representative IDP Forum deals with the draft.

vi. The IDP committee has to inform the ward committees and stakeholder associations on the way the

comments were considered, or on reasons why they were not considered by the Representative IDP

Forum, before the draft is submitted to the council for approval.

vii. Council meetings on the approval of integrated development planning must be public meetings.

9.7 GUIDELINES ON THE ENCOURAGEMENT OF PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

The municipal government, through its IDP committee and its councillors, should use all appropriate means,

above and beyond creating the necessary conditions, to encourage public participation. As it will be a struggle

for most municipalities to provide the minimum conditions, and ensure the involvement of the major role-

players from within municipal government, and as participation is a right but not a duty of residents, the ability

to actively encourage public participation at community level will be limited in most places.

Active encouragement should therefore focus on those social groups which are not well organised and which

do not have the power to articulate their interests publicly. This could mean poverty groups, or women, or

specific age groups (youth, orphans, aged people). The municipality has to identify the groups and determine

appropriate ways of ensuring their representation in the Representative IDP Forum.

40

9.8 GUIDELINES ON PHASING PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

Public participation is not equally relevant and appropriate in each stage of planning, and not all participation

procedures are equally suitable for each planning step. To limit participation costs, to avoid participation fatigue,

and to optimise the impact of participation, the mechanisms of participation will have to differ from stage to

stage. The following guidelines can help municipalities to decide on appropriate tools for the right step:

✰✰✰ – High intensity: Involvement of communities, stakeholders, residents, users and partners.

✰✰ – Medium intensity: Involvement of representative municipal IDP Forum.

✰ – Low intensity: Small technical committees with selected representatives of the public.

S t r a t e g i e s

✰

• District level workshops of IDPcommittees, with representatives ofsector departments and selectedrepresentatives of stakeholderorganisations and resource people

• Partly on district-level

P roject planning(a) Projects/programmes

with municipality-widescale

(b) Localised community-level projects

✰

✰✰✰

• Technical sub-committees with fewselected representatives of stakeholderorganisations/civil society

• Intensive dialogue between technical sub-committees and affectedcommunities/stakeholders

I n t e g r a t i o n ✰ • By Representative IDP Forum

A p p ro v a l

✰✰✰

• Broad public discussion/consultationprocess within all community/stakeholderorganisations

• Opportunity for comments from residents

Monitoring of

i m p l e m e n t a t i o n✰✰

• By Representative IDP Forum

Planning phase Required intensity of

public participation

Mechanisms

Analysis

✰✰✰

• Community and stakeholder meeting

• Sample surveys (problem census, etc.)

• Opinion polls

41

10. SUPPORT SYSTEMS FOR MUNICIPAL PLANNING

10.1 EXISTING LEGAL AND POLICY FRAMEWORK

There is a clear separation between roles and responsibilities which each sphere of government has, in its own

right, as part of a co-operative system of government with shared responsibilities, and the specific support roles

of national and provincial government towards local government, which are to help local government to fulfil its

own functions adequately. While shared responsibilities within the system of co-operative governance are of a

long-term nature, support responsibilities may be temporary.

According to the Constitution, national and provincial government must support and strengthen the capacities of

municipalities to manage their own affairs, to exercise their powers and to perform their functions.

The WPLG refers to this constitutional mandate and specifies the roles of national and provincial government.

While national government is supposed to establish an overall framework for municipal capacity building and

support, provincial government has to provide a framework for capacity building in the province, which takes

account of the different needs of the municipalities, and ensures that capacity building takes place. Provincial

training structures have to be established. Providing assistance with municipal IDPs is one of the capacity-

building functions mentioned in the WPLG. District governments are expected to fulfil the role of providing on-

demand assistance as well as systematic capacity building for local municipalities. This refers, among other

areas, to technical support in the area of planning.

The MSB refers only to the support role of the province for integrated development planning, without providing

further details.

All spheres of government are expected to take responsibility for capacity-building support for local

municipalities. While national government’s role is that of providing a framework for support, provinces and

districts are expected to become directly involved in capacity building. The distribution of support roles

between provinces and districts is not specified any further.

10.2 EXPERIENCE TO DATE

The existing support systems for integrated development planning did not correspond to the support

requirements of all smaller category B municipalities which could not afford their own built-in professional

planning capacities. Neither national support (such as the provision of guidelines and manuals), nor provincial

support (such as providing regulations, organising training and exchange workshops, and providing

organisational guidance) filled the gap in planning and facilitation skills at the local level. It was mistakenly

presumed that municipal managers could be capacitated to take over the role of planners and facilitators by

being provided with a manual and a short introductory course. Municipal managers, however, had neither the

time nor the professional background to take on the job of a planner for a number of months. The support gap

was, therefore, filled by consultants. This solution turned out to be inadequate in most cases, for two reasons:

• Planning consultants tended to use a product-related approach rather than a supportive and capacity-building

one. In addition, most municipalities that outsourced integrated development planning to consultants

wanted a document at the end that would qualify for approval by the MEC, thus fulfilling a legal

requirement.

• Most planning consultants were specialised in a conventional type of town planning. They were not familiar

with concepts of participatory, or of strategic and project planning. The support was usually not adequate for

the new requirements of integrated development planning.

None of the existing types of support agents can take over the role of providing professional methodological

guidance to municipal managers during the planning and drafting process.

42

10.3 PRINCIPLES OF AN INTEGRATED DEVELOPMENT PLANNING SUPPORT SYSTEM

i. Two components of a planning and management support system for local government have to be

distinguished:

– Constitutional public support obligations like finance, policy guidance, policy-related information,

monitoring and control. This type of support must be provided in a proactive, supply-oriented manner by

the agencies in charge.

– Professional services like methodological guidance, facilitation, documentation, surveys, analytical

studies, etc. These services may be provided by private or public service providers, depending on the

capacity to provide the appropriate services. They should only be provided on a demand basis.

ii. In relation to time horizons it is important to distinguish between temporary and permanent support

requirements:

– Temporary support is usually enabling support. It has to be provided to capacitate actors in fulfilling their

roles and responsibilities in line with the new requirements.

– Permanent support is usually provision of services for which a governing body is politically responsible

without being able to do it on its own, due to a lack of economies of scale and specialisation advantages.

iii. Professional support has to be managed by the municipalities. It should not take over the municipal

management responsibility. Just as municipal managers cannot be expected to do the job of a planner (but

can be expected to control planners), planners should not be allowed to do the job of the IDP manager.

iv. Principle of subsidiarity: Support systems should be as close to the local sphere as possible. Whatever can

be done as well or better at a lower level should not be done at a higher level. Whatever is done adequately

by existing service providers should not be done by newly established service providers. The responsibility

for municipal support systems should, as far as possible, be within the local sphere of government. New

support systems should only fill support gaps, not replace functioning existing support.

10.4 GUIDELINES ON ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES WITHIN AN INTEGRATED DEVELOPMENT PLANNING

SUPPORT SYSTEM

i. The role of national government in supporting municipal planning is (aside from its own role of setting a

legal framework and policy guidelines and principles):

– to provide a set of planning tools or methods;

– to cater for the elaboration of a general framework for training programmes and curricula development;

– to contribute to the planning costs;

– to help get a nation-wide support system established;

– to monitor the planning and implementation process; and

– to provide opportunities for exchange of ideas and experiences.

ii. The supporting role (aside from its own roles in the planning system) of provincial government is:

– to provide broad procedural guidance for the planning process;

– to provide professional feedback on methodological as well as on substantive aspects of an IDP;

– to contribute to the planning costs;

– to organise learning networks between municipalities;

– to ensure access to appropriate training programmes; and

– to monitor the planning and implementation process.

43

iii. District Councils must support local municipalities with insufficient planning capacities by:

– providing access to planning and management related information;

– providing methodological guidance to single local municipalities during the course of the planning

process (e.g. by joint workshops with local municipalities for some critical integrated development

planning components);

– training local municipality officials and councillors in managing the process through “learning by doing”

approaches;

– linking local municipalities to appropriate services, information and training; and

– providing opportunities for sharing ideas and experiences and for doing certain planning steps through

joint workshops.

iv. The private sector (consultants, NGOs) can be used for all planning-related services that do not affect the

management responsibility of local authorities and which require specific skills and can easily be outsourced:

– NGOs may be used in particular for assisting communities and disadvantaged, unorganised groups to get

involved in the process through establishing appropriate representative systems and mechanisms.

– Private consultants may be used, in particular, for specific product-related contributions (e.g. technical

studies, surveys, environmental impact assessments, mapping and GIS).

– Facilitation of planning workshops and meetings requires very special, high-level skills. Competent

facilitators are rare and may be hired from NGOs, the private sector or from within the government

sector.

The Department of Provincial and Local Government is in the process of establishing a nation-wide “Planning

and Implementation Management Support System” (PIMSS), which is in line with these guidelines.

The allocation of tasks within the support system can help all actors involved to identify their own mandates

and responsibilities. It should not be taken as a rigid and prescriptive formula. There are some overlaps, there

must be some flexibility related to local circumstances, and there may be competition among different types of

service providers.

11. ASSESSMENT AND APPROVAL OF IDPS

11.1 EXISTING LEGAL AND POLICY FRAMEWORK

The WPLG emphasises the importance of not undermining the municipalities’ executive authority over

development procedures and approvals, thereby questioning the approval procedure required by the DFA.

The MSB requires only the submission of a copy of the IDP, which has to be adopted by the municipal council,

to the MEC for local government. If the IDP does not comply with legal requirements or development plans or

strategies of other municipalities or other spheres of government, the MEC may request the municipality to

amend the plan. If the municipality disagrees, the MEC may appoint an ad hoc committee to deal with the

case. If this ad hoc committee insists on the amendment, the municipality must adjust the IDP.

11.2 EXPERIENCE TO DATE

The system of inter-governmental relations and the important role of provincial and national government

agencies in the implementation of IDPs requires provincial government and relevant representatives of national

government to be involved in the assessment and/or approval of IDPs for alignment purposes. However, it is far

from clear who should be involved in that process and against which criteria an IDP should be assessed. Clear

guidelines for the assessment approval procedure are required to make it a meaningful exercise.

44

11.3 GUIDELINES FOR THE ASSESSMENT/APPROVAL PROCESS

i. IDPs have to be approved by municipal councils only.

ii. District councils need to ensure the co-ordination of local plans and should therefore mediate a process of

achieving co-ordination and alignment between local plans.

iii. To ensure functioning inter-governmental relations (as outlined in Chapter 4), and to contribute to a smooth

horizontal and vertical co-ordination mechanism, IDPs have to be submitted to the provincial MECs for local

government for assessment and feedback in line with the MSB.

iv. The provincial level assessment and feedback process should be done in line with four major criteria:

– compliance with legal requirements;

– professional quality of the planning process and usefulness of the integrated development planning

documents as a tool;

– feedback on feasibility and viability of proposed projects; and

– harmonisation of plans across district boundaries and alignment with sectoral/departmental planning in

the context of provincial strategies and national priorities.

v. The MEC for local government should establish an IDP alignment committee consisting of representatives

of provincial, national and local government to comment on and discuss issues related to the criteria of

feasibility and viability of projects and harmonisation and alignment.

12. LEGAL STATUS OF IDPs

12.1 EXISTING LEGAL AND POLICY FRAMEWORK

The legal status of IDPs is defined in the MSB which says that the IDP:

– informs all planning and development, and all decisions with regard to planning and development, in the

municipality;

– binds all persons (except in case of inconsistencies with national or provincial legislation); and

– requires that the municipal council give effect to it by conducting its affairs in a manner which is consistent

with the IDP.

Moreover, the spatial development framework contained in an IDP prevails over plans made in line with the

Physical Planning Act, 1991.

It is obvious that the MSB wants to make IDPs a powerful tool to guide all actions of a municipal council.

12.2 EXPERIENCE TO DATE

The intention of the MSB to provide IDPs with strong teeth is difficult to operationalise. Many components of

plans are not sufficiently precise to be binding; others are too subject to continuous adjustment to changing

conditions (e.g. budget frames, new opportunities) to be binding in a legal sense. Some specification and

interpretation is required to allow IDPs to have more impact.

45

12.3 GUIDELINES FOR ENSURING THE IMPACT OF IDPS

i. IDPs are a principle-led, indicative framework for all decision-making processes within the municipality,

including specific elements such as:

– municipal budgets and business plans;

– sectoral/departmental investment budgets;

– land management decisions; and

– economic promotion measures.

The municipal council is politically accountable for deciding on, and conducting its affairs in line with, the IDP.

Its performance will be measured against the objectives and indicators outlined in the IDP.

ii. The spatial development framework, with the IDP, will be a legally binding document for all land-use

management decisions in accordance with the new spatial planning legislation under preparation.

I D P G u i d e - P a c kG u i d e I I

P R E P A R A T I O N

IDPINTEGRATED DEVELOPMENT PLANNING

4

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. INTRODUCTION: PREPARING FOR THE IDP PROCESS 5

1.1 What needs to be prepared? 5

1.2 Legal Requirements with regards to Preparation of the IDP Process 6

1.3 The Required Documents: Process Plan and Framework 7

1.4 The Preparation Process 10

1.5 Guidance Offered by this Document 10

2. DISTRIBUTION OF ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES 13

3. ORGANISATIONAL ARRANGEMENTS 18

4. MECHANISMS AND PROCEDURES FOR PUBLIC PARTICIPATION 24

5. DESIGNING AN ACTION PROGRAMME 30

6. MECHANISMS AND PROCEDURES FOR ALIGNMENT 32

7. NATIONAL AND PROVINCIAL BINDING LEGISLATION AND

PLANNING REQUIREMENTS 36

8. BUDGET FOR THE PLANNING PROCESS 37

9. THE FRAMEWORK 39

ANNEX 1 41

ANNEX 2 42

Phase I: Analysis 42Phase II: Strategies 43Phase III: Projects 44Phase IV: Integration 45Phase V: Approval 46

ANNEX 3 47

CONTACT DETAILS 48

5

1. INTRODUCTION: PREPARING FOR THE IDP PROCESS

Guide II intends to help municipal management to accomplish its preparationwork for the IDP process. Thus, it is about planning for planning.

This introduction section provides you with:

• a short rationale for the preparation process, explaining what needs to beprepared and why (1.1);

• a presentation and interpretation of legal preparation requirements (1.2);

• a summary of the documents (and their contents) to be compiled as aresult of the preparation process (1.3);

• some general guidance on how to organise the preparation process (1.4);and finally

• an overview of the contents of this guide (Guide II) which indicates how itwill lead you through the various preparation steps and tasks (1.5).

1.1 WHAT NEEDS TO BE PREPARED?

Drafting an Integrated Development Plan requires a 9 month planning process

with the involvement of a wide range of role-players from inside and outside

the municipality. Such a process needs to be properly organised and prepared.

It needs some kind of a business plan:

• Roles and responsibilities have to be clarified in advance and internal

human resources have to be allocated accordingly.

• Organisational arrangements have to be established and decisions on

the membership of teams, committees or forums have to be made.

• A programme needs to be worked out which sets out the envisaged

planning activities, a time frame and the resource requirements for the

planning process. Such a detailed programme of the planning process is

crucial to keep track and to interact with other role-players (especially

between local and district municipalities).

• Special attention has to be paid to deciding on mechanisms and

procedures for community and stakeholder participation during the

planning process: Who has to be involved, consulted and informed in

which stage of the process by which means? This has to be decided in

advance in order to inform people in time and to allocate required

resources in time.

• The same is true with regard to mechanisms and procedures for

alignment with external stakeholders such as other municipalities,

districts, and other spheres of government. Such alignment activities have

to be decided on a mutually binding basis, through a joint framework for

the interactive planning process which requires preparation well in

advance.

6

• One has to make sure that all relevant documents, which have to beconsidered in the course of the planning process, are known and available.This applies especially to legal documents and to guidelines, plans andstrategies from the provincial and national sphere and corporate serviceproviders.

• Based on all these preparation steps a cost estimate has to be made forthe whole planning process.

This preparation task for IDP is the duty of municipal management. Thepreparation process should contribute to the institutional preparedness of themunicipality for the IDP process. Nobody else, therefore, can make themanagement decisions involved in it. Guide II is supposed to assist themunicipal manager to do this preparation work in a simple and straightforwardmanner.

1.2 LEGAL REQUIREMENTS WITH REGARDS TO PREPARATION OF THE

IDP PROCESS

In order to ensure certain minimum quality standards of the IDP process and a

proper co-ordination between and within the spheres of government, the

preparation of the planning process has been regulated in the Municipal

Systems Act, 2000. The Act does not say anything different from the

“common sense” preparation requirements outlined above. It requires:

(a) Adoption of a “process set out in writing” by each municipality

(local/district) which is supposed to guide the planning, drafting, adoption

and review of the IDP. This written document on the IDP process will be

called in short the “Process Plan” in this Guide. This Process Plan has to

include:

– a programme specifying the time frames for the different planning

steps;

– appropriate mechanisms, processes and procedures for consultation

and participation of local communities, organs of state, traditional

authorities, and other role-players in the IDP drafting process; and

– the identification of all plans and planning requirements binding on

the municipality in terms of national and provincial legislation.

(b) Adoption of a framework for integrated development planning by each

district municipality which binds both the district municipality and the

local municipalities in the area and which is supposed to ensure proper

consultation co-ordination and alignment of the planning process of the

district municipality and the various local municipalities.

While the Process Plan has to be based on appropriate consultation with

local communities and to be communicated to them, the Framework has

to be based on a consultative process with the local municipalities within

the district area.

7

Process Plans and the district-level Framework need to be established in an

inter-active, mutually aligned manner during the preparation phase in order to

ensure the Process Plans of local municipalities are in line with the Framework

and the Framework reflects the proposals of all local municipalities. A co-

ordinated planning process requires co-ordinated preparation of that process.

Both Process Plan and Framework have to be submitted to the MEC for Local

Government together with the adopted IDP document at the end of the

planning process.

1.3 THE REQUIRED DOCUMENTS: PROCESS PLAN AND FRAMEWORK

Process Plan and Framework are two distinct documents which are talking to

each other. The Process Plan is a management tool for each municipality (local

and district) which helps with the management of the IDP process on a day-

to-day basis. The Framework is a coordination tool for the district which helps

ensure interrelated parallel planning processes at district and local level.

Some sections of Process Plans and Framework are identical, others are only

required in one of the two documents (compare diagram 1).

The Process Plan should fulfil the function of a business plan or an

operational plan for the IDP process. It should say in a simple and transparent

manner what has to happen when, by whom, with whom, and where, and it

should include a cost estimate.

Accordingly, it should be a highly standardised document, which provides an

easy overview through formats.

While each municipality is free to design the document in its own way, a

proposed list of contents may help to give a clear picture on how the legal and

practical requirements lined out above can be incorporated.

