ready-made shacks

CIB2007-087

Ready-made shacks: Learning from the informal sector to meet housing

needs in South Africa

Gonzalo Lizarralde ([email protected]) Dave Root ([email protected])

ABSTRACT

The informal construction sector has been the only industry capable of providing affordable housing solutions for the urban poor in developing countries. While South African housing policies rely on the formal construction sector for attaining the ambitious targets of subsidized housing delivery, townships keep growing with the support of informal processes. The strategies and outputs of both sectors are dramatically different; while the formal industry relies on standardization, repetition, and the use of new materials and a single technology, the informal sector takes full advantage of variety, multiplicity, recycling and combination of technologies. Surprisingly, this does not prevent the informal sector from looking for specialization and innovation.

In South Africa, one of these remarkable innovations is the market of pre-fabricated shacks. By using a modular design, a simplified process and an efficient service and delivery, informal enterprises display competitive advantages to adapt to the hostile conditions of the low-cost housing market. The formal housing sector has much to learn from the informal strategies, logic and processes of the informal sector. This is rather an unusual technology transfer, but it is one that has the potential to reduce the ever-growing gap between demand and formal housing delivery in South Africa.

Keywords: Informal Sector; Low-cost Housing; Prefabrication, Technology Transfer, Innovation.

2068 CIB World Building Congress 2007

1. INTRODUCTION

Since John Turner’s call for a better understanding of spontaneous settlements (in Housing as a verb, 1972) a number of authors have emphasized the role of the informal sector in the provision of housing for the urban poor. In doing so, authors like Kellett and Tipple (2000) or Bhatt and Rybczynski (2003) have highlighted the importance of a better understanding of the needs of the poorest sectors of the society and their own responses to them. Keivani and Werna (2001) and many others have developed the useful distinction between the conventional (formal) and the unconventional (informal) provision of shelter. According to Bhatt and Rybczynski (2003), the informal sector, which maximizes self-help and mutual aid building, has been virtually the only group that has had any success in providing appropriate, low cost solutions to the shelter problems of the urban poor.

Estimates are that half of the population of developing countries is housed via informal processes of construction (Bhatt and Rybczynski, 2003). However, very little is still known about the way in which the informal housing sector operates in terms of its product and processes. Little is known -for example- about the way in which materials are sourced, delivered and transferred, about the real costs of construction or about the processes of building.

It the effort to respond to the ever growing demand of urban housing, post-apartheid housing programs in South Africa have been largely dominated by a subsidized housing scheme. The current government policies contemplate two main possibilities for housing delivery: (i) subsidies that support self help construction such as that encouraged by the People Housing Process (PHP Policy Working Group, 2006); and (ii) project-linked subsidies where houses are built by a contractor formally employed by the provincial government or the municipality (Department of Housing, 2006). In reality, many PHP projects end up being built by formal contractors and despite the ‘soft’ advantages of PHP projects in capacity building, empowerment and community participation (PHP Policy Working Group, 2006), the second option remains the core of housing delivery in South Africa as is evidenced by projects such as the N2 Gateway in Cape Town.

According to Napier (2005), “