1.1 Introduction
The creation and further sustenance of spatial inequality in most developing countries has been labelled as a colonial creation (Lester et al. 2000). This in its basic sense was a result of disinvestment in African areas of interest which was explicitly aggravated by the exploitation of indigenous resources. This exploitation saw the creation of bare-minimum conditions for the local population while resources were transported and invested elsewhere where comfortable conditions for the minority were generously provided. The history of the developing world is rich in such discourse and as such, South Africa, though a young democracy, also witnessed this aggravating level of marginalisation which the country is still struggling to repair. It has been observed that some young democracies tend to sustain such inconsistencies in development since they fail to develop policies that respond positively to such historical imbalances (Lester et al. 2000).
According to Lester et al. (2000) apartheid planning in South Africa reinforced a scenario of underdevelopment in a country already marked by regional disparities in terms of access to resources and land which had emerged in the colonial period. The same views are echoed by May (1998) who noted that apart from unsatisfactory access to clean water, energy, health care and education among households, the distribution of income and wealth in South Africa is among the most unequal in the world. He further argues that although the country has shifted the regime to a more democratic government, racial inequality is still visible in poverty as seen in, 61% of Africans and 38% of Coloureds as compared to only 5% Indians and 1% Whites. The persisting unequal distribution of resources, skills and opportunities between racial groups and between geographical areas presents major policy challenges to the South African government (The Presidency 2006). The National Planning Commission (2011) substantiates these views by contending that spatial patterns exclude the poor from the fruits of development since public services are uneven and often of poor quality and the country remains a divided society.
Apartheid planning consigned the majority of South Africans to places far away from work, where services could not be sustained, and where it was difficult to access the benefits of society and participate in the economy. For this reason, the Commission proposed a strategy to address the apartheid geography and create the conditions for more humane and environmentally sustainable living and working environments that respond directly to the South African Constitutionāespecially to the provisions in the Bill of Rights that affirm the right of all to a healthy environment, access to adequate housing, and basic services (National Development Plan 2011: 260).
During the apartheid era, inequality was based on race. Most of the effort of the liberation movement (pre-1994), were devoted towards eliminating racial exclusion. Lester et al. (2000) argue that the post-apartheid government, in a bid to respond to deep-rooted inequality has implemented a range of interventions that intend to redress inequality by addressing development backlogs and creating opportunities for historically disadvantaged groups. Some of the key policy documents that intend to address spatial inequalities as noted by Nel and Rogerson (2009) include the National Spatial Development Perspective (NSDP) of 2006, Regional Industrial Development Strategy of 2006 and a number of other policies ranging from Spatial Development Initiatives to Cluster Development Support Programmes, Provincial Growth and Development strategies and Local Economic Development. All these policy interventions mark the commitment of the post-apartheid government to address the deep-rooted spatial inequalities of the country. However, it should be noted that:
None of these interventions were designed explicitly to respond to regional and national spatial inequalities, Indeed, most of the āspatialā interventions undertaken during the first decade of democracy functioned only on an ad hoc and often decentralized basis, with the (unintended) consequence that ultimately the most well-resourced (mainly large urban) areas benefited the most, whilst less well-off areas of South Africa experienced little or no change in their status. (Nel and Rogerson 2009: 143)
Most former homelands such as Transkei, Bophuthatswana, Venda and Ciskei are still among the most deprived regions in the country. The lack of any significant change in the countryās spatial inequalities was confirmed by the NSDP which started that nearly 80% of the countryās economy is generated in four core areas namely Gauteng, City of Cape Town, Durban and Port Elizabeth (The Presidency 2006). May (1998) commenting on disparities in the country argues that high levels of human development are reflected in the provinces of the Western Cape and Gauteng and they are similar to those found in Venezuela or Singapore. The Northern Province, on the other hand, has a low human to that of Zimbabwe or Namibia. This is a pointer to the fact that the level of disparities is not only at racial level but also in different geographical locations. Former president Thabo Mbeki (2017) shared the same sentiments by noting that:
Material conditions ā¦have divided our country into two nations, the one black, and the other white. ā¦[the latter] is relatively prosperous and has ready access to a developed economic, physical, educational, communication and other infrastructureā¦The second, and larger, nation of South Africa is black and poor, [and] lives under conditions of a grossly underdeveloped infrastructure.
Noble et al. (2006) expound on these views in their study whose findings reveal the degree to which former homelands are still more deprived as compared to other areas. In their study of 2009, Noble et al. used the indices of multiple deprivations for South Africa to demonstrate that many former homeland areas, such as the former Transkei and former Ciskei and Venda are characterised by almost uniformly high levels of poverty and deprivation. The findings are contrasted with the much more varied composition of urban areas, where affluent neighbourhoods and poor neighbourhoods are often found in close proximity. What can be deduced is that former homelands are still marred with poverty despite government interventions to address this inequality. The NPCās (2011) diagnostic report also substantiates these finding by noting that in South Africa:
- Public services are uneven and often of poor quality,
- South Africa remains a divided society,
- Spatial patterns exclude the poor from the fruits of development.
These findings are controversial as they seriously question the effectiveness of policies in place to address spatial inequality. In the light of well-articulated policies, one cannot help but to ask the effectiveness of the policies in place, as to whether they are being well implemented or whether the government has enough capacity to implement such policies.
Regardless of the persistence of spatial inequality within the country, research on the spatial distribution of poverty and deprivation in South Africa is fairly limited. Following the 1996 Census, work was undertaken to produce simple indices of deprivation to analyse health inequalities (Day et al. 2007) and to map income poverty down to relatively small area levels (Alderman et al. 2003). However, most analyses in South Africa have been undertaken at national or provincial level (e.g. Bhorat et al. 2004; Hoogeveen and Ozler 2004; Leibbrandt et al. 2005). Therefore, this book intends to close this gap.
1.2 Scope of the Book
The trust of the book is on spatial inequality in South Africa and it revolves around specific themes which in essence, are chapter outlines. However, these chapters structurally fall into two main sections of the bookāviz: Sects. 1.2.1 and 1.2.2.
1.2.1 Creating the Stage for Interrogation
Creating the stage for interrogation is a critical section that introduces the subject on spatial inequality in South Africa and also draws reference to what is happening around the global. As a background section, it formulates fundamental issues that drive the whole book under specific themes that are expressed as in the form of chapters as outlined below.
This chapter, which is the introductory chapter, provides an overview of spatial inequality in South Africa and the borders beyond. It sets the scene of the whole book by giving insight into the prevailing nature of spatial inequality in South Africa. As an introductory chapter, it starts-off by explaining inequality in the South African context. The dimensions of inequality and some of the factors that contribute to the growth of inequality are discussed in the background section both from a historical perspective and a contemporary perspective. Above all, this chapter outlines the key sections and chapters of the book.
South Africa is a country of contradictions in as much as it is a country with a wealth of resources. Chapter 2 takes a retreat into the physical attributes of South Africa by providing a geopolitical context of the country. As a country...