8

PROCESS PLAN – PROPOSED LIST OF CONTENTS Approx no of pages

1. Introduction (1)

2. Distribution of Roles and Respnsibilities in the IDP Process (1 – 2)

3. Organisational Structures/Institutional Arrangements for the

IDP Process (1 – 2)

4. Action Programme with Time Frame and

Resource Requirements (4 – 5)

5. Mechanisms and Procedures for Community and

Stakeholder Participation (2 – 3)

6. Mechanisms and Procedures for Alignment (1 – 2)

7. Binding Plans and Planning Requirements at

Provincial and National level (1)

8. Cost Estimate for the Planning Process (1 – 2)

The function of the Framework is to ensure that the process of district IDPs

and local IDPs are mutually linked and can inform one another. If parallel

processes are supposed to be smoothly inter-linked, one has to agree on a

joint time schedule and some crucial joint milestones. This will be done

through the Framework. The district municipalities are in charge of drafting the

Framework. As it has to be agreed by local municipalities and as is has to be

used by all municipalities as a basis for drafting their Process Plans, the

Framework has to be agreed upon at an early stage of the preparation

process.

FRAMEWORK: PROPOSED LIST OF CONTENTS

1. Introduction

2. Framework Programme with Time Frame (1 – 2)

3. Issues, Mechanisms and Procedures for Alignment

and Consultation (1 – 2)

4. Binding Plans and Planning Requirements at Provincial

and National Level (1)

5. Procedures and Principles for Monitoring of the Planning

Process and Amendment of the Framework (1)

The compliance of the actual IDP process of all municipalities with the

Framework has to be carefully monitored by the districts in order to be able to

undertake corrective action in time if some municipalities fail to adhere to the

timeframes.

9

DIAGRAM 1: PROCESS PLAN AND FRAMEWORK

CONTENTS IN COMPARISON

Distribution of Roles andResponsibilities

Organisational Arrangements

Mechanisms and Proceduresfor Community and

Stakeholder Participation

Action Programme withTimeframe and Resource

Requirements

Mechanisms and Proceduresfor Alignment

Binding Legislation andPlanning Requirements atProvincial/National level

Cost Estimate for the PlanningProcess

Principles and Procedures forMonitoring of the Planning

Process and Amendment ofthe Framework

Process Plans

(Local and District Municipality)

Framework

(District Level)

There are three chapters which must be part of the Framework and of each

Process Plan: The Action Programme, the alignment chapter, and the chapter

on binding legislation and planning requirements. The Action Programmes of

municipalities will differ significantly from the Action Programme in the

Framework. They need to be far more detailed, and therefore need to be

drafted by each municipality individually, taking the timeframes of the

Framework Action Plan into consideration. The Alignment Procedures and the

binding legislation and planning requirements will be the same for the district

Framework and the Process Plans. Consequently, they can be taken over from

the Framework.

1.4 THE PREPARATION PROCESS

It has already been said that preparing a Process Plan is a management task

like the preparation of any business plan. It does not require specific

professional planning skills. Neither does it need the involvement of

consultants. The result of the preparation process should not only be a

document (the Process Plan), but also a well-prepared management, confident

about the planning task ahead. The preparation process requires some

consultation with those role-players who are expected to participate or to be

consulted in the planning process:

(a) between local municipalities and district municipalities (as required for

establishing the Framework);

(b) with community and stakeholder groupings who are to be given the

opportunity to become part of the organisational arrangements; and

(c) with financing bodies for aligning resource requirements for the planning

process with available resources.

Managing these consultation processes and getting all role-players on board of

the IDP process is definitely the major preparation task. With some

concentrated efforts, a time-span of one month should, nevertheless, be

sufficient.

1.5 GUIDANCE OFFERED BY THIS DOCUMENT

Guide II aims at putting the municipal management into a position to

formulate the Process Plan and the Framework without external support and

in line with the requirements of the Municipal Systems Act, 2000, as well as

with the practical requirements of a well managed planning process. Guidance

will be provided with regard to each of the preparation tasks:

10

• deciding on the distribution of roles and responsibilities (section 2);

• designing organisational structures and institutional arrangements for theIDP drafting process (section 3);

• drafting the Action Programme with phases, time schedules, and resourcerequirements (section 4);

• deciding on appropriate participation mechanisms and procedures (section 5);

• deciding on contents and mechanisms for co-ordination and alignment(section 6);

• identifying binding legislation and planning requirements (section 7);

• preparing the budget for the planning process (section 8); and

• compiling the Framework (section 9).

For each of these preparation tasks, guidance will be provided on:

(a) the required preparation activities and outputs (procedural guidance

for the preparation process) which partly includes recommended formats

for documentation of the outputs; and

(b) contents of the Process Plan and Framework, i.e. proposals on the

decisions to be taken with respect to the nature of the IDP process, or

on criteria to be considered when making such decisions.

The content recommendations given in Guide II, on how to design the IDP

process, cannot replace a proper reading of the content of Guides I and III,

which is the basis for a sound understanding of the IDP process. Such sound

understanding is crucial for preparing the IDP process of a specific

municipality in a flexible and appropriate manner taking into consideration the

local circumstances. The intent of summarising the content recommendations

in Guide II is just to put these guidelines into the context of the preparation

process and the Process Plan.

11

12

DIAGRAM 2: TIMEFRAME FOR PREPARING FOR THE IDP PROCESS

2. DISTRIBUTION OF ROLES

AND RESPONSIBILITIES

It is one of the pre-requisites of a smooth and well organised planning process

that all role-players are fully aware of their own and of other role-players’

responsibilities. Therefore, it is one of the first preparation requirements for

the IDP planning process to ensure that there is a clear understanding of all

required roles, and of the persons or organisations which can assume those

roles.

13

Required Outputs • List of required roles and responsibilities for the planning process

(by municipal management).

• List of persons or agencies who are expected to assume these roles

and responsibilities.

• Clear and mutually agreed terms of reference, which describe their

roles and responsibilities in detail.

Proposed Process (1) The IDP Steering Committee clarifies the roles which the

municipality has to play in the IDP process in relation to the roles

which external role-players are expected to play (in line with

Section 84 of the Municipal Structures Act).

(2) The roles to be played by municipal role-players are further

specified by drafting terms of reference for each role which

determine the responsibilities related to that role.

(3) The Municipal Manager, after having drafted the role descriptions

approaches persons to take over the various roles and submits a

proposed list of role-players for discussion in the IDP Steering

Committee and for approval by the Executive Committee of the

Council or the Executive Mayor or Committee of Appointed

Councillors.

(A) PREPARATION ACTIVITIES AND OUTPUTS

Process Plans

Framework

Distribution of Rolesand Responsibilities

14

Actors Roles and Responsibilities

Local Municipality

• Municipal

Government

To:

• Prepare, decide on and adopt a Process Plan.

• Undertake the overall management and co-ordination of the

planning process which includes ensuring that:

– all relevant actors are appropriately involved;

– appropriate mechanisms and procedures for public consultationand participation are applied;

– the planning events are undertaken in accordance with the timeschedule;

– planning process is related to the real burning issues in themunicipality, that it is a strategic and implementation-orientedprocess; and

– the sector planning requirements are satisfied.

• Adopt and approve the IDP.

• Adjust the IDP in accordance with the MEC for Local Government’sproposal.

• Ensure that the annual business plans, budget and land use

management decisions are linked to and based on the IDP .

Residents,

communities and

stakeholders (civil

society) including

traditional leaders

To represent interests and contribute knowledge and ideas in theplanning process by:

• participating in the IDP Representative Forum to:

– inform interest groups, communities and organisations, onrelevant planning activities and their outcomes;

– analyse issues, determine priorities, negotiate and reachconsensus;

– participate in the designing of project proposals and/or assessthem;

– discuss and comment on the draft IDP;

– ensure that annual business plans and budgets are based on andlinked to the IDP; and

– monitor performance in implementation of the IDP.

• conducting meetings or workshops with groups, communities ororganisations to prepare for and follow-up on relevant planningactivities.

NOTE: The specific role of traditional leaders still needs furtherclarification. The roles of the “civil society” are to be seen as anopportunity rather than a responsibility or duty.

(B) CONTENT GUIDELINES

(1) PROPOSED DISTRIBUTION OF ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES BETWEEN THE MUNICIPALITY

AND EXTERNAL ROLE-PLAYERS

15

District

Municipality

A. Same roles and responsibilities as governments of localmunicipalities but related to the preparation of a District IDP.

B. Co-ordination roles for local municipalities:

• ensuring horizontal alignment of the IDPs of themunicipalities in the district council area;

• ensuring vertical alignment between district and localplanning;

• facilitation of vertical alignment of IDPs with other spheres ofgovernment and sector departments; and

• preparation of joint strategy workshops with localmunicipalities, provincial and national role-players and othersubject matter specialists.

Provincial

Government

• Local

Government

Department

• Sector

Departments

and Corporate

Service

Providers

• Ensuring horizontal alignment of the IDPs of the districtmunicipalities within the province.

• Ensuring vertical/sector alignment between provincial sectordepartments/provincial strategic plans and the IDP process atlocal/district level by:

– guiding the provincial sector departments’ participation in and theirrequired contribution to the municipal planning process; and

– guiding them in assessing draft IDPs and aligning their sectoralprogrammes and budgets with the IDPs.

• Efficient financial management of provincial IDP grants.

• Monitoring the progress of the IDP processes.

• Facilitation of resolution of disputes related to IDP.

• Assist municipalities in the IDP drafting process where required.

• Organise IDP-related training where required.

• Co-ordinate and manage the MEC’s assessment of IDPs.

To:

• Contribute relevant information on the provincial sectordepartments’ plans, programmes, budgets, objectives, strategies andprojects in a concise and accessible manner.

• Contribute sector expertise and technical knowledge to theformulation of municipal strategies and projects.

• Engage in a process of alignment with district municipalities.

• Participate in the provincial management system of co-ordination.

16

1Planning professionals may be town and regional planners, development planners or any other professionals involved indevelopment and spatial planning.

Support Providers/

Planning

Professionals1

Consultants, NGOs,PIMS-CentresMunicipal PlanningOfficials

Any external providers of planning related services should only be

consulted for such tasks for which internal professional capacities are

not available.

Though different types of service providers may be specialised on

specific types of services, there are usually many overlaps. Therefore

we do not differentiate the roles by service providers.

External service providers may be engaged for:

• providing methodological /technical guidance to the IDP process;

• facilitation of planning workshops;

• documentation of outcomes of planning activities;

• special studies or other product related contributions;

• s u p p o rt to organised and unorganised g roups and communities t om o re effectively engage in and contribute to the planning process; and

• ensure the IDP is aligned with provincial and national department’sbudget.

Municipal Council As the ultimate political decision-making body of the municipality, the

Municipal Council has to:

• Consider and adopt a Process Plan.

• Consider, adopt and approve the IDP.

Executive

Committee or

Executive Mayor or

Committee of

Appointed

Councillors

As the senior governing body of the municipality, they have to:

• Decide on the Process Plan.

• Be responsible for the overall management, co-ordination andmonitoring of the process and drafting of the IDP, or delegate thisfunction to the Municipal Manager.

• Approve nominated persons to be in charge of the different roles,activities and responsibilities of the process and drafting.

Ward Councillors Councillors are the major link between the municipal government

and the residents. As such, their role is to:

• Link the planning process to their constituencies and/or wards.

• Be responsible for organising public consultation and participation.

• Ensure the annual business plans, and municipal budget are linked toand based on the IDP.

(2) PROPOSED DISTRIBUTION OF ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES WITHIN THE MUNICIPALITY

17

Municipal Manager

and/or IDP

Manager

The Municipal Manager or a senior official being charged with the

function of an IDP Manager on his/her behalf has to manage and

co-ordinate to IDP process. This includes to:

• prepare the Process Plan;

• undertake the overall management and co-ordination of the planningprocess;

• ensure that all relevant actors are appropriately involved,

• nominate persons in charge of different roles;

• be responsible for the day- to-day management of the draftingprocess;

• ensure that the planning process is participatory, strategic andimplementation orientated and is aligned with and satisfies sectorplanning requirements;

• respond to comments on the draft IDP from the public, horizontalalignment and other spheres of government to the satisfaction of themunicipal council;

• ensure proper documentation of the results of the planning of theIDP document; and

• adjust the IDP in accordance with the MEC for Local Government’sproposals.

Even if the Municipal Manager delegates some of these functions to an

IDP Manager on his/her behalf, he/she is still responsible and

accountable.

Heads of

Departments and

Officials

As the persons in charge for implementing IDPs, the technical/sectional

officers have to be fully involved in the planning process to:

• provide relevant technical, sector and financial information foranalysis for determining priority issues;

• contribute technical expertise in the consideration and finalisation ofstrategies and identification of projects;

• provide departmental operational and capital budgetary information;

• be responsible for the preparation of project proposals, theintegration of projects and sector programmes; and

• be responsible for preparing amendments to the draft IDP forsubmission to the municipal council for approval and the MEC forLocal Government for alignment.

18

3. ORGANISATIONAL

ARRANGEMENTS

The municipalities will need to establish a set of organisational arrangements

to:

• institutionalise the participation process;

• effectively manage the drafting of outputs; and

• give affected parties access to contribute to the decision-making process.

The number of structures and composition or positions may vary between

different categories and types of municipalities to suit the available human and

institutional resources, but the proposed generic arrangements are

recommended as a minimum and are based on the following principles:

• Public participation has to be institutionalised to ensure all residents havean equal right to participate; and

• Structured participation must specify who is to participate, on behalf ofwhom, on which issues, through which organisational mechanisms and towhat effect.

Municipalities should consider existing arrangements, use them and adapt

them if necessary, and avoid duplication of mechanisms. For example if they

have adopted a ward committee approach they may want to use this structure

and would only need to ensure that in addition stakeholders and social groups

are also represented.

The following structures/persons are recommended:

• Municipal Manager or IDP Manager

• IDP Steering Committee

• IDP Representative Forum

• Project Task Teams

The recommended arrangements will serve as a guide for the majority of

district and local municipalities. The IDP Manager, IDP Steering Committee

and IDP Representative Forum are structures required through the whole

IDP process to be established at the beginning and therefore will be

introduced in this Guide.

The Project Task Teams will be small operational teams composed of a

number of relevant municipal sector departments and technical people, actors

involved in the management of implementation and where appropriate

community stakeholders directly affected by the project. The Project Task

Teams will be required at the outset of phase 3 and will be introduced there in

more detail (Planning Activity 3.1).

All organisational arrangements suggested above should be maintained during

IDP implementation stage as teams in charge of co-ordinating and steering

the implementation process.

Process Plans

Framework

OrganisationalArrangements

19

Required Outputs • Type of arrangements/structures to be established.

• Clear Terms of Reference for each of the arrangements/structures.

• Criteria for Selection

• List of agreed persons and/or organisations to be represented.

• Code of Conduct.

• Selected members are familiar with roles.

Proposed Process ( 1 ) The Executive Committee, or Executive Mayor, or a Committee ofCouncillors should in consultation and with support of the MunicipalM a n a g e r :

• Define Te rms of Reference for IDP Manager and SteeringC o m m i t t e e ;

• Identify an appropriate IDP Manager, taking into consideration thei m p o rtance of IDP, time constraints of the municipal manager anda l t e rnative persons;

• Assign responsibilities with re g a rd to drafting of the IDP to theMunicipal Manager; and

• Identify and nominate suitable candidates for the SteeringCommittee ensuring that all relevant issues (e.g. LED, spatial,housing municipal finance) have at least one responsible person.

( 2 ) The newly established IDP Steering Committee should be re s p o n s i b l efor the establishment of the IDP Representative Forum by:

• Defining Te rms of Reference and criteria for members of the IDPR e p resentative Foru m ;

• I n f o rming the public (e.g. issue advert) about the establishment ofthe IDP Representative Forum and request submission ofapplications from stakeholders/community groups indicating goals,objectives, activities, number of members, and constitution;

• I d e n t i f y i n g :

– additional stakeholders and unorganised marg i n a l i s e d /u n d e rre p resented groups that may need an “advocate” tore p resent their intere s t s ,

– potential advocates,

– re s o u rce persons,

– senior off i c i a l s ;• Selecting potential groups/members based on criteria;

• Submitting proposed groups/members to council for consideration;a n d

• Nominating members and informing the local community.( 3 ) If the Municipal Manager is not the IDP Manager the Municipal

Manager must decide on:

• powers and functions to be delegated;• responsibility remaining with Municipal Manager/accountability; and

• re p o rting mechanisms.

( 4 ) IDP Steering Committee to:

• establish sub committees (if necessary) and decide on re l a t i o n s h i p /re p o rting mechanisms; and

• appoint the secre t a r i a t .

(A) PREPARATION ACTIVITIES AND OUTPUTS

20

(B) CONTENT GUIDELINES

EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE/EXECUTIVE MAYOR/COMMITTEE OF COUNCILLORS

The executive committee or executive mayor of a municipality or, if the municipality does not have an

executive committee or executive mayor, a committee of councillors appointed by the municipal council

must:

• manage the drafting;

• assign responsibilities in this regard to the municipal manger; and

• submit the draft plan to the municipal council for adoption.

These are structures already established and required by the Municipal Structures Act and not specific

structures of the municipality for the IDP.

It is recommended that the responsibility for managing the drafting of the IDP is assigned to the

Municipal Manager or IDP Manager on his behalf.

IDP MANAGER

The Municipal Manager, or IDP Manager on his behalf, is the responsible person for championing the

Integrated Development Planning process. The selection of the appropriate person is crucial for the

success of IDP and needs to be done as the first step towards preparing the Process Plan since the IDP

Manager is also the responsible person for designing the Process Plan.

The IDP Manager should be a dedicated person that has the required authority to involve all relevant

role-players.

Proposed Terms of

Reference for IDP

Manager

• Responsible for the preparation of the Process Plan.

• Responsible for the day-to-day management of the planning processunder consideration of time, resources, people, ensuring:

– involvement of all different role-players, especially officials;

– that the timeframes are being adhered to;

– that the planning process is horizontally and vertically aligned andcomplies with national and provincial requirements;

– that conditions for participation are provided; and

– that outcomes are being documented.

• Chairing of the Steering Committee.

• Management of consultants.

21

IDP STEERING COMMITTEE

The Steering Committee should be a technical working team of dedicated Heads of Departments and

senior officials who support the IDP Manager and ensure a smooth planning process. The IDP Manager

is responsible for the process but will often delegate functions to members of the Steering Committee.

In municipalities where there are relevant portfolio councillors who want to be part of the IDP Steering

Committee they should be included. In this cases the appropriate protocol must be considered.

Proposed

composition of the

IDP Steering

Committee

Chaired by:

• The Municipal Manager and/or IDP Manager

Secretariat:

• Official of the Municipality

Composition:

• Heads of Departments or Senior Officials

• Treasurer

Note • The IDP Steering Committee may establish sub-committees forspecific activities and outputs which should include additional personsoutside the Steering Committee.

• An Official of the municipality should be appointed to prepare,facilitate and document meetings. The function should be theresponsibility of the Municipal Planner or similar official.

• For the logistics of workshops, dissemination of information andinvitations the Official should be supported by an administrator.

Proposed Terms of

Reference for IDP

Steering

Committee

• Provides terms of reference for the various planning activities

• Commissions research studies

• Considers and comments on:

– inputs from sub-committee/s, study teams and consultants– inputs from provincial sector departments and support providers

• Processes, summarises and documents outputs

• Makes content recommendations

• Prepares, facilitates and documents meetings

22

IDP REPRESENTATIVE FORUM

The IDP Representative Forum is the structure which institutionalises and guarantees representative

participation in the IDP Process. The selection of members to the IDP Representative Forum needs to

be based on criteria which ensures geographical and social representation.

Proposed Terms of

Reference for IDP

Representative

Forum

• Represent the interests of their constituents in the IDP process

• Provide an organisational mechanism for discussion, negotiation anddecision making between the stakeholders including municipalgovernment

• Ensure communication between all the stakeholder representativesincluding the municipal government

• Monitor the performance of the planning and implementation process

Note The preparation, facilitation and documentation of meetings and

workshops of the IDP Representative Forum may need to be supported

by professional planners, e.g. PIMS-Centres.

Proposed

composition of the

IDP Representative

Forum

Chaired by:

• A member of the Executive Committee or the Executive Mayor or amember of the Committee of Appointed Councillors

Secretariat:

• IDP Steering Committee

Composition:

• Members of the Executive Committee

• Councillors (including Councillors who are members of the DistrictCouncil and relevant portfolio Councillors)

• Traditional Leaders

• Ward Committee Chairperson

• Heads of Departments / Senior officials

• Stakeholder representatives of organised groups

• Advocates for unorganised groups

• Resource persons

• Community Representatives (e.g. RDP Forum)

23

DIAGRAM 3: PROPOSED ORGANISATIONAL ARRRANGEMENTS

Proposed issues to

be considered in

the Code of

Conduct for the

IDP Representative

Forum

The code of conduct should regulate issues such as:

• meeting schedule (frequency and attendance)

• agenda, facilitation and documentation of meetings

• understanding by members of their role as representatives of theirconstituencies

• feed back to constituents

• required majority for approval

• resolution of disputes

District

Municipalities:

Organisational

Arrangements

• Similar structures will be required at District level for the District IDP;

• The composition of the District Municipality Representative Forumshould include all DM Councillors and ensure geographicalrepresentatives, include district wide stakeholders andrepresentatives of district wide issues.

Council

Executive Committee or ExecutiveMayor or Appointed Councillors

Municipal Manager(IDP Manager)

IDP Steering Committee IDP Representative Forum

Project Task Team StakeholderStructures

WardCommittee

24

4. MECHANISMS AND

PROCEDURES FOR PUBLIC

PARTICIPATION

One of the main features about the integrated development planning process is the involvement of

community and stakeholder organisations in the process. Participation of affected and interested parties

ensure that the IDP addresses the real issues that are experienced by the citizens of a municipality.

Section 3 above dealt with the minimum organisational arrangements that need to be established to

ensure proper participation. This section will go even further in providing guidance on what each

municipality needs to consider when developing a public participation strategy for its integrated

development planning process. For more information on the legal and policy framework on community

and stakeholder participation in the affairs of local government, municipalities should refer to Guide I

“General IDP Guidelines”. Guide IV (“Toolbox”) provides various tools and techniques for participation.

Required Outputs A public participation strategy to be approved by council

Proposed Process (1) The IDP Steering Committee formulates a proposal for the strategytaking into consideration the need to comply with any relevantlegislation e.g. chapter 4 of the Municipal Systems Act and IDPRegulations.

(2) The proposal is submitted to the council for consideration andapproval.

(3) Once the strategy is approved by council, the IDP SteeringCommittee has the responsibility to implement it.

(4) The IDP Steering Committee presents the strategy to the firstmeeting of the IDP Representative Forum.

(A) PREPARATION ACTIVITIES AND OUTPUTS

Process Plans

Framework

Mechanisms andProcedures forCommunity and

StakeholderParticipation

25

(B) CONTENT GUIDELINES

Proposed Content The participation strategy must contain a decision on issues like:

• Roles of different role-players during the participation process (e.g.

councillors, the IDP Steering Committee, the IDP Representative

Forum, other officials, consultants etc.)

• Means of encouraging representation of unorganised groups

• Participation mechanisms for different phases of the methodology

• Available resources for participation

• Frequency of meetings/ workshops

• Appropriate venue for the meetings/workshops

• Time frames to allow responses, comments, inputs

• Appropriate participation tools

• Means of information dissemination

• Means of eliciting and collecting community needs (including

documentation of participation inputs)

26

In designing a strategy for participation, a municipality must take into consideration the following issues:

(C) ISSUES TO CONSIDER WHEN DEVELOPING A STRATEGY

FOR PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

Principles of public

participation

• The elected council is the ultimate decision-making forum on IDPs.The role of participatory democracy is to inform stakeholders andnegotiate with them on issues. It is also to give stakeholders anopportunity to provide input on the decisions taken by the council.

• In order to ensure public participation, the legislation requiresmunicipalities to create appropriate conditions that will enableparticipation. This is a minimum requirement, however, it is notenough. Municipalities also have a responsibility to encourage itscommunity and stakeholder groups to get involved. This should bedone in particular with regard to disadvantaged or marginalisedgroups in accordance with the conditions and capacities in amunicipality.

• Structured Participation: Most of the new municipalities are too bigin terms of population size and area to allow for direct participation ofthe majority of the residents in a complex planning process.Participation in the integrated development planning, therefore needsclear rules and Structured Participation: Most of the newmunicipalities are too big in terms of population size and area to allowfor direct participation of the majority of the residents in a complexplanning process. Participation in the integrated developmentplanning, therefore needs clear rules and procedures specifying:

– Who is to participate

– Who will not directly participate, but must be consulted on certain

issues (e.g. adjoining municipalities)

– On which issues should direct participation or consultation take

place.

• Diversity: The way public participation is structured has to providesufficient room for diversity within the municipal area in terms of:

– Different cultures

– Gender

– Language

– Education levels

• Participation costs can be kept at an acceptable level if potentialparticipants are made aware of the fact that it is in their own interestto be involved in the planning process and it is not a task they haveto be paid for.

27

In developing its participation strategy, the municipality has to ensure that conducive conditions are

created for proper and successful public participation. Here are some of the issues to consider:

Creating

conditions for

public participation

• Informing Communities and stakeholders:

The residents and stakeholders have to be informed on the

municipality’s Intention to embark on the integrated development

planning process. In doing so the municipality must ensure that the

appropriate forms of media (e.g. community radio stations,

information flyers inside the municipal bills etc.) are utilised in order

to reach as many people as possible. No stakeholders should feel

ignored or unimportant. In choosing the appropriate form of media,

municipalities must consider the cost of using such mechanisms. For

instance, it can be very costly to place an advert in a newspaper,

therefore this might not be a feasible option.

Another mechanism of informing communities is through councillors.

Councillors have to inform the people within their wards, by means of

public ward-level meetings.

• All affected and interested parties to be invited to participate:

All relevant community and stakeholder organisations must be invited

to register as members of the IDP Representative Forum. The

municipality must also keep a database of those groupings that will

not necessarily participate as members of the Representative Forum,

but that will need to be consulted at various stages of the process.

• Use of appropriate language:

The use of appropriate language is essential to allow all stakeholders

to freely participate. The IDP Steering Committee have to consider

the need to identify an interpreter to cater for situations where some

participants are uncomfortable with a particular language.

• Choosing the right venue:

The venue where public participation events are held can determine

the level of attendance. It is crucial that the venue that is selected

can be accessed easily by all stakeholders e.g. it should be accessible

by public transport to enable those participants without private

transport to get to it.

• Choosing the suitable time for meetings:

The times when the IDP Representative Forum Meetings are held

should accommodate the majority of the members. The IDP Steering

Committee needs to establish the best suitable time for the majority

of the members to hold meetings. Weekends should also be

considered.

28

• Appropriate refreshments:

If the IDP Representative Forum has long meetings which wouldrequire the provision of refreshments, consideration must be given tothe participants’ different preferences e.g. halaal, vegetarian etc.

• Representatives to be encouraged to report back to their

organisations:

To allow for a fair opportunity for legitimate representativeparticipation, the community and stakeholder representatives have tobe given adequate time (2-4 weeks) to conduct meetings orworkshops with the groups, communities or organisations theyrepresent, before the issue is dealt with by the IDP RepresentativeForum. This must be taken into consideration when the programmeand timeframe are developed. The requirement for therepresentatives to report back to those they represent on theoutcome of the IDP Representative Forum meetings/workshops,must be included in the code of conduct for the Forum.

• Opportunity for stakeholders to comment on draft documents:

Draft planning documents have to be accessible for all communitiesand Stakeholders. There must be a time period of at least threeweeks for ward committees, stakeholder associations and interestedgroups and residents to discuss the draft document publicly, and tocomment on it before the IDP Representative Forum finalises thedraft. This timing must be catered for in the programme.

• Council meetings for approval:

Council meetings on the approval of the IDP should be open to thepublic.

• The IDP document to be available to all stakeholders:

Copies of the finalised IDP must be available to all communities andstakeholders. It might even be useful to summarise the main outputsof the plan e.g. municipality’s vision, objectives etc. in the variouslanguages that are relevant for that particular municipal area.

Encouraging public

participation

The municipal government, through its IDP committee and itscouncillors, should use all appropriate means, above and beyondcreating the necessary conditions, to encourage public participation.

Active encouragement should particularly focus on those social groupswhich are not well organised and which do not have the power to

articulate their interests publicly e.g. poverty groups, women,disabled, specific age groups (youth, orphans, and aged people) etc. Themunicipality has to identify the groups and determine appropriate waysof ensuring their representation in the IDP Representative Forum.

One of the mechanisms of ensuring participation of these groups is tomobilise NGOs or competent resource persons that advocate for theirinterests.

29

GUIDELINES ON PHASING PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

Public participation is not equally relevant and appropriate in each stage of planning, and not all

participation procedures are equally suitable for each planning step. To limit participation costs, to avoid

participation fatigue, and to optimise the impact of participation, the mechanisms of participation will

have to differ from stage to stage. The IDP Steering Committee need to have a good understanding of

Guide III (methodology) to be able to decide on the intensity of participation and also the appropriate

participation tools for different phases. The following guidelines can help municipalities to decide on

appropriate tools for different planning phases:

Analysis • Community meetings organised by councillors

• Stakeholder meetings

• Sample surveys

• Opinion polls

Approval • Broad public discussion/ consultation process within allcommunity/stakeholder organisations

• Opportunity for comments from residents and stakeholderorganisations

Integration • IDP Representative Forum

Strategies • District level strategy workshops, with representatives of allmunicipalities, sector provincial and national departments andselected representatives of stakeholder organisations and resourcepeople.

• IDP Representative Forum at local level

• Stimulation of public debates through public events like hearings,press conferences etc.

Project planning

(a) Projects/

programmes

with

municipality-

wide scale

(b) Localised

community-

level projects

• Technical sub-committees with few selected representatives ofstakeholder organisations/civil society

• Intensive dialogue between technical sub committees and affectedcommunities/stakeholders

Monitoring and

implementation

• IDP Representative Forum

Planning phase Participation Mechanisms

30

5. DESIGNING AN ACTION

PROGRAMME

The Action Programme is a component of the Process Plan and nothing other than a business plan

which answers the questions: what needs to be done, when, how long will it take, who is responsible,

who contributes and which resources will be required. The Action Programme should be known by all

role-players involved in the IDP process to ensure participation and alignment. To design the Action

Programme it is crucial to be familiar with and understand Guide III and to consider the District

Framework. Not all the information needed for the design of the Action Programme will be available

already during the preparation phase. Some activities may have to be included and defined at a later

stage (e.g. only once the priority issues are known, will the need for more in-depth analysis become

clear).

A Format/Template is being provided in Annex 2.

Required Outputs Action Programme based on the IDP Phases and Planning Activitiesincluding:

• activities/tasks/events for preparing, undertaking and finalising eachPlanning Activity;

• the name of the responsible person to manage, facilitate and/ordocument the Planning Activity;

• the starting date and expected duration;

• the names of people/structures that need to be involved an how (e.g. attend meeting/comment ); and

• the required resources (consultants/venues/catering/finances/translation) and costs.

Proposed Process IDP Manager together with the IDP Steering Committee to:

(1) Consider activities per phase and proposed time frames from Guide III as well as District Briefing Session;

(2) Submit draft Action Programme for District Framework Workshop;

(3) Discuss and agree on District Framework Programme as basis forMunicipal Programme;

(4) Adapt Action Programme to local circumstances (taking the DMFramework into consideration); and

(5) Finalise Action Programme by:

• considering organisational structures and defined roles andresponsibilities within those structures;

• including alignment activities;

• including community participation; and

• indicating required resources (consultants, venue, catering).

(A) PREPARATION ACTIVITIES AND OUTPUTS

Process Plans

Framework

Action Programme withTimeframe and

Resource Requirements

31

(B) CONTENT GUIDELINES

Issues to be

considered for the

Time Frame of the

Action Programme

• The Time Frame Table of Annex 1 should be considered when

designing the Framework and Action Programme.

• The Action Programme should consider local circumstances (e.g.

frequency of Council meetings) and be aligned in time with the

municipal budgeting process, bearing in mind that a considerable

amount of budgeting activities will be undertaken as part of the IDP

process.

• To ensure that the outputs of the IDP process are satisfactory to the

municipality, the municipal Council will need to consider and request

amendments to the outputs during the process. For this to occur we

recommend a phased-consideration process where the outputs of

each phase are:

(1) submitted to the IDP Representative Forum, to signal that the

process can continue and once approved;

(2) tabled and discussed by the municipal Council.

It is very important that while the municipal Council considers specific

outputs of the IDP process, the process continues and is not put on

hold, even if the outputs are not satisfactory. The comments from the

municipal Council will be incorporated subsequently to them being

noted.

32

6. MECHANISMS AND

PROCEDURES FOR

ALIGNMENT

The IDP planning process is a local process, which requires the input and support from other spheres of

government at different stages. Before starting with the planning process municipalities need to

understand where alignment should take place and how best, through which mechanism, this can be

achieved. Alignment is the instrument to synthesise and integrate the top-down and bottom-up planning

process between different spheres of government.

The alignment procedures and mechanisms are a component of the Process Plan as well as the

Framework. It should be arrived at between Local and District municipalities, and all parties involved in

the alignment need to be informed.

There are two main types of alignment required:

• Between municipalities and relevant district to ensure that their planning processes and issues

are co-ordinated and addressed jointly. The District has the responsibility to ensure that alignment

between the local municipalities takes place.

• Between local government (municipalities/districts) and other spheres, especially

provincial/national sector Departments as well as corporate service providers (e.g. Eskom, Telkom) to

ensure that the IDP is in line with national and provincial policies and strategies so that it is

considered for the allocation of departmental budgets and conditional grants. The Provincial

Department for Local Government should play a co-ordinating role ensuring that all other spheres

and especially sector departments understand the need for alignment and their role within the local

IDP process.

Process Plans

Framework

Mechanisms andProcedures for

Alignment

33

Required Outputs The required outputs should be defined separately for both types of

alignment (between municipalities and relevant district/ between local

government and other spheres/corporate service providers):

• List of role-players to be involved in the alignment process.

• Alignment events (like information flows and joint planning activities)per phase with indication of time and role-players to be involved.

• Conflict solving mechanisms for aligning different role-players.

Proposed Process The process of arriving at agreed alignment procedures corresponds to

the general process of arriving at the Framework.

(1) IDP Steering Committee to present alignment need at District levelFramework workshop based on methodology Guide III.

(2) At workshop:

• compile joint list of alignment needs and discuss mechanisms toensure alignment;

• agree on alignment mechanism with time and role-players to beinvolved; and

• propose for debate and final decision mechanism to dissolve disputeor differences between local municipalities and local with district.

(3) DM to engage (meeting, written communication) with provincial andnational departments and corporate service providers to outlinemunicipal and district alignment needs and expectations and agreeon mechanisms.

(4) Each municipality to consider alignment when designing the ActionProgramme with time frame.

(A) PREPARATION ACTIVITIES AND OUTPUTS

34

(B) CONTENT GUIDELINES

Alignment

Principles

• Alignment requirements should be minimised to keep the co-ordination requirements on a manageable level.

• Different alignment mechanisms will be suitable for the differentalignment needs and at different stages.

• This implies with regard to alignment mechanisms:

– Keeping the number of alignment events (such as workshops/meetings) to a minimum due to the financial and time resourcesrequired.

– Using bilateral communication – telephonic/electronic/writtencommunication as far as possible.

• Events with numerous participants from different sectors andspheres will usually require a competent facilitator. The facilitatorshould also be responsible for the documentation of the outcome.

• Alignment with provincial Departments can also be achieved throughprovincial visits to the districts.

• The establishment of a structure which includes provinces, districts,municipalities etc. can in some cases be the most appropriate form.

• Municipalities, both local and district, may have to align on a bilateralbasis with neighbour municipalities for issues that affect both.

Proposed persons

that need to be

involved in the

alignment process

Between municipalities and relevant district:

• District council’s IDP Manager and IDP Steering Committee.

• Local council’s IDP Manager and IDP Steering Committee.

• PIMS-Centre professional planning staff.

Between local government and other spheres/corporate serviceproviders:

• Local IDP Manager.

• District IDP Manager.

• Provincial IDP Co-ordinator.

• Provincial/national senior sector department officials.

• Senior officials of relevant service providers (Eskom, Water Boards,Telkom, etc).

Proposed

management

structure to ensure

alignment

• For both alignment types (between municipalities and relevantdistrict/between local government and other spheres/corporateservice providers) the main responsibility to ensure alignment lieswith the District Municipality.

• The IDP Manager should ensure alignment of local issues.

• The Provincial Department of Local Government plays a crucialrole as co-ordinator to ensure alignment above District level andbetween districts within a province.

• Where they have adequate capacity, the PIMS-Centres (Planning andImplementation Management Support Centres), established at thedistrict level, could support the management of the alignmentprocess.

• Districts without a PIMS-Centre should nominate a responsibleperson to manage the alignment process.

• In the case of under capacitated District municipalities (e.g. newlycreated district) the municipalities should appoint a responsiblemunicipality and person within that municipality to manage theprocess on behalf of all municipalities within that DM.

35

Proposed

alignment per

phase

Due to the different nature of each phase alignment may be of more or

less importance and the suitable alignment mechanism will differ. The

table proposes minimum alignment requirements for both types of

alignment per phase. The indicated timing refers to the proposed

Indicative Time Programme attached in Annex 1.

Local

Local Govt/

Timing Municipality/ other

Phase (weeks) Alignment Activity District spheres

1. 7th 1. Information on

Priority Issues to DC X

2. 14th 2. Joint decision on

Localised Guidelines X X

15th – 18th 3. District-level Strategy Workshop X X

3. 23rd – 27th 4. Technical inputs to

project planning X

4. 28th – 30th 5. Sector Programmes under

responsibility of provincial/

national sector departments X

5. end 33rd 6. Submission of draft IDP X X

34th – 36th 7. Comment on draft IDP X X

36th – 37th 8. Compiling District-level

Summary of local IDPs

36

7. NATIONAL AND PROVINCIAL

BINDING LEGISLATION AND

PLANNING REQUIREMENTS

To ensure that all relevant binding national and provincial legislation as well as other policies,

programmes, strategies and available funds are considered in the IDP process municipalities should be

aware of all these relevant information. In order to increase efficiency and minimise costs, Districts

should provide municipalities with the required information.

Required Outputs • Joint District list of national and provincial binding legislationincluding the category of requirement (legal requirement for amunicipal level plan, legal requirement as part of IDP, compliancewith normative framework, for value adding contribution). (Proposedlist on national legislation, see Annex 3).

• List of other relevant policies, programmes and documents.

Proposed Process (1) DM with support of provincial IDP Co-ordinator to prepare list of

Provincial legislation and other important national and provincial

information for Framework Workshop.

(2) DM to present list at Framework Workshop and familiarise

municipalities with provincial sector departments’ requirements as

well as policies/programmes/funds/contact persons.

(A) PREPARATION ACTIVITIES AND OUTPUTS

(B) CONTENT GUIDELINES

Use opportunity of engaging with national and provincial sector departments to establish contacts

for alignment and outline the need for information on policies, programmes and funds, to ensure

that IDP is in line with sector requirements and can attract sector budgets.

Process Plans

Framework

Binding Legislation andPlanning Requirementsat Provincial/National

level

37

8. BUDGET FOR THE

PLANNING PROCESS

The costs for the IDP process have to be budgeted by the municipality. This budget serves as a basis

for applying for financial contributions from the provincial and national level. It can also help the

municipal management to check whether the planning costs are reasonable in relation to other budget

items. In case the planning costs seem to be unacceptably high, one will have to reconsider the Process

Plan in order to arrive at a less costly IDP process or one will have to look for contributions from other

sources.

Required Outputs • A list of expenditure items with per unit cost, numbers of units andtotal cost per expenditure item.

• Addition of all costs.

• Crucial budget/expenditure items to be distinguished are:

– Consultant fees

– Facilitator fees

– PIMSS fees for contract services

– Costs for disseminating information

– Costs for workshops and meetings

– Printing costs

Proposed Process (1) The required resources have to be indicated in the “Programme

with Time Frame and Resource Requirements” for each major

planning activity.

(2) Based on that table, the costs can be calculated and summarised

by type of expenditure.

(3) In case the total costs are unacceptably high, the Steering

Committee will have to discuss ways and means to reduce costs

either by looking for less costly ways and means to get a planning

activity accomplished or by slimming down on the way planning

activities are designed.

(A) PREPARATION ACTIVITIES AND OUTPUTS

Cost Estimate for thePlanning Process

Process Plans

Framework

38

(B) CONTENT GUIDELINES

• As it is not possible to predict all planning costs precisely before the beginning of a planning

process the budget for the IDP process will be necessarily a tentative estimate.

• The budget for the IDP process of an average size Category B Municipality (approximately

100 000 people) should not exceed an amount of R200 000,00.

• Information requirements are usually rather costly. This is true in particular for rural areas where

only limited information is available. In such cases one should keep in mind that not all relevant

information need to be collected in the course of the first IDP process of a new municipality.

Reasonable planning can usually be done well on the basis of sound professional estimates.

• Participation costs can be kept at an acceptable level if potential participants are made aware of

the fact that it is in their own interest to be involved in the planning process and it is not a task

they have to be paid for.

• There are a number of departments and agencies, which get part of their planning requirements

covered by the IDP. Some of these agencies (such as DLA, DWAF, CMIP, LED, ISRD, etc.) are

expected to cover part of the planning costs, and it is recommended that planning costs be

specified according to their requirements.

39

9. THE FRAMEWORK

The Framework is the main guiding document for aligning the planning process between municipalities

and between municipalities and the relevant district. The framework should be developed in a joint

workshop and it is binding on both district and local municipalities.

Required Outputs • Introduction.

• Framework Programme.

• Mechanisms and Procedures for alignment and consultation (seechapter 6).

• Legally binding Plans and Planning Requirements (see chapter 7).

• Principles and Procedures for monitoring of the Process Plan andamendment of the Framework.

Proposed Process (1) District Briefing session of IDP Managers on:

– Planning Process and Approach.

– Legislation (Municipal Structures and Systems Act).

– Support Systems.

(2) Municipalities draft tentative programmes with alignment needs.

(3) District to prepare workshop including list of binding legislation and

planning requirements.

(4) District Framework workshop to:

• Synthesis the individual programmes and agree on theFramework Programme;

• Discuss and agree alignment needs and mechanisms; and

• Develop and agree on legally binding legislation and relevantdocuments.

(5) Adoption of Framework by District Council.

(6) Framework to be considered by all municipalities within the Districtboundaries while preparing the Process Plan.

(A) PREPARATION ACTIVITIES AND OUTPUTS

40

(B) CONTENT GUIDELINES

• The Framework Programme is a summary of the District Action Programme and the Municipal

Action Programmes which focuses on the district-wide activities that need to be undertaken

together in a co-ordinated way (e.g. District-wide strategy workshop). In other words it is a tool

for the alignment between municipalities and a relevant district.

• Principles and Procedures for monitoring of the Process Plan and amendment of the

Framework.

• Each municipality will be responsible for monitoring its own Process Plan and ensure that the

Framework Programme is being followed as agreed.

• Proposed Procedures for Deviations:

– Establish a committee of IDP Managers that meets after each phase to jointly assess

progress and decide on amendments;

– Each municipality to inform the District Municipality on deviations of the Action

Programme that affect district-wide activities (e.g. the identification of municipal priority

issues is delayed and the District wide strategy workshop needs to be postponed);

– DM has the mandate to decide when and how an amendment takes place and therefore

postpone an activity or continue with the agreed programme; or

– All municipalities have to agree before the Framework is amended.

41

ANNEX 1

42

ANNEX 2

PHASE I: ANALYSIS

The Analysis Phase should take, on average, 3 months to complete. All the Planning Activities should beprogrammed to occur within this time.

43

PHASE II: STRATEGIES

The Strategies Phase should take, on average, 2 months to complete. The Planning Activity should be programmedto occur within this time.

44

PHASE III: PROJECTS

The Projects Phase should take, on average, 2 months to complete.The Planning Activities of this phase shouldbe programmed to occur within this time.

45

PHASE IV: INTEGRATION

The Integration Phase should take, on average, 6 weeks to complete. The Planning Activities of this phaseshould be programmed to occur within this time.

46

PHASE V: APPROVAL

The Approval Phase should take 6 weeks to complete for submission to the MEC. The PlanningActivities of this phase should be programmed to occur within this time frame.

47

ANNEX 3

LIST OF NATIONAL BINDING LEGISLATION

For a municipal level plan • Water Services Development Plan;

• Integrated Transport Plan;

• Integrated Waste Management Plan; and

• Land Development Objectives (to bereplaced by spatial planning as arequirement to be incorporated as acomponent in the IDP).

For sector planning to be

incorporated as a component

in the IDP

• Housing strategies and targets;

• Coastal management issues;

• Local economic development strategies;

• Integrated infrastructure planning;

• Integrated energy planning; and

• Spatial framework.

For compliance with normative

frameworks

• National Environmental Management Actprinciples;

• Development Facilitation Act principles;

• Environmental Implementation Plans; and

• Environmental Management Plans.

Category of Requirement Sector Requirement

For value adding contribution • Local Agenda 21.

48

key departmental contact persons

N a m e P o s i t i o n Te l e p h o n e F a x E - m a i l

Mr Elroy Africa Acting DDG: (012) 334-0799 (012) 334-0763 E l ro y @ d s o . p w v. g o v. z aG o v e rnance and

D e v e l o p m e n t

Ms Esme Magwaza D i rector: (012) 334-0823 (012) 334-0612 E s m e @ d s o . p w v. g o v. z aDevelopment Planning and LED

ddp task team (idp programme)

N a m e P o s i t i o n Te l e p h o n e F a x E - m a i l

Mr Yusuf Patel DDP Manager (012) 334-0805 (012) 334-0808 Yu s u f @ d s o . p w v. g o v. z aDr Theo Rauch GTZ – DDP adviser (012) 334-0802 (012) 334-0808 Vi r a @ d s o . p w v. g o v. z aMs Musa Majozi Task Team member (012) 334-0803 (012) 334-0808 M u s a @ d s o . p w v. g o v. z aMs Vira Denton A d m i n i s t r a t o r (012) 334-0806 (012) 334-0808 Vi r a @ d s o . p w v. g o v. z aMr Marc Feldman Task Team member (011) 487-1002 (011) 487-1025 M a rc f e l d @ g l o b a l . c o . z aMs Maria Coetzee Task Team member (012) 841-2552 (012) 841-4036 M j c o e t z e @ c s i r. c o . z a

idp provincial coordinators

N a m e P o s i t i o n Te l e p h o n e F a x E - m a i l

Ms Mosa Molapo K Z N (0333) 95-2114 (0333) 42-8825 M o l a p o m @ l g h . k z n t l . g o v. z aMs Andrea Steenkamp N o rth We s t (018) 387-3605 (018) 387-3608 A s t e e n k a m p @ n w p g . o rg . z aMr Thabo Mathabathe N o rt h e rn Cape (053) 830-9538 (053) 831-2904 T m a t h a b a t h e @ p a n c m a i l . n c a p e . g o v. z aMr Eddie Scott F ree State (051) 405-4415 (051) 403-3403 D s p @ m a j u b a . o f s . g o v. z aMr Solly Maluleke N o rt h e rn Pro v i n c e (015) 295-5400 (015) 295-3463 M a l u l e k e p s @ l o c p t b . n o r p ro v. g o v. z aMs Mani Molefe M p u m a l a n g a (013) 755-3300 (013) 755-3363 M m o l e f e @ n e l . m p u . g o v. z aMr Tebogo More m i G a u t e n g (011) 355-5119 (011) 355-5262 Te b o g o @ g p g . g o v. z aMr Philip Globler We s t e rn Cape (021) 483-4326 (021) 483-4527 P g ro b l e r @ p a w c . w c a p e . g o v. z aMr Kojo Gyan E a s t e rn Cape (040) 609-5466 (040) 609-5525 G y a n @ d h l g 1 . e c a p e . g o v. z a

ddp steering committee

As above, with the following additional members:

N a m e P o s i t i o n Te l e p h o n e F a x E - m a i l

Mr Chris du Plessis D L A (012) 312-9357 (012) 312-9348 H c d u p l e s s i s @ s g h q . p w v. g o v. z aMs Lize Coetzee D o T (012) 309-3428 (012) 323-9370 C o e t z e e l @ n d o t . p w v. g o v. z aMr H Makobe S A L G A (012) 338-6700 (012) 338-6747 H m a k o b e @ s a l g a . o rg . z aMs Bev Pre t o r i u s D WA F (012) 338-8812 (012) 321-1193 P re t o r i u s b @ d w a f . p w v. g o v. z aMr Diet von Bro e m b s e n D o H (012) 421-1453 (012) 341-8893 D i e t @ h o u s e p t a . p w v. g o v. z aMs Emmarie Behre n s D E AT (012) 310-3745 (012) 320-5469

pimss national task team

N a m e P o s i t i o n Te l e p h o n e F a x E - m a i l

Marion Mbina Pimss Manager (012) 334-0788 (012) 334-0790 P i m s s @ d s o . p w v. g o v. z aNomalizo Zibi Administrator (012) 334 0788 (012) 334-0790 P i m s s @ d s o . p w v. g o v. z aKatharina Hübner GTZ Adviser (012) 334-0839 (012) 334-0790 K a t h a r i n a @ d s o . p w v. g o v. z aPinky Kunene Task Team member (012) 334-0788 (012) 334-0790 P i n k y @ d s o . p w v. g o v. z a vKentse Sesele Task Team member (012) 334-0788 (012) 334-0790 S e s e l e k @ w o r l d o n l i n e . c o . z aDanso Agyemang Task Team member (012) 334-0788 (012) 334-0790

other dplg programmes

N a m e P ro g r a m m e Te l e p h o n e F a x E - m a i l

K a ren Harr i s o n L E D (012) 334-0801 (012) 334-0763 K a re n @ d s o . p w v. g o v. z aSam Choshi Social Plan (012) 334-0755 (012) 334-0610 S a m @ d s o . p w v. g o v. z aR i c h a rd Kru g e r C M I P (012) 334-0744 (012) 334-0610 R i c h a rd @ d s o . p w v. g o v. z aZama Nofemela M S P (012) 334-0750 (012) 334-0610 Z a m a @ d s o . p w v. g o v. z a

Useful contacts

PHASE 1: ANALYSIS

Introduction

1/1 Compilation of Existing Information

1/2 Community and Stakeholder Level Analysis

1/3 Reconciling Existing Information Compilation and Communityand Stakeholder Level Analysis

1/4 Municipality-level Analysis

1/4a Economic Analysis

1/4b Environmental Analysis

1/4c Institutional Analysis

1/5 Spatial Analysis

1/6 Socio-economic/Gender Differentiation

1/7 Identification of Municipal Priority Issues

1/8 In-depth analysis of Priority Issues: General Guidelines

1/9 In-depth analysis of Priority Issues: Generic Guidelines forSector Alignment

1/9a Sector Specific Requirements

1/10 Consolidation of Analysis Results

24

Process

Outputs

Compilation of existingi n f o r mation

• Service gaps (sector specific)• Differentiated by area and

social category• Available resource potentials

In-depth Analysis ofPriority Issues

• Understanding the exact nature of the issue

• Dynamics/Trends• Causing factors• Resources/Potentials

A g g re g a t i o n

Priority Issues

1/1

• Assessment of the existing level of development

• Priority issues of pr o b l e m s

• Information on context, causes, dynamics of priority issues or pr o b l e m s

• Information on available r e s o u r ces and potentials

Community andStakeholder level Analysis

• Differentiated by location and social category

• Cross-sectoral

1/2

M u n i c i p a l i t y - l e v e lA n a l y s i s– cross-sectoral– overarching issues/problems

• Economic Analysis

1/4

1/8

1/7

1/101/9

• Socio-economic Analysis Gender/Poverty

1/6

• Spatial Analysis 1/5

• Institutional Analysis 1/4c

• Environmental Analysis 1/4b

1/4a

= planning event

= output

= other planning activities

PHASE 1: ANALYSIS

25

1/3 R e c o n c i l i a t i o n

26

Focusing

Avoiding data

cemeteries

Providing useful

management

information

Assessing the

existing level of

development

Arriving at a well-

informed decision

on priority issues

Focused analysis of

a few prioritised

issues

Being aware of

resources and

assets

People’s

perceptions and

statistical

information

In Phase 1, municipalities deal with the existing situation . The big challenge for the

municipal management in the Analysis Phase is to focus on the relevant aspects of the

situation. In the past, planners tended to compile all kinds of information in a

comprehensive manner. This is an expensive and largely irrelevant effort destined for

the book shelves, which contributed to a widespread perception that planning is a

useless exercise in a situation of pressing needs and scarce resources.

Considering IDP as part of an integrated management system means asking what kind

of information on the existing situation is really necessary to arrive at appropriate

management decisions. This means that it is up to the municipal management and not

the planning professionals or provincial regulations to decide on information

requirements.

What are the required outputs of the Analysis Phase? In other words, what do

municipalities need to know to arrive at strategic and implementation-oriented decisions

on how to make best use of their scarce resources? The Municipal Systems Act is not

very prescriptive on this issue. It just requires an assessment of the existing level of

development¸ including an identification of communities which do not have access to

the basic municipal services.

Looking at the decision-making and management requirements of municipalities, the

need for information and analysis of the existing situation is determined by the

following considerations :

✰ The information should enable the municipality to decide on priority issues or

problems, with due consideration of the residents’/communities’ perceptions and of

available facts and figures.

✰ The municipal decision-makers should be knowledgeable about the concrete nature

of these priority issues or problems, such as trends, context, causes and impacts

related to these issues, in order to make informed decisions on appropriate

solutions (rather than just curing symptoms).

✰ The municipal decision-makers should be aware of existing and accessible assets

and resources and of resource limitations before making decisions on strategies.

In short, expected outputs of the Analysis Phase are:

• Assessment of the existing level of development (with special reference to

service gaps).

• Priority issues or problems.

• Information on context, dynamics and causes of priority issues.

• Information on available resources, potentials and assets.

There are different possible processes to arrive at these outputs. The process

proposed here is guided by the following considerations:

✰ There is a necessity to combine “data-based” and participatory methods of analysis:

It is important to know the residents’ perceptions of their needs (see Planning

Activity 1/2 ). But, it is as important to be informed by facts and figures, e.g. on

service gaps or on unemployment (see Planning Activity 1/1 ). Good decisions can

rely neither on perceptions, nor on statistical data alone. They have to consider both,

to compare both, and to interrelate both sources of information to one another to

arrive at a full and realistic picture (see Planning Activity 1/3 ).

INTRODUCTION

27

Adding the wider

perspective

Analysing the

situation from a

cross-cutting

perspective….

… with limited data

and resources

Getting the pieces

together

Deciding what you

really need to

know better

Adding the wider

perspective

✰ There is a necessity to look at the situation, not only from the community and

stakeholder perspective, but also from a municipality-wide perspective. The

crucial issues in a municipality are more than the sum of the needs of the

communities and stakeholder groups living in it. There may be all kinds of

overarching issues, like massive population influx, economic decline, HIV/AIDS

related problems, cumbersome administrative procedures and environmental

problems, which may not arise from a localised analysis. Therefore, we

recommend a special municipality level planning event to identify and analyse

such issues (Planning Activity 1/4) .

✰ The analysis should not be sectoralised. Otherwise sectoral thinking would

result in a wide and comprehensive list of issues, rather than in focusing on the

burning issues felt by people. But there are some cross-sectoral dimensions

which need to be considered in any analysis of the existing situation in order to

ensure that related development policy guidelines can be applied in a situation-

specific manner:

A spatial analysis is required as a basis for designing a spatial development

framework which is in line with the DFA principles of spatial development

(Planning Activity 1/5) .

A socio-economic analysis with special focus on the poverty situation, on

gender differentiation and on issues like HIV/AIDS is required as a basis for

arriving at an inclusive development strategy in line with national policy

guidelines on poverty alleviation and gender equity (Planning Activity 1/6) .

Some municipalities (especially Category A and C) may decide to do a systematic

cross-sectoral analysis as well for the economic, environmental and institutional

dimensions (Planning Activities 1/4a – c) . As this would be too ambitious, and

hardly affordable for smaller Category B municipalities, we do not recommend this

for the time being. We would rather recommend an issue focused approach within

the “Municipality-wide Analysis” (1/4) which makes best use of available knowledge

(including existing studies) and which may have to rely on informed professional

guesses rather than exact analysis.

Well-known basic facts and figures on the institutional system, on economic

conditions and environmental issues should already be included in the “compilation

of existing information” (1/1).

✰ A major challenge in the Analysis Phase is to take the step from all the bits and

pieces of analysis done at different levels and places and by different methods

to a consolidated list of priority issues which does justice to all actors involved

and to all information sources. It is a compilation, aggregation and reconciliation

of information which needs to be done, before the IDP Representative Forum

can arrive at a well-informed and fair list of priority issues in a transparent

manner (Planning Activity 1/7) .

✰ After priority issues have been agreed upon, it may turn out that the nature of

the issues or their dimensions are far from being clear. We may know that the

majority of the residents suffer from lack of access to clean drinking water but

we may not know whether the deficient supply situation is mainly a result of

water resources availability, technical deficiencies, an inappropriate water

management system, a tariff structure which encourages excessive

28

And summarising

useful information

for the further

planning process.

consumption, or a lack of investment funds. Such information, however, is crucial

for finding appropriate solutions. In such cases of high priority issues with crucial

information deficits, a focused in-depth analysis addressing these specific

information deficits is justified (Planning Activity 1/8 and 1/9 for sector-specific

requirements) .

✰ The information gathered during the Analysis Phase is primarily relevant for those

role-players involved in the further planning and decision-making process. That

means, it needs to be summarised and made available for use during Phase 2

(Planning Activity 1/10) . To turn the argument around: Only information which is

being used during the further stages of the IDP process is worth collecting.

Therefore, management’s question “for what purpose do we need to know this?”

should guide all activities in Phase 1.

Sector alignment in the Analysis Phase

Instead of compiling existing information (activity 1/1) and undertaking community

and stakeholder level analysis (activity 1/2) in entirely separate and uncoordinated

sector compartments, municipalities should attempt to collapse these into one.

The analysis is not the comprehensive, wasteful status quo of the past. It is defined,

directed or focused by the priorities established in the IDP process. The IDP analysis

phase can accommodate a range of sector status quo and analysis requirements that

are general in nature (such as demographics, consumer profile, financial and human

resource constraints analysis). These general, potentially duplicative aspects of sector

planning should be incorporated into “Compilation of Existing Information” (1/1) as

well as the identification of service gaps related to the sector (in case of basic

services). The decision about whether or not to incorporate the technical sector

elements of analysis within the In-depth Analysis (1/8) or undertake them in parallel

will depend on the relevance of the sector with regard to the Priority Issues of a

municipality.

Sector alignment also indicates the need to expand consideration of resource

constraints analysis beyond the financial and human capacity aspects to include

natural resources such as water, land and the environment. This sector perspective

and related expertise should be incorporated in the Municipality level Analysis (1/4)

and the In-depth Analysis (1/8 and 1/9).

Each municipality should agree, through the IDP institutional arrangements made for

sector communication, on the exact definition of what goes into the IDP process and

into the parallel processes in the analysis (and subsequent phases). Planning activity

1/9 (appended) provides a guide in this respect.

29

MinimumRequirements:w/r to Output

w/r to Process

Purpose:

(1) Current reality assessment is meant to be limited to a compilation or up-dating of existing data. It should not include research related to unknowninformation.

(2) It should provide a quick overview of relevant data, i.e. one should notattempt to maximise information, but to select that which is crucial forplanning and decision-making.

(3) The data should provide evidence on problems (e.g. service gaps) and onresources which can possibly help solve problems.

(4) The information should be spatialised and differentiated by populationgroups as far as possible.

(5) Sector-specific data requirements should at this stage be considered only tothe extent which is necessary to identify service gaps and sector agencies’information should be used as far as possible.

(6) HIV/AIDS prevalence rates or “best estimates” should be included.

(7) Crucial information gaps should be identified.

✰ Basic demographic figures.✰ Service levels and service gaps for all basic public services (localised, target-

group specific and basic-needs related).✰ Financial resources differentiated by source of income and type of

expenditure.✰ Available institutional capacities.✰ Compilation of crucial policy requirements.

None

To ensure that all actors involved in the planning process are aware of and haveaccess to basic facts and figures related to the present situation, trends anddynamics. This will contribute to the identification of realistic solutions, withproper consideration of the real needs and of available resources.

WHY?

WHAT?

PHASE 1: ANALYSIS

PLANNING ACTIVITY: 1/1COMPILATION OF EXISTING INFORMATION

Times Requirement(tentative)

2 weeks

thereafter, amendments and

additions may be made

Note:☛ Data requirements for making appropriate decisions are usually

over-estimated. On aspects for which proper data are missing,

sound professional guesses may help establish a realistic

understanding of the situation.

“Better be vaguely right than precisely wrong!”

☛ Population dynamics may be difficult to quantify. If there are no

updated figures, identify major trends.

☛ Make use of maps for information on spatial settlement patterns

and location of public services.

• The compilation of data should be managed by the IDP Steering Committee.• All technical officers of the municipalities should compile data within their

field of responsibility.• Provincial and national sector agencies should be approached to provide the

data on their facilities and services.• Consultants are not needed to compile such basic data.

SuggestedInstitutionalArrangements/Responsibilities

Hints for Designingthe Output

HOW?

WHO?

Keep facts and figures in mind!

1/1

30

MinimumRequirements:w/r to Output

w/r to Process

Purpose:

( 1 ) Establishment of an IDP Representative Forum consisting of re p resentatives ofgeographical areas (Wa rds), stakeholder organisations and disadvantagedg ro u p s .

( 2 ) I n f o rm members on intended participation process and pro c e d u re s .( 3 ) Give them at least one month to organise meetings in their areas or with their

m e m b e r s h i p .

( 4 ) If necessary, provide them with guidance on how to organise such meetings.( 5 ) Compile and consolidate results in a workshop of the IDP Repre s e n t a t i v e

F o ru m .

✰ Summary/ies of residents’/communities’/stakeholders’ prioritised needsdifferentiated by location, social categories and gender.

✰ Summary/ies of residents’/communities’/stakeholders’ own resources andinitiatives to address those needs differentiated by location, social categoriesand gender.

✰ Create conditions for public participation by:– informing the public and specific stakeholders on the IDP process and

encouraging their contribution.– establishing an IDP Representative Forum.– giving community and stakeholder representatives the opportunity to

conduct meetings or workshops within an agreed time frame and in alanguage which is in line with the preferences of the majority of thepeople (taking into account the involvement of illiterate people).

– Considering the results of community and stakeholder level events in thefurther analysis.

To contribute towards a situation in which municipal activities will addresspeople’s priority needs and incorporate people’s own initiatives. In addition, the participation process should help make residents aware of theimportance of IDPs for the quality of their lives.

WHY?

WHAT?

PHASE 1: ANALYSIS

PLANNING ACTIVITY: 1/2COMMUNITY- AND STAKEHOLDER-LEVELANALYSIS

Time Requirement(tentative)

– Initial meeting of IDP RepresentativeForum: 1 day

– Time-span for community/ stakeholder meetings: 1 month

– Consolidation Workshop of IDPRepresentative Forum: 1 – 2 days

Note:☛ The proposed pro c e d u re complies with all sectoral planning

re q u i re m e n t s .☛ Prioritisation of problems/needs is cru c i a l .☛ The top priority problems/needs should be specified by pro v i d i n g

facts and figures (quantity, quality, affected groups, locations, timed i m e n s i o n s ) .

☛ Name residents’/communities’/stakeholders’ own re s o u rces andinitiatives related to each priority problem or need.

☛ For aggregation of priority needs, see Planning Activity I/7.☛ For utilisation of existing (data-based) information during

community- and stakeholder-level analysis see Planning Activity I/3.

• The IDP Representative Forum is the central body of a structuredparticipation process.

• Ward Councillors and Ward Committees are the crucial actors to organisecommunity participation.

• Stakeholder representatives to organise stakeholder participation.• Traditional authorities should be considered as important stakeholders in rural

areas.• Special resource persons or advocates should be nominated for consideration

of needs of unorganised marginalised/underrepresented groups.• There should be competent facilitation of workshops. This might be done in

partnership with NGOs or other service providers (like PIMSS).

SuggestedInstitutionalArrangements/Responsibilities

Hints forStructuring theProcess

HOW?

WHO?

1/2Relate planning to people’s

problems and needs

31

1/3

MinimumRequirements:w/r to Output

w/r to Process

Purpose:

To arrive at a realistic picture, double cross-checking of the results of data-basedanalysis and of people’s perceptions is required. Practically, this can be arrangedin the following manner:

– The intermediate results of the data-based “Compilation of ExistingInformation” are communicated to the IDP Representative Forum and tothose involved in community-/stakeholder level participatory workshops asfacilitators or resource persons.

– During community-/stakeholder workshops, participants are challenged withinformation from data-based analysis in case the data indicate somethingwhich seems to contradict people’s perceptions of their problems.

– The results of community-/stakeholder analysis are communicated to thosein charge of “Compilation of Existing Information” to give them theopportunity to check, in case of contradicting information.

✰ Reconciled results from “existing information” and “participatory analysis”.

None

To contribute to a realistic identification of priority issues.

WHY?

WHAT?

PHASE 1: ANALYSIS

PLANNING ACTIVITY: 1/3RECONCILING “COMPILATION OF EXISTING INFORMATION” AND“COMMUNITY/STAKEHOLDER ANALYSIS

Time Requirement(tentative)

No additional time requirements.

Note:☛ Challenging people with facts is crucial in achieving realistic and

precise results of a participatory process. Those who conduct

participatory workshops should know the current reality in the

area.

☛ Data do not always provide sufficient evidence of problems.

People’s perceptions may indicate problems which are not

reflected by data. Both sources of information have to be

combined.

• Those in charge of “Compilation of Existing Information” (including technicalofficers) should attend meetings of the IDP Representative Forum.

• Officials in charge of a certain geographical area or a specific socio-economicgroup (e.g. teachers, health officers) should attend community or stakeholdermeetings.

SuggestedInstitutionalArrangements/Responsibilities

Hints forStructuring theProcess

HOW?

WHO?

“Which Truth Counts?”

32

MinimumRequirements:w/r to Output

w/r to Process

Purpose:

While participatory problem analysis/needs assessment is proceeding oncommunity and stakeholder level there should be municipality-level workshops.At such workshops major municipal wide issues should be identified (such asemployment generation, service payment, HIV/AIDS, draught, immigration,administrative reform) and be dealt with by working groups. The issues may besummarised eventually under headlines like economic, environmental, social andinstitutional aspects (compare Planning Activities 1/4a – c).

✰ Identification of crucial trends, dynamics, and related problems which affectthe area of the municipality and the municipal government as a whole.

✰ Identification of available resources, competitive advantages and initiatives inthe municipal area and of the municipal government to address theseproblems.

✰ Involvement of the IDP Representative Forum and of other competentresource persons for economic, environmental, institutional and social trends.

To ensure that the IDP projects and programmes will address not onlycommunity- and stakeholder specific issues, but also over-arching issues whichrelate to the municipality and its sustainability as a whole.WHY?

WHAT?

PHASE 1: ANALYSIS

PLANNING ACTIVITY: 1/4MUNICIPALITY-LEVEL ANALYSIS

Time Requirement(tentative)

4 days (during the same time whileplanning activity 1/2 is done).

Note:☛ To ensure a focused discussion on the real issues, do not

subdivide the process of analysis a priori according to the fourdimensions: “environmental”, “economic”, “social” and“institutional”.

☛ Category A and C municipalities as well as bigger and betterresourced Category C municipalities may do professional studiesfor environmental, economic, social and institutional analysis aspart of the Analysis Phase of the IDP process, or they may be ina position to make use of existing studies. Districts should doeconomic and environmental analysis on a district-wide scale forthe benefit of all local municipalities in their area (see 1/4a – c).For smaller and resource poor municipalities, such systematicapproaches of analysis are usually too ambitious and notaffordable (unless sponsored by external funding agencies). Theyhave to make best use of available knowledge and experienceand on informed professional guesses and, if available, of district-level analyses.

• The IDP Steering Committee should identify the topics for workshops andthe participants.

• Resource persons on issues of general concern, especially on HIV/AIDS,should be consulted to ensure that problematic, but sensitive issues are notneglected.

• The members of the IDP Representative Forum should always be invited, inorder to ensure that interlinkages between community stakeholder-specificissues, and over-arching issues are taken into account.

• Experienced facilitators should be invited to prepare, facilitate and documentthe workshops.

SuggestedInstitutionalArrangements/Responsibilities

Hints forStructuring theProcess

While the discussion process should focus on concrete issues, instead of beingstructured according to general “dimensions” (like economic, social, institutional,environmental), the documentation of the results of the analysis should begrouped under headlines such as economic, environmental, etc, aspects.

Hints for Designingthe Output

HOW?

WHO?

1/4 Looking at the whole

reveals more than the

sum of its parts!

33

1/4a

MinimumRequirements:w/r to Output

w/r to Process

Purpose:

• Preparing an economic analysis is desk-work, rather than a workshop event.All available economic data related to the municipal area should be compiledas background information for the municipal-level workshop dealing with“Municipality-Level Analysis” (1/4).

• Most municipalities will not be in a position to do or initiate economicsurveys to obtain additional information as part of their IDP process. If thereis an urgent need for more data and a more in-depth analysis, localmunicipalities may join their efforts with the district municipality and initiate adistrict-wide analysis on crucial economic issues of general interest (to bedone as part of Planning Activity 1/9).

✰ Basic economic data (employment, major economic sectors).

✰ Major economic trends (growth, decline by sector).

✰ Major economic potentials (under-utilised resources).

✰ Major constraints for economic development.

None

To ensure that municipal development strategies and projects take existingeconomic potentials and limitations of the area into account.

WHY?

WHAT?

PHASE 1: ANALYSIS

PLANNING ACTIVITY: 1/4 A

ECONOMIC ANALYSIS

Time Requirement(tentative)

(a) Compilation of existing economicdata 1 – 2 days

(b) Study 2 – 3 weeks (during Phase 1,parallel to other Planning Activities)

Note:☛ Do not make economic analysis a topic of a workshop or a work

group session. Work groups should focus on issues (such as

unemployment) rather than providing information.

• Compilation of existing economic data can be done by one of the technicalofficers of the municipality, based on available reports and in consultationwith economic stakeholders and promotion agencies.

• Provision of new information should be done on a district-wide scale and beinitiated by the district councils, unless category B municipalities feel theneed, and have the capacities to do a specific study for their own area.

• Involve economic stakeholders and specialists in the IDP RepresentativeForum.

SuggestedinstitutionalArrangements/Responsibilities

Hints forStructuring theProcess

HOW?

WHO?

Being aware of economic

potentials and limitations

34

MinimumRequirements:w/r to Output

w/r to Process

Purpose:

• Preparing an environmental analysis is a task which involves investigationand desk-work, rather than a topic for a workshop event. All availableinformation on crucial environmental problems and threats within themunicipal area should be considered as background information for themunicipal-level workshop dealing with “Municipality-Level Analysis” (1/4).

• It is up to the IDP Representative Forum to decide (taking the information ofthe environmental analysis into account) whether or not a certainenvironmental issue will become a municipal Priority Issue.

• Most category B municipalities will not be in a position to do or initiate acomprehensive environmental study to obtain additional information as partof their IDP process. Should there be an urgent need for more information,local municipalities may join their efforts with the district municipality andinitiate a district-wide analysis on crucial environmental issues (as part ofPlanning Activity 1/9).

✰ A list of major existing environmental problems with a short description ofeach of the problems (location, people affected, magnitude of problem,causes).

✰ A list of major environmental threats and risks (including disaster risks) with ashort description.

None

To ensure that municipal development strategies and projects take existingenvironmental problems and threats into consideration as well as environmentalassets which require protection or controlled management.WHY?

WHAT?

PHASE 1: ANALYSIS

PLANNING ACTIVITY: 1/4 B

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS

Time Requirement(tentative)

(a) Compilation of existing informationon environmental problems 1 – 2 days

(b) Study 2 – 3 weeks (during Phase 1,parallel to other Planning Activities)

Note:☛ Do not make environmental analysis a topic for a workshop or a

work group session. There may, however, be workshops or workgroups on certain specific burning environmental issues (such asair pollution or risk of floods or forest fires) if they are identifiedas municipal priorities. Work groups should focus on discussingsuch crucial issues rather than being used for providinginformation.

• One of the technical officers of the municipality can compile existinginformation on environmental problems and risks, based on available reportsand consultation with environmental stakeholders and promotion agencies.

• Provision of new information should be done on a district-wide scale and beinitiated by the district councils, unless a category B Municipality feels theneed and has the capacities to carry out a specific study on a specificenvironmental issue in their own area.

• Involve environmental stakeholders and specialists in the IDP RepresentativeForum.

SuggestedInstitutionalArrangements/Responsibilities

Hints forStructuring theProcess

HOW?

WHO?

1/4b Being aware of

environmental problems

and threats

35

1/4c

MinimumRequirements:w/r to Output

w/r to Process

Purpose:

• The institutional analysis should be part of the Municipality-Level Analysis.Strengths and weaknesses of the municipal government can be identifiedthrough a joint and facilitated meeting of councillors and officials (self-analysis).

• The compilation of institutional constraints related to the priority issuesraised by the residents (communities, stakeholders) is an on-going processduring Phase 1 and which is not limited to Planning Activity 1/4 . Somebodyfrom the municipality has to make sure that all institutional aspects are notedand summarised at the end of Phase 1.

• Most category B municipalities will not be in a position to initiate anorganisational analysis by professional consultants as part of their IDPprocess. Such external support is not required at this stage, but may have tocome into it, in the event of a major organisational restructuring process.

✰ An organogram of the municipal administration.

✰ An overview of institutional strengths and weaknesses of the municipalgovernment in relation to the new requirements of a developmental localgovernment.

✰ A compilation of all institutional constraints which have been identified ascausal factors of other identified priority problems/issues.

None

To ensure that municipal development strategies and projects take existinginstitutional capacities and constraints into consideration, and that they addressinstitutional problems in the municipality.WHY?

WHAT?

PHASE 1: ANALYSIS

PLANNING ACTIVITY: 1/4 C

INSTITUTIONAL ANALYSIS

Time Requirement(tentative)

1 day throughout Phase 1

(a) Self assessment

(b) Compilation of institutional

constraints (parallel to other

Planning Activities).

Note:☛ As institutional analysis always affects the interests of the

members/employees of an organisation, it is important to rely

not only on the internal perspective (which may be biased), but

also on an external (clients’, residents’) perspective.

That external perspective can come in, when the people’s

Priority Issues and their causes are analysed in depth

(Planning Activity 1/9).

• The Municipal Manager, as head of municipal administration, should takedirect responsibility to ensure that institutional aspects are adequatelyaddressed during the analysis process. As institutional aspects and possibleconsequences to be drawn from it are usually controversial within thegoverning bodies of a municipality, this task cannot be done by a junior or asectoral officer.

• Self-assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of a municipalgovernment requires a qualified and independent facilitator.

SuggestedinstitutionalArrangements/Responsibilities

Hints forStructuring theProcess

HOW?

WHO?

Being aware of

institutional strengths

and weaknesses

36

MinimumRequirements:w/r to Output

w/r to Process

Purpose:

• Representing the spatial dimension of development issues should not bea separate process, but an extension of:

– the compilation of existing information;– community and stakeholder level analysis;– municipal level analysis; and– socio-economic analysis.

• All problems which can be located or represented in space should bemapped.

• Analysis of spatial patterns and trends should be one issue to be dealtwith in the “Municipal-level Analysis”.

• Avoid expensive and time-consuming data capturing exercises and wherepossible make use of other sources of existing information such as ENPAT(ENnvironmental Potential AT las) etc.

✰ Mapping the spatial dimensions of development issues identified in 1/1, 1/2and 1/4.

✰ Mapping major spatial patterns, trends (such as migration patterns), problemsand opportunities.

✰ Mapping of spatial restructuring issues in compliance with DFA and NEMAprinciples.

✰ Identification and mapping of land reform issues with respect toredistribution, restitution and tenure reform.

✰ Maps should be used as a tool during all steps of analysis.

To ensure that the municipality’s spatial strategies and land use managementdecisions are based on a general awareness of:

• spatial constraints, problems, opportunities, trends and patterns;• the necessity for spatial restructuring;• the need for land reform; and• the spatial dimension of development issues.WHY?

WHAT?

PHASE 1: ANALYSIS

PLANNING ACTIVITY: 1/5SPATIAL ANALYSIS AND THE SP ATIALREPRESENTATION OFDEVELOPMENT ISSUES

Time Requirement(tentative)

No separate process, but involvementof a spatial planner in the analysisprocess for a minimum of one week.

Time requirements depend on the sizeof the municipality.

Note:☛ Within a mid-term perspective each municipality should establish

a basic system of spatial information (if necessary supported byPIMSS-Centres).

☛ Within a short-term perspective it is sufficient to spatialise theavailable information.

• In municipalities with a (spatial) planning department/section or official, thisoffice should be charged with preparing the spatial analysis.

• Municipalities without spatial planning capacity should engage a spatialplanner for this purpose.

SuggestedInstitutionalArrangements/Responsibilities

Hints forStructuring theProcess

HOW?

WHO?

You don’t know it unless

you know where it

happens.

1/5

37

MinimumRequirements:w/r to Output

w/r to Process

Purpose:

• No separate process required. Socio-economic and gender differentiation isone dimension of “Compilation of Existing Information” and of “Communityand Stakeholder Analysis”.

• “Municipality-level Analysis” should include an identification of povertygroups (with their specific problems) and of poverty trends.

✰ Data of “Compilation of Existing Information” are differentiated by socio-economic category and by gender/age group as much as data availabilityallows.

✰ Residents’/communities’/stakeholders’ priority needs are differentiated bysocial categories and gender.

✰ Public participation process has to be inclusive and representative withregard to social categories (especially poverty groups), gender and agegroups.

To ensure that the municipality’s strategies and programmes sufficientlyconsider the needs of disadvantaged/marginalised population groups, in order todeal effectively with poverty-reduction and gender equity.WHY?

WHAT?

PHASE 1: ANALYSIS

PLANNING ACTIVITY: 1/6SOCIO-ECONOMIC/GENDER DIFFERENTIATIONOF ANALYSIS

Time Requirement(tentative)

No separate process, but involvementof a specialist for poverty/genderissues for a minimum of one weekduring the Analysis Phase.

Note:☛ The interlinkages between poverty and HIV/AIDS as well as

between gender and HIV/AIDS need special attention.

☛ Well-capacitated municipalities should go far beyond theseminimum requirements and initiate focused studies on thesituation of specific disadvantaged/poor groups and on specificgender-related problems.

☛ In areas with under-capacitated Category B municipalities it issuggested that Districts-, agencies from other spheres ofgovernment or research institutions should initiate regional-scalestudies on typical socio-economic/gender related issues for thebenefit of Category B municipalities.

• Representatives of disadvantaged social groups, poverty groups, women,youth, aged, households affected by HIV/AIDS etc. should be members ofthe IDP Representative Forum. In the event of a disadvantaged group nothaving legitimate representatives, competent resource persons should benominated as “advocates” for such groups.

• In municipalities with a social development officer, this officer should be amember of the IDP Steering Committee to ensure a representative povertyand gender sensitive process. Municipalities without such capacities shouldengage a specialist as a resource person on a temporary basis.

SuggestedInstitutionalArrangements/Responsibilities

Hints forStructuring theProcess

HOW?

WHO?

Being inclusive by

differentiating

1/6

38

MinimumRequirements:w/r to Outcome

w/r to Process

Purpose:

( 1 ) IDP Representative Forum Workshop: Presentation of community,stakeholder and municipal-level priorities.

( 2 ) Summarising of all results on overview charts for comparison andaggregation.

( 3 ) Presentation of outcomes of data-based service gap analysis and reconcilingprocess (see Processes 1/3 and 1/2).

( 4 ) Identification of consolidated municipal Priority Issues taking intoconsideration community-, stakeholder- and municipal-level priorities as wellas the results of “Compilation of Existing Information”.

( 5 ) In addition to the consolidated priority issues, those community- /stakeholder-specific top priorities not covered by the overall priorities have to be listed.

✰ Municipality-wide priority issues.✰ Summary of community and stakeholder-specific priorities.

✰ Involvement of community and stakeholder representatives in theconsolidation process.

To ensure a clear focus of municipal action on strategic municipality-wide priorityissues, while at the same time ensuring that essential location and target groupspecific needs or problems will not be neglected.WHY?

WHAT?

PHASE 1: ANALYSIS

PLANNING ACTIVITY: 1/7IDENTIFICATION OF MUNICIPAL PRIORITYISSUES/AGGREGATING PRIORITIES

Time Requirement(tentative)

1 – 2 days preparation

1 – 2 days workshop

1 – 2 days – documentation of

workshop results

Note:☛ The consolidation process includes aggregation of results from

various communities and stakeholder groups and thereconciliation of results of participatory and data-base analysis.Both tasks should be done within one workshop.

☛ Information on community/stakeholder-specific problems andrelated details are still important for the further planning processand must not get lost in the consolidation process.

☛ While, in principle, the identification of Priority Issues shouldresult from the local context rather than from a nationalperspective, there are two issues of nation-wide concern whichare assumed to be relevant in most municipalities: This isunemployment and HIV/AIDS. Where these issues are notidentified as Priority Issues, reasons should be given.

• The consolidation process is a key event within the overall IDP-process andshould be done through a workshop of the IDP Representative Forum.

• Preparatory work like compilation of all information has to be done by the IDPSteering Committee or by a person nominated by the Committee.

• The consolidation workshops require high level facilitation skills and shouldbe done by experienced facilitators.

SuggestedInstitutionalArrangements/Responsibilities

Hints forStructuring theProcess

HOW?

WHO?

Finding common ground

for joint action

1/7

39

MinimumRequirements:w/r to Output

w/r to Process

Purpose:

(1) Identification of additional information requirements for each priority issue(under consideration of sectoral planning requirements).

(2) Identification of officers in charge of managing the in-depth analysis.

(3) Drafting Terms of Reference for each in-depth study.

(4) Select responsible persons for doing the analysis (in consultation withDistrict-level PIMS-Centre).

(5) Provide organisational support, guidance and feedback to study team.

(6) Organise workshop to draw conclusions from study results.

✰ Analysis of the precise nature of a problematic issue (quantity, quality,

affected groups, location, time).

✰ Analysis of causes and their impact

✰ Analysis of priority issues in context.

✰ Analysis of dynamics related to the priority issues.

✰ Analysis of problem-solving potentials and initiatives.

✰ Different process requirements for different issues.

To ensure that the strategies and projects are based on a thorough knowledge ofall the relevant aspects of the priority issues identified to ensure that strategies:

– respond to causes rather than symptoms

– deal with the problem in context

– consider potentials, opportunities and initiatives for resolving priority issues.WHY?

WHAT?

PHASE 1: ANALYSIS

PLANNING ACTIVITY: 1/8IN-DEPTH ANALYSIS OF PRIORITY ISSUES:GENERAL GUIDELINES

Time Requirement(tentative)

Timeframe: 1 month.

The time requirements in terms ofperson-days will differ considerablydepending on the nature of the study,but should not exceed 20 person-daysper study.

Note:☛ The information requirements of in-depth studies have to be

determined by those in charge of making the decisions, ratherthan by consultants commissioned with doing the analysis. Donot waste funds on creating data-cemeteries for the shelf, butdetermine what municipal government needs to know better inorder to arrive at realistic strategies.

☛ In-depth analysis has to include and build upon information fromprevious steps of analysis (1/1, 1/2, 1/4, 1/5, 1/6).

• Whether an in-depth analysis can be done by a municipality on its own orwhether it has to be outsourced depends on the information requirementsand on the in-house capacities of the municipality.

• Local resource persons (including government field staff like teachers, healthofficers, technical officers and NGOs) should be involved in the analysis.

• For issues which are common to several municipalities in a region, Districtsmay be charged with the task to organise in-depth studies in order to makeeffective use of limited resources.

SuggestedInstitutionalArrangements/Responsibilities

Hints forStructuring theProcess

HOW?

WHO?

Finding out what you

really need to know

1/8

40

MinimumRequirements:w/r to Output

w/r to Process

Purpose:

(1) Identification of sector officers who will take responsibility for aligningsector planning and IDP priorities in the in-depth analysis – either viaincorporation or in parallel, depending on the relevance of the sector inrelation to the Priority Issues.

(2) Identification of what aspects of the sectors have relevance in relation tothe Priority Issues.

(3) Agreement on which sector information and analysis requirements areincorporated into the Terms of Reference of the in-depth studies.

(4) Inclusion of sector expertise on the relevant study teams.

✰ Requirements differ by sector.

See table for further guidance on output requirements.

✰ Not applicable in general terms. Sector official (see below) to bring anyspecific process requirements to the in-depth analysis, where relevant.Specific recommendations and principles are addressed in the table below.

To ensure that sector planning is aligned with the in-depth analysis in a mannerwhich promotes local priorities; resolves sector planning requirements wherethese exist; and ensures that a thorough and expert knowledge of the sector isincluded in relevant in-depth studies.

WHY?

WHAT?

PHASE 1: ANALYSIS

PLANNING ACTIVITY: 1/9IN-DEPTH ANALYSIS OF PRIORITY ISSUES:GENERIC GUIDELINES FOR SECTORALIGNMENT

Time Requirement(tentative)

Timeframe: 1 month.

These activities are components of the

in-depth analysis step.

Note:☛ This activity helps to ensure that sector planning is grounded in

local priorities and that the IDP has the necessary technical

expertise.

☛ If there are aspects of the sector planning requirements that are

not directly related to IDP priorities, then this activity will assist

municipalities to allocate responsibility for these in parallel to the

integrated development planning process in order to ensure that

requirements are nevertheless met.

☛ Basic sector information (such as service gaps) of descriptive

nature as well as duplicative sectoral information requirements

(population issues) should already be included under Compilation

of Existing Information (1/1), as it may help to identify Priority

Issues.

• The sector officers could be district and local officials, depending on the IDPpriorities (see table below for further guidance).

• Whether the sector elements of the in-depth analysis/analyses can be doneby a municipality on its own, or whether this has to be out-sourced, dependson the information requirements and on the in-house capacities of amunicipality.

SuggestedInstitutionalArrangements/Responsibilities

Hints forStructuring theProcess

HOW?

WHO?

Make sector requirements

meet people’s priorities

1/9

41

Water

Transpor t

It is the responsibility of district municipalities to produce I W M P s, with the assistance ofp rovincial government if necessary. While demographics will be covered within 1/1 andstakeholder and needs analysing under 1/2 the following minimum information andanalysis re q u i rements will apply in the in-depth analysis phase:• b a c k g round information on relevant policy and laws;• waste quantities and characteristics;• existing waste management practices; and• f i n a n c i n g .

It is the responsibility of water services authorities (WSAs) to produce W S D P s . As alldistrict municipalities are also water services development authorities, the followingminimum information and analysis re q u i rements will apply to districts. In those casesw h e re local municipalities are also water services development authorities, then there q u i rements will also apply to them. While some re q u i rements such as consumerp rofile and service levels should be covered already in Planning Activity 1/1 the followingother re q u i rements need an in-depth analyis:• water balance;• water source and quality;• water service infrastru c t u re ;• demand management;• institutional aspects and management; and• finances and aff o rd a b i l i t y.

The minimum output re q u i rement of the ITP that corresponds with this phase of the IDPis the current public transport r e c o rd , which constitutes the basis for the integratedt r a n s p o rt plan. It must be pre p a red in accordance with the document titled “re q u i re -ments and format for preparation of current public transport re c o rds by core cities”, aspublished in the Gazette on 22 May 1998 or any subsequent amendment there o fpublished in the Government Gazette and agreed to by the MECs. The re c o rd must:– take into account the changes necessary in the context (except where that

document is in conflict with the National Tr a n s p o rt Act);– show all of the scheduled and unscheduled ser v i c e s that are operated in the are a

of the planning authority, and take into account those to and from the areas ofneighbouring planning authorities; and

– show all the facilities and infrastr u c t u r e in place and utilised in the area concern e dfor the purpose of, or in connection with the public transport services, as well as thefacilities and infrastru c t u re being developed for those purposes or in that connectionwithin the area concern e d .

PHASE 1: ANALYSIS

PLANNING ACTIVITY: 1/9 A

SECTOR-SPECIFIC GUIDELINES

Although the revised Municipal Infrastr u c t u r e Investment Framework was not final atthe time writing, the following list indicates the ouptut re q u i rements that are beingp roposed (remember that the infrastru c t u re planning process re q u i rement is that it mustbe done as part of the IDP pro c e s s ) :• the existing service levels available to households (part of 1/1);• costs to households of service payments; and• availability of grant funding.

Infrastructur e

T h e re are no specific process re q u i rements for the public transport re c o rd. However, theNational Tr a n s p o rt Bill (2000) stipulates that participation of all interested and aff e c t e dp a rties in transport planning including vulnerable and disadvantaged persons must bep romoted.

Transpor t

T h e re are no WSDP process re q u i rements applicable in this phase. However, district andlocal municipalities should engage with one another on aspects of local and districtpriorities which affect water.

Water

There are no IWMP process requirements applicable in this phase.Wastemanagement

Wastemanagement

Minimum Requirements: w/r to Process

1/9a

Minimum Requirements: w/r to Output WHAT?

HOW?

42

MinimumRequirements:w/r to Output

w/r to Process

Purpose:

The in-depth analyses will result in additional, more detailed and perhapsdifferent information compared to the information from previous planningactivities. These different pieces of information can be combined in thefollowing way:

(1) Reports of in-depth studies shall be presented to the IDP RepresentativeForum for comments.

(2) The person in charge of a Priority Issue should outline in a summary paperall information related to the issue on the basis of the report, thecomments, from compilation of the existing information, and fromcommunity/stakeholder-level analysis.

✰ Information from the various analysis activities is summarised per PriorityIssue in a refined and well-structured manner and made accessible to allactors involved in the planning process.

None

To ensure that the knowledge gained during the Analysis Phase is easilyavailable for the further planning phases and for implementation and monitoringpurposes.WHY?

WHAT?

PHASE 1: ANALYSIS

PLANNING ACTIVITY: 1/10CONSOLIDATION OF ANALYSIS RESULTS

Time Requirement(tentative)

1 week

Note:☛ The compiled summary reports for each Priority Issue may

become part of the IDP document.

☛ The summary documents should be made available to allmembers of the IDP Steering Committee, of the IDPRepresentative Forum, and to Project Task Teams.

• Discussion of in-depth study results in IDP Representative Forum.• Compilation of summary report: desk work.• Alignment requirement: The summary documents need to be submitted

to the district as a basis for their efforts to prepare district-level strategyworkshops on issues which affect more than one municipality.

SuggestedInstitutionalArrangements/Responsibilities

Hints forStructuring theProcess

The summary paper on each Priority Issue should not exceed 3 – 5 pages. Itshould include:

– Facts and figures related to the issue, differentiated by geographical area andsocial category (incl. gender).

– Trends and dynamics related to the issue.

– Causal factors and wider context of the issue.

– Potentials available to resolve the issue.

Hints for Designingthe Output

HOW?

WHO?

Information management means summarising useful

information

1/10

IDPIntegrated Development Planning

Better ServiceDeliver y

Local EconomicDevelopment

SpatialIntegration

PartnershipApproach

Monitoring andEvaluation

Capacity Building

ImplementationManagement

PovertyReduction

SustainableMunicipal

Development

SoundEnvironment

IDP

INTEGRATED DEVELOPMENT PLANNING SYSTEM

4

IDP: Phases and planning activities

Introduction to Guide III

1. ANALYSIS

Introduction1/1 Compilation of Existing Information 291/2 Community and Stakeholder Level Analysis 301/3 Reconciling Existing Information Compilation and Community and Stakeholder Level Analysis 311/4 Municipality-wide Analysis 321/4a Economic Analysis 331/4b Environmental Analysis 341/4c Institutional Analysis 351/5 Spatial Analysis 361/6 Socio-economic/Gender Differentiation 371/7 Identification of Municipal Priority Issues/Aggregating Priorities 381/8 In-depth Analysis of Priority Issues: General Guidelines 391/9 In-depth Analysis of Priority Issues: Generic Sector Guidelines 401/9a Sector Specific Requirements 411/10 Consolidation of Analysis Results 42

2. STRATEGIES

Introduction2/1 Vision 482/2 Working Objectives 492/3 Localised Strategic Guidelines 502/3a Localised Spatial Strategic Guidelines 512/3b Localised Strategic Guidelines for Poverty Alleviation and Gender Equity 522/3c Localised Strategic Environmental Guidelines 532/3d Localised Strategic Guidelines for Local Economic Development (LED) 542/3e Localised Institutional Strategic Guidelines 552/4 Defining Resource Frames/Financial Strategy 562/5 Creating Strategic Alternatives 572/6 Creating Conditions for Public Debate on Alternatives 582/7 Undertaking District-level Strategy Workshops 592/8 Analysing Alternatives 602/9 Deciding on an Alternatives/Designing the Strategy 612/10 Translating District Strategy Workshop Results into Local Decisions 62Examples for Strategy Statements 63-66

3. PROJECTS

Introduction3/1 Forming “Project Task Teams” 713/2 Establishing Preliminary Budget Allocations 723/3 Designing Project Proposals 733/4 Target Group Participation in Project Planning 743/5 Involvement of Project Partners 753/6 Setting Indicators for Objectives 763/7 Project Outputs/Targets/Locations 773/8 Major Activities/Timing/Responsible Agencies 783/9 Cost/Budget Estimates/Source of Finance 79

4. INTEGRATION

Introduction4/1 Screening of Draft Project Proposals 844/2 Integrating Projects and Programmes 854/3 Integrated Sector Programmes 864/4 5-year Financial Plan for the Municipality 904/5 5-year Capital Investment Programme (all sources of investment) 914/6 5-year Action Programme 924/7 Integrated Monitoring and Performance Management System 934/8 Integrated Spatial Development Framework 944/9 Integrated Poverty Reduction/Gender Equity Programme 954/10 Integrated Environmental Programme 964/11 Integrated LED Programme 974/12 Integrated Institutional Programme 984/13 Integrated HIV/AIDS Programme 994/14 Disaster Management Plan 100

5. APPROVAL

Introduction5/1 Opportunity for Comments from Provincial/National Government 1045/2 District-level Horizontal (Inter-municipal) Coordination 1055/3 Opportunity for Public Comments 1065/4 Incorporating and Responding to Comments 1075/5 Final Adoption by the Municipal Council 1085/6 Compiling District-level Summaries of Local IDPs 109

INTRODUCTION

1. THE CHALLENGE OF A SIMPLIFIED AND USER-FRIENDLY INTEGRATED DEVELOPMENT PLANNING

(IDP) MANUAL

The authors of this new IDP methodology were challenged by three major requests:

♦ to simplify the approach

♦ to encourage a debate on the “real issues” in a municipality, rather than a comprehensive data collection

exercise and a mechanistic application of planning tools

♦ to present the manual in a more user-friendly format.

There is general agreement about the need for clear, concise and user-friendly guidelines, and on the desirability

of a planning style which provides an platform for debate on real issues, rather than motivating for professional

planners’ lonesome deskwork struggle with the right terminology. The challenge of a simplified methodology is

more difficult to deal with. Integrated development planning, in order to be meaningful, is not that simple and

includes:

1. A consultative process which requires meaningful involvement of a wide range of different stakeholders in

various stages of the analysis and the decision-making process. Getting everybody on board when and

where they need to be on board (rather than all the time) is a complex task.

2. A strategic process which requires a focused approach, and a systematic search for the most appropriate

and effective solution, keeping in mind given resources, and overall policy guidelines and principles. This

goes well beyond simply compiling priority lists and transforming them into budget proposals.

3. An integrated approach which requires thinking and acting holistically across the conventional sectoral

boundaries.

4. Implementation-oriented planning, which requires becoming quite specific in terms of quantities, quality,

responsibilities, location, time and costs to make sure delivery will take place. This goes well beyond a list

of project titles.

The challenge of an IDP planning approach is to combine these three requirements in order to arrive at a

decision-making process which is consultative, strategic and implementation oriented at the same time.

This manual uses four means of making the complexity of IDP manageable:

1. It involves an event-centred approach to organising the IDP process, instead of a tool- or method-centred

approach. Thinking of planning as a sequence of organisational events is easier than thinking of a sequence

of planning tools. And it tends to encourage a consultative and strategic discussion process on real issues

which is not disturbed by requirements to stick to a certain terminology or certain formats.

2. It clearly differentiates between a generic IDP Approach (Guide III) which applies to all types of

municipalities, and specific planning techniques and tools (Guide IV) which may differ greatly from

municipality to municipality.

3. It aims at a more user-friendly language by avoiding planners’ jargon.

4. It unpacks the overall process into five sequenced “phases”, and into “planning activities” for each

phase (which are not necessarily to be followed in a certain sequence).

2. INTENDED USERS OF THE MANUAL

The planning methodology, as it is outlined in this Guide III is supposed to provide guidance on how to structure

and organise the IDP process. Accordingly, the major users will be the IDP Coordinators (Municipal Managers)

and any professional planners or facilitators assisting in the IDP process. Other role players who are involved in

the IDP Steering Committee and in the IDP Representative Forum should at least be able to understand it.

5

3. THE IDP APPROACH

Event-Centred Approach

The event-centred IDP Approach is supposed to be a systematic (but not rigid) sequence of planning events:

➺ starting from a focused and consultative analysis of the existing situation (Phase 1 – Analysis);

➺ getting through a strategic discussion and decision-making phase on the objectives and on the most

appropriate ways and means of resolving priority issues (Phase 2 – Strategies);

➺ to a process of concrete and technical project planning (Phase 3 – Projects);

➺ before all project proposals are checked for compliance and consistency and integrated into a

consolidated IDP (Phase 4 – Integration);

➺ which eventually has to go through an assessment, alignment and approval process (Phase 5 – Approval).

6

Phase 3: Projects

Compiling Existing Data

Phase 1: Analysis

Analysing the Context of Priority Issues

Meetings with Community andStakeholder Representatives

Agreeing on a vision and on objectives

Phase 2: Strategies

Debate and decision-making on appropriate strategies

Considering the relevance andapplication of policy guidellines in the

IDP process

Screening, adjusting, consolidating andagreeing on project proposals

Phase 4: Integration

Compilation of integrated programmes

Inviting and incorporating comments

Phase 5: Approval

Adoption by the council

Diagram 1: The Event-Centred Approach

Agreeing on Priority Issues

Formulation of project proposals

Planning events are usually meetings or workshops of the organisational structures in charge of the IDP

process (IDP Representative Forum, IDP Steering Committee, Project Task Teams) or, in exceptional cases,

activities done by individuals (data compilation, surveys, etc.). Each planning event is supposed to result in

certain “outputs”. Such outputs can be in the form of information or decisions. Some of the outputs are

related to legal requirements, others are just logical requirements which help to follow a conclusive process.

For each planning event, suggestions are made on the type of organisations and “actors” to be involved, in

order to ensure an inclusive and representative consultative and participatory process.

IDP Approach excluding Planning Techniques

The planning approach, however, does not say much about the specific planning tools to be used for each

planning event. These tools may differ greatly by type of municipality.

While metropolitan councils may use sophisticated computer-based planning techniques, small category B

municipalities may deal with the same planning event by means of a simple dialogue. While advanced

municipalities may make use of refined information processing techniques (e.g. geographical information

systems), others may have to rely on guesswork and rapid appraisal approaches. As a consequence, the

event-centred IDP approach as presented in this manual applies to all categories and types of

municipalities1. All have to answer the same type of questions by going through the same kind of

consultative/participatory planning and decision-making events. The principles of a:

♦ consultative

♦ strategic

♦ implementation oriented process

apply to each municipality and all of them will have to go through the phases of:

1. Analysing the existing situation

2. Making strategic choices

3. Designing concrete project proposals

4. Screening and integrating these proposals

5. Getting their IDPs assessed, aligned and approved.

Only the planning techniques will differ. To avoid confusing the overall IDP Approach and the context-

specific techniques and tools, possible techniques and tools for different types of municipalities are

compiled in a different manual (Guide IV: “Tool Box”). Designing the IDP Approach in a way which avoids

proposing specific planning techniques and tools is a way:

➺ to simplify the approach (each municipality can opt for its own degree of simplification or sophistication);

and

➺ to allow for a certain degree of pluralism with regard to planning styles and techniques as well as for

flexible adjustment to the context of each municipality.

Consultative/Participatory Approach

The IDP Approach is based on the principle of inclusive and representative consultation and/or

participation of all residents, communities and stakeholders within a municipality, as well as

representatives from other spheres of government, sector specialists, and other resource persons.

Due to the large size of the amalgamated municipalities, the consultation/participation process as suggested

here follows the principles of:

(a) structured participation through organisations and legitimate representatives (or advocates in the case ofnon-organised disadvantaged or marginalised population groups), rather than direct participation,

(b) providing prerequisites and opportunities for participation, rather than proactively encouraging andorganising participation by municipal government.

1For the distribution of roles between District Municipalities and Local Municipalities see Guide II. 7

8

In other words: Direct participation of residents and community members through public meetings will be the

exception rather than the rule in municipalities with 100 000 inhabitants on average. The approach is based on

institutionalised participation with an IDP Representative Forum as the major organisational body, and with

provision of adequate time for the representatives to consult with their communities or their membership

before discussing the issue in the IDP Representative Forum.

Participation and consultation will have to happen during all phases, rather than being exclusively applied for

assessment and prioritisation of needs or problems during the Analysis Phase.

➺ In phase 1 communities and stakeholders are given the chance to analyse their problems and determine

their priorities.

➺ In phase 2 there will be opportunity for a broad public debate on the appropriate ways and means of solving

problems.

➺ In phase 3, the communities and/or stakeholders affected by a concrete localised project will be consulted

on specific questions related to the project design (how should facilities/services be designed? where should

they be located? who should provide it? who should get access under which conditions?).

➺ In phase 4, the IDP Representative Forum will have to check whether the project proposals are in line with

the priorities and strategic guidelines.

➺ In phase 5, communities and stakeholders will be given the opportunity to comment on the draft IDP.

This approach of institutionalised and structured participation and consultation is expected to provide better

opportunities for relevant participation with less effort and cost for the municipal government which does not

necessarily have to cover costs for initiating and organising public meetings.

Phase 1: Analysis

Phase 2: Strategies

Sectors

Problem/Needs

Analysis

Public debate on alternatives

Consultation ofspecific affected

population groups

Discussion in IDP Representative

Forum

Comments fromthe public

Specialists

Strategy

DecisionsIssues

IdentificationProject

Proposals

Project Proposals IntegratedDistrict Plans

IntegratedLocal Plans

Assessment by Sectors

Phase 3: Projects

Phase 4: Integration

Phase 5: Approval

Provincial/National

District andMunicipality

LocalMunicipality

Communities/Stakeholders/

Users

District-level Issues

Identification

Diagram 2: Consultative/Participatory Approach by Planning Phase

Adopted IDP

Adopted IDP

Strategic Approach

The strategic planning approach does not only become relevant during the “Strategy Phase”. Strategic planning

means to make the best use of limited resources considering the given conditions and policy guidelines. It

includes:

♦ prioritising on a few crucial issues rather than dealing in a comprehensive manner with all issues

(Phase 1).

♦ focusing analysis rather than wasting resources for collection of useless information (Phase 1).

♦ addressing root causes of problems, rather than only symptoms (in Phase 1, causes are to be identified, in

Phase 2 they have to be considered when designing strategies).

♦ taking given resources and relevant context into account (in Phase 1 these have to be identified, in Phase

2 they have to be considered).

♦ identifying and analysing alternative strategic options (asking the “How-question”) rather than going for

preconceived solutions (Phase 2).

9

Diagram 3: Strategic Approach

start

finish

You decide on your priorities1) ...............................................2) ...............................................3) ...............................................

First you makeyourselves aware ofgiven frameworkconditions andavailable resources.

Thereafter, you focus allyour analysis and debateson these priorities.

Before defining solutions, youstart thinking about thecauses of the problems, andof ways of addressing them.

Now you need to become creative to identifyalternative ways ofhow to addressproblems in a cost-effective, sustainableand policyguidelines relatedmanner.

These alternative options need to be analysedsystematically, for their advantages and disadvantages before making a strategic choice .

Strategic planning is not difficult as such. In private life, everybody is used to prioritising, focusing, addressing

the roots of problems, taking own resources (and limitations) carefully into account, and searching for the best

option. It tends to be the institutional routine which takes us along the non-strategic path of spending scarce

public resources in an ineffective manner by trying to deal with symptoms in a comprehensive manner and by

applying costly standard solutions.

The challenge of strategic planning is not a methodological one. It is an institutional and sometimes a political

one. Prioritising, focusing and making choices require a debate on distribution and allocation of scarce

resources, between departments, population groups and locations.

Such debates tend to be conflictual ones. The challenge of developmental local government is to handle and

resolve such conflicts by following policy guidelines, by looking for more effective ways and means which can

satisfy more needs with given funds, by finding common ground or by managing negotiation processes for

compromises.

IDP does not establish that challenge, but IDP tries to provide an appropriate forum and systematic

manner of dealing with that given challenge. The IDP approach, by being a strategic planning approach, can

be seen as a conflict-resolving process. By providing a systematic and transparent decision-making process, it

will help find acceptable solutions within given time-periods, thereby overcoming many of the decision-making

deadlocks which delay the delivery of services.

In addition to the systematic approach proposed in this manual, good facilitators will be crucial for such

consultative decision-making processes. Moreover, appropriate solutions may need a broader discussion

process, involving external resource persons and other spheres of government, besides local stakeholders. For

this reason, the District-level is proposed to be a crucial forum for strategic decision-making processes . It is

the appropriate forum, where “people & places” meet “sectors & subjects”, i.e. where local knowledge can be

combined with the knowledge of technical experts.

Implementation oriented Approach

Integrated Development Plans are only as good in so far as they help municipal management to improve

and fast-track delivery and development. Planning is supposed to become part of municipal management by

preparing decisions in a manner which is conducive to turning them into actions. This understanding of IDP

implies some requirements with regard to the nature and quality of the planning process:

(a) The project proposals have to be rather concrete and specific in respect of quantitative targets, quality,

timing, location, costs, and responsible implementing agencies. This is required in order to provide the

necessary information for the business planning of envisaged implementing agencies and for fulfilling

approval requirements of potential financing agencies.

(b) The IDP has to be carefully checked for its compliance with the financial resource framework and with the

available institutional capacities.

(c) There has to be a close link between the planning and the budgeting process.

(d) Those in charge of managing the implementation process have to play a key role in the planning process in

order to ensure realism of the plans and to promote their buy-in.

(e) There has to be sufficient consensus among potential users, affected population groups and other

interested stakeholders on the planned projects to avoid delay of implementation resulting from conflicts.

This means, that concerned population groups have to be involved in the project designing process.

10

Diagram 4: Implementation-oriented Approach

11

Consequently, IDPs have to go beyond providing a general and vague strategic framework for subsequent

project planning, in order to be useful as a management and budget planning tool. The “real” technical planning

work is not supposed to be done after the completion of an IDP, it needs to become an integral part of the IDP

process (though not all technical details may have to become part of the IDP document).

Not all technical planning, however, can be done within the IDP’s planning period. Some projects may require

detailed feasibility studies which take more time or which may only be due at a later stage. In such cases,

targets, costs and budgets have to be calculated on the basis of sound professional estimates

(“pre-feasibility study” level of planning).

IDP and Sectoral Planning

IDP is an inter-sectoral, but priority focused planning process which may or may not include each and every

sector. It may also only overlap with sectoral planning responsibilities to a certain degree, depending on local

priorities as the primary guiding factor.

Sector agencies within a municipality, as well as those belonging to other spheres of government, have their

own planning requirements, some of which are defined by legislation. The IDP approach, as presented in

this manual, is aligned to these sectoral planning requirements in a way that they are incorporated in the

IDP process.

As a result, sectoral planning requirements will be met by the IDP process as proposed in this manual,

wherever such planning requirements relate to cross-cutting issues (like spatial planning and environmental

issues) and where a sector (or part of it) is related to priority issues resulting from the IDP process. Only

such aspects of sectoral planning requirements which have nothing to do with the priorities of a municipality

will have to be dealt with separately from the IDP process. That means that there will be varying degrees of

overlap, depending on the coincidence between sectoral planning requirements and a municipality’s

priorities. But there will be no more duplication of planning requirements. And there will be a basis for the

full involvement of sector agencies in the IDP planning, funding and implementation process.

Diagram 5: IDP and Sector Planning

Case A

12

IDP Process The sector is strongly related to the priority issues which arise from the

IDP Analysis. Only minor segments of the sectoral planning requirements

do not fit into the issues focused IDP process and have to be done as

“homework” outside the IDP process.SectoralPlanning

IDP Process The sector is partly related to the priority issues arising from the IDP

process. E.g. public passenger transport may be a priority issue, while

road maintenance may not be a priority. The sector department will do its

public passenger transport planning as part of the IDP process, while

the minimum planning requirements for road maintenance will have to

be done outside the IDP process.

SectoralPlanning

Case B

IDP Process There is only a very small overlap between sectoral planning

requirements and IDP priorities. In such a case, the sectoral staff will

only be asked to provide a few specific contributions to the IDP process.

SectoralPlanning

Case C

Conclusion

The event-centred IDP Approach which does not include planning techniques, is supposed to make the

inherent complexity of a consultative, strategic and implementation oriented inter-sectoral planning process

manageable and transparent. One does not have to be a professional planner to understand the approach

and to organise the IDP process accordingly. But one may have to engage professional planners or

facilitators at certain stages of the approach to help identify and handle appropriate planning techniques and

tools.

4. THE USER-FRIENDLY DESIGN OF THE IDP GUIDE PACK

The new manual attempts to be a user-friendly document by:

(a) Splitting information into context- and target group-specific packages, i.e. in six guides2 which can be used

independently of each other; and

(b) Standardising the presentation of the planning methodology (Guide III) to a high degree by sub-dividing

the approach into “Planning Activities” which are described and explained in the same way, thus allowing

quick and focused access to the required information.

Diagram 6: Guide III in Context

2The six Guides are:Guide I: IDPGuidelinesGuide II: Preparing for IDPGuide III: IDPMethodologyGuide IV: IDP ToolboxGuide V: Sectoral and Cross-cutting Policy GuidelinesGuide VI: Implementing and Monitoring IDPs

Guide I: General IDP Guidelines

Provides you with basic guidance on purpose, contents and institutional

aspects of IDP, which go beyond the minimum requirements as outlined in

the Municipal Systems Act.

Guide II: Preparing for IDP

Helps you to plan the planning process.

Guide IV: Tool Box

offers you a variety

of options for

planning tools/

techniques to use

for each process.

Guide VI: Implementation

Management and Monitoring

and Review

information about:

• Planning-Implementation Links

• Institutional Preparedness

• Management Tools

• Monitoring and Performance

Management Tools

• Reviewing IDPs.

Guide V: Sectoral and

Cross-cutting Policy

Guidelines

offers you guidance on

how to relate other

(non-IDP-specific)

general or sector

policies to the IDP.

Guide III: IDP

Methodology

information about:

• required outputs

• recommended

processes to guide you

through the process.

13

(c) Avoiding planning jargon as far as possible by not suggesting specific planning techniques in Guide III.

(d) Highlighting minimum requirements for each phase and planning activity, thereby differentiating clearly

between the “must” (resulting from legal and policy requirements) and the non-prescriptive

recommendations for those who want some hints on how to deal with a certain planning activity.

(e) Providing short answers to the following set of questions for each planning activity:

• WHY do it? (i.e. explaining the purpose of a planning activity)

• WHAT needs to be there as a result of the planning activity? (i.e. specifying the output)

• HOW should the process or procedure look in order to arrive at the output?

• WHO shall be in charge and be involved?

• HOW LONG should it take?

Guide III, however, has got the character of a manual. That means it is not a booklet to be read from page 1 to

the end to get a quick overview (this purpose is aimed at by the General Overview “IDP at a Glance”). It is a

document to be used during the planning process accordingly to need, i.e. to look for answers when questions

arise. It is meant to offer fast access to specific information for those involved in the planning process, rather

than to provide a short holistic summary on what IDP is all about.

5. PLANNING ACTIVITIES

The IDP Approach is structured by “Planning Activities” which apply for both Local and District Municipalities.

These “Planning Activities” should not be confused with planning steps. While some of the “Planning

Activities” are planning events which will have to be done in a certain sequence, other “Planning Activities” are

related to ways and means of considering certain aspects and planning requirements during or inbetween

certain planning events (e.g. how to deal with the environmental, spatial, or economic dimension when

designing strategies). In other words: Planning Activities may be steps or events to be organised (such as

workshops, studies, data compilation) or they may refer to the way certain aspects have to be considered

during a specific step or event.

For each phase of the IDP process, there is an overview chart which indicates:

(a) the proposed planning events and their sequence;

(b) the outputs of the phase; and

(c) “Planning Activities” which cover aspects to be considered in the process.

This will help give the user of the Guide an overview of the process and nature of the “Planning Activities”.

14

6. THE 5 PLANNING PHASES: PURPOSES, PROCESS AND OUTPUTS

Processes:

Purpose:

(1) Data-based analysis of service standards/gaps

(including sector-specific data)

(2) Participatory problem analysis/issues prioritisation (cross-sectoral)

(3) In-depth analysis related to identified priority issues (dynamics, causal

factors, resources, etc).

To ensure that decisions will be based on:

– people’s priority needs and problems

– knowledge on available and accessible resources

– proper information and on a profound understanding of the dynamics

influencing the development in a municipality.

Outputs: • Assessment of the existing level of development

• Priority issues/problem statements

• Understanding of nature/dynamics/causes of these issues

• Knowledge on available resources and potentials (including a tentative

overall financial frame).

PHASE 1: ANALYSIS

Processes:

Purpose:

• Inter-sectoral workshop process as a forum for open discussions on

ways and means of dealing with the priority issues/problems

• Workshops (as a rule) at district-level with all affected local

municipalities and representatives from relevant provincial and national

agencies and corporate service providers in order to ensure:

– well informed and well facilitated strategic debates

– that cross-boundary issues and inter-government/sector alignment

issues are taken care of.

To ensure that there will be a broad inter-sectoral debate on the most

appropriate ways and means of tackling priority issues, under

consideration of policy guidelines and principles, available resources,

interlinkages, competing requirements and an agreed vision. The strategy

debate shall help avoid the usual short cut from identified needs to

sectoral projects. It shall help find more appropriate, innovative and cost-

effective solutions under due consideration of various options. It is the

phase of making choices.

Outputs: • Vision (for the municipality)

• Objectives (for each priority issue)

• Strategic options and choice of strategy (for each issue)

• Tentative financial framework for projects

• Identification of projects.

PHASE 2: STRATEGIES

15

Process:

Purpose:

Project Task Teams which include the officers from the agencies in charge

of implementation (departments, corporate sector agencies) and other

domain specialists will be charged with the task of working out project

proposals in consultation with specialists from provincial/national agencies

and from the communities or stakeholders affected by the project.

To ensure a smooth planning/delivery link by providing an opportunity for a

detailed and concrete project planning process done by project task teams

of professionals and relevant stakeholders who provide proposals with

tentative target figures, technical standards, locations, time horizons and

cost estimates. This phase will give the sector specialists their appropriate

role in the planning process, thereby contributing to a smooth planning –

implementation link.

Remark: While the focus of the IDP planning process is on priority issues, there

are also a number of departmental routine projects (e.g. maintenance)

which are found to be necessary though not regarded as a priority. These

have to be planned during phase 3 and be reviewed in relation to the

financial requirements for priority issues and related projects/

programmes.

Outputs: • Indicators (quantities, qualities) for objectives

• Project outputs with targets and location

• Major activities, timing

• Responsible agencies/actors

• Costs and budget estimates and sources of finance

– Consideration of sectoral planning requirements

– Sector plans may be elaborated during this phase; IDP will only

include a summarising project overview resulting from such sector

plans.

The degree of specification and exactness of the outcomes will vary, as

some projects may need in-depth feasibility studies which may not be

manageable within the IDP planning period. At least tentative estimates

based on preliminary decisions on the project design (pre-feasibility level)

shall be provided.

PHASE 3: PROJECTS

16

Processes:

Purpose:

• Presentation of project proposals to the IDP Representative Forum

and discussion

• Matching, alignment (within municipality)

• Revision by Project Task Teams

• Compilation of revised proposals.

To ensure that the results of project planning will be checked for their

compliance with vision, objectives, strategies and resources and that they

will be harmonised. The harmonisation process will result in a

consolidated spatial, financial and institutional framework as a sound basis

for smooth implementation.

Outputs: • Revised project proposals (may be revised strategies)

– for priority projects

– for other projects

• 5-year financial plan (all sources of finance)

• 5-year capital investment programme (all sources of finance)

• 5-year municipal action plan (for municipal management)

• Integrated spatial development framework

• Integrated programmes for LED, environmental issues, poverty

alleviation, gender equity and HIV/AIDS

• Institutional plan for implementation management

• Consolidated monitoring/performance management system

• References to sector plans

• (Outcomes of sector plans to be fed back into the IDP process)

• Disaster Management Plan.

PHASE 4: INTEGRATION

17

7. THE DISTRIBUTION OF ROLES BETWEEN DISTRICT AND LOCAL MUNICIPALITIES

There has always been some confusion about the distribution of roles between Districts and Local

Municipalities (TLCs, TRCs) in the LDO/IDP process. Should the Districts go ahead with planning and establish a

framework plan as a basis for local level planning? Or should the local level go ahead first, leaving it to the

Districts to produce an amalgamated and consolidated plan on the basis of local plans?

The demarcation process has resulted in a fundamental change in the distribution of roles and relationships

between Districts and Local Municipalities. Previously, the roles of both levels were not strongly interrelated:

The Districts were mainly expected to cater for those areas not covered by Local Municipalities. Besides, they

did regional-scale planning and programme implementation. Now, there will be wall-to-wall municipalities. With

the exception of a few direct “District Management Areas”, Districts will be responsible for the same areas as

Local Municipalities. Sharing responsibilities for the same areas of jurisdiction requires cooperation, rather than

operating in isolation in different fields.

This has implications for the IDP process. According to the Municipal Structures Act and the Municipal Systems

Act, both tiers of local government have to elaborate IDPs as a crucial part and tool of their management and

delivery system. In order to avoid duplication of work, the two planning processes should be closely

interrelated. The design of this interrelation and distribution of responsibilities has to take four imperatives into

consideration:

18

Processes:

Purpose:

• Discussion of Draft IDP in the Municipal Council

• Providing opportunity for public comments

• Amendments in line with comments

• Approval by Municipal Council

• District-level alignment: Horizontal coordination

• Provincial/national level alignment

– legal compliance check

– sector alignment

– feasibility check/professional feedback

• Amendments and/or response by local councils

• Final adoption by council.

To ensure that, before being adopted by the Municipal Council, all relevant

stakeholders and interested parties, including other spheres of government

have been given a chance to comment on the draft plan, thus giving the

approved plan a sound basis of legitimacy, support and relevance.

Output: • An amended and adopted Integrated Development Plan.

Final Outcome: • An IDP document which has the support of the municipal administration,

the municipal residents, the district council and all relevant agencies in

charge of implementation of programmes and projects within the

municipal area of jurisdiction and which is approved by the Municipal

Council.

PHASE 5: APPROVAL

• The analysis and prioritisation of needs and problems needs to be done through a participatory process,

involving local communities and stakeholders. The information on service gaps and on potentials needs to

be location-specific. Therefore, this has to be done by Local Municipalities, which are close to the

residents.

• Local Municipalities and District Municipalities need their own planning processes and their own planning

documents if IDP is to contribute to institutional transformation and if it is meant to inform municipal

budgets and business plans. Therefore, one district-level plan for all local government entities within the

district will not be sufficient to make IDP an effective tool for development local government.

• There are strategic planning and decision-making processes which are of similar nature for all local

municipalities, and which need high level facilitation and professional skills, as well as the involvement of

sector specialists from provincial level. Therefore, the elaboration of strategies may be better done jointly

by all Local Municipalities, together with Districts and provincial officers on District-level.

• Smooth coordination between adjacent (???) local municipalities and between local and district level.

Translating these three imperatives into the phasing of IDP processes may result in the following procedure:

• During Phase 1, the phase of analysis, assessment and participatory issues identification, the focus of the

planning process will be on the local level, while District Councils may do some analysis related to region-

wide issues (but without getting involved in an extensive participation process on its own).

• During Phase 2, the phase of strategising, the focus will, as a rule, be on District-level, while there may still

be some locally specific issues which need locally specific strategies. Local Municipalities should be invited

to strategy workshops on each of the priority issues, to jointly discuss the most appropriate problem-solving

strategies. Provincial and national specialists and competent resource-persons from civil society could be

invited to join this process, which will be facilitated by the staff of District-level PIMS-centres. This is the

arena where “people and places meet with sectors and subjects”.

• During Phase 3, the phase of project planning, each type of municipality will have to do its “homework”, i.e.

transforming strategies into concrete localised projects which will inform the budgets and business plans.

• The same applies to Phase 4 (“Integration”) during which local and district municipalities will check and

consolidate the project proposals in order to arrive at integrated plans and programmes as a basis for their

management systems.

• During Phase 5 (Approval), the Districts will have to play an important role in horizontal (cross-border issues)

and vertical coordination.

Local and District-level planning will therefore be done parallel, but inform each other mutually, rather than in a

one-sided bottom-up or top-down manner.

19

Phase 1: Analysis

Phase 2: Strategies

Phase 3: Project

Phase 4: Integration

Phase 5: Approval

District

Local

Local Issues

Regional Issues District CouncilProjects

Draft District IDP

Adoptionby District

Council

Horizontaland

Vertical co-ordination

Local CouncilProjects Draft Local IDPs

Adoption by Local Council

Diagram 7: Model for Integration of District- and Local-Level IDP

8. AN INDICATIVE TIME AND RESOURCE FRAME FOR THE IDP PROCESS

Time Special R e q u i re m e n t R e s o u rce

Planning Activity ( w e e k s ) Type of Event R e q u i re m e n t s

1 / 1 Compilation of existing inform a t i o n 2 Desk work –

1 / 2 Community/stakeholder workshops 4 (a) Rep Forum Meeting(b) Local Meetings

1 / 3 Reconciling 1/1 and 1/2 (2)* Various interactive p ro c e s s e s

1/4 – 1/6 Municipality-wide analysis ( 1 ) * Rep Foru m F a c i l i t a t i o nSpatial/Socio economic analysis S p e c i a l i s t s

1 / 7 Identification of Priority Issues 1 Desk work F a c i l i t a t i o nRep Forum Wo r k s h o p

1 / 8 In-depth Analysis 4 S t u d i e s S p e c i a l i s t sRep. Forum workshop

1/9

1 / 1 0 Consolidation of analysis/drafting 1 Desk work

Phase 1 1 2 4 Rep Forum workshops

2/1 – 2/2 Vision, Objectives 1 Rep Forum workshop F a c i l i t a t o r

2 / 3 Localised Strategic Guidelines 1 District workshops S p e c i a l i s t sF a c i l i t a t o r( D i s t r i c t s )

2 / 4 Defining re s o u rce frames/financial strategy ( 2 ) * Rep Forum workshop F a c i l i t a t o r

2/5 – 2/6 C reating alternatives/conditions for public debate (1)*

2/7 – 2/9 District Strategy workshops 4 District workshops Facilitator (time frame for all strategy workshops) ( D i s t r i c t s )

2 / 1 0 Translating into Local decision 2 Rep Forum workshop F a c i l i t a t o rDesk work

Phase 2 8 3 Rep Forum workshops2 District workshops

3/1 – 3/2 F o rming Project Task Te a m s / 2 Desk work F a c i l i t a t o rsetting budget frame Rep Foru m

3/3 – 3/9 Designing project pro p o s a l s 5 Task Te a m s

Phase 3 7 1 Rep Forum workshop

4 / 1 S c reening of project pro p o s a l s / i n t e g r a t i o n 2 Desk work Facilitator Rep Forum workshop

4/2 – 4/13 Revising and integrating pro j e c t s 3 Desk work Facilitator and programmes Rep Forum workshop

Phase 4 5 2 Rep Forum workshops F a c i l i t a t o r

Phase 5 5 1 Rep Forum workshop Facilitator S p e c i a l i s t s

T O TAL: 3 7 11 Rep Forum Wo r k s h o p s

* To be done during other planning activities; no separate time re q u i re m e n t s .(1) Depending on the in-built staff capacities of a municipality, these re s o u rces may be provided by the municipality or they have

to be hired from PIMS-Centres or from consulting firms. The re q u i rements relate to a range of very diff e rent skills and can,t h e re f o re, by no means be covered by one single consultant. The quantity depends on the size of a municipality and on thetype of issues.

20

21

9. AN INDICATIVE LIST OF CONTENTS OF AN INTEGRATED DEVELOPMENT PLAN

Form and content of an IDP document are largely (with exception of those contents prescribed in the Municipal

Systems Act) subject to the discretion of each municipality. Therefore, a list of contents should not be

prescribed.

A list of contents is, however, quite a useful tool to provide an idea on how an IDP might look. The following

example may help to get an impression, but it should not prevent anyone from developing his/her own creative

ideas.

LIST OF CONTENTS

1. The Planning Process (3 – 6)

1.1 Institutional arrangements/roles and responsibilities (1 – 2)

1.2 Process overview: Steps and events (1 – 2)

1.3 Self-Assessment of the Planning Process (1 – 2)

2. The Situation (30 – 40)

2.1 Current Reality: Basic facts and figures (3 – 5)

2.2 Summary of community and stakeholder Priority Issues (1 – 2)

2.3 Priority Issues from a Municipal Perspective (1 – 2)

2.4 Spatial Analysis: Patterns and trends (2 – 4)

2.5 Social Analysis: Poverty situation and gender-specific issues (2 – 3)

2.6 Economic Analysis: Major patterns and trends (1 – 2)

2.7 Environmental Analysis: Major risks and trends (1 – 2)

2.8 Institutional Analysis: Strengths and weaknessesof the municipal administration (1 – 2)

2.9 Priority Issues in Context: Summary reports on in-depth analysis (15 – 20)

3. Development Strategies (25 – 40)

3.1 The Municipal Vision (1)

3.2 Localised Strategy Guidelines (15 – 20)

3.3 Objectives and strategies for each Priority Issue(including objectives, available resources, alternatives taken into consideration, assessment and proposed strategy) (10 – 15)

3.4 Financial Strategy (1 – 2)

3.5 Summary list of identified projects (1 – 2)

4. Projects 1 page project format per project (see 3/3) (15 – 30)

5. Operational Strategies (16 – 25)

5.1 Operational 5-year Action Plan (1 – 2)

5.2 5-year Financial Plan (1 – 2)

5.3 Capital Investment Programme (1 – 2)

5.4 Integrated Spatial Development Framework (3 – 5)

5.5 – 5.8 Integrated Social, economic, environmentaland institutional programmes (6 – 10)

5.9 Disaster Management Plan (2 – 3)

5.10 Monitoring and information flow system (2 – 3)

(90 – 140)

22

Compilation of existing infor m a t i o n(data-based analysis)– service gaps (sector specific)– differentiated by area and social

category– available resources/potentials

Analysis

In-depth Analysis of Priority Issues– understanding the exact nature of

the issue– dynamics/trends– causing factors– resources/potentials

PriorityIssues

(ProblemAreas)

Reconciliation

Socio-economic AnalysisGender/Poverty

Spatial Analysis

Municipality-wide Analysis– cross-sectoral– overarching issues/problems

Community and Stakeholder levela n a l y s i s(participatory analysis)– differentiated by location and social

category– cross-sectoral

Strategies

P r ojects identified

Strategy Guidelines (localised)– spatial– poverty/gender– environmental– economic– institutional

PHASES OF THE IDP PROCESS – OVERVIEW

Vision for the municipality

Objectives for each Priority Issue

Development Strategiesfor each Priority Issue– Strategic discussion and decision-making

process on ways and means of dealingwith Priority Issues

– District-level workshops for each PriorityIssue

Projects

Drafting ofSector Plans

F o r mation of “Project Task T e a m s ”

P re l i m i n a r y budget allocations per pr o j e c t

Designing Project Pr o p o s a l s– by Project Task Terms– with involvement of:

– target groups/public– sector departments/partners

– based on discussion on technical “micro strategies”

including:– Indicators for objectives– Outputs/targets/locations– Activities/responsible actors/timing– Cost/budget/sources of finance

S c re e n i n g / r evision of projects with r e g a r d to:– compliance with priorities/objectives/guidelines– harmonisation between projects– feasibility/viability

Integration Approval

– Discussion by the Council– Public Comments– District Alignment

– Horizontal co-ordination

– Provincial/National Alignment– sector adjustment– legal compliance– professional feed-back

– Final approval by Council

Compilation of integrated pr o g r a m m e s / p l a n s– Sector Programmes – Institutional Plan– 5 year Financial Plan – Disaster Management Plan– 5 year Capital Investment Programme – Integrated HIV/AIDSProgramme– 5 year Action Programme – Development and Performance– Integrated Spatial Development Framework Management Indicators– Integrated LEDProgramme– Integrated Environmental Programme– Integrated Poverty alleviation/Gender equity Programme

Annual BusinessPlans Municipal Budgets Budgets of

Provincial and NationalDepartments

FinancingApplications

Land Use Management Decisions

InstitutionalTransformation

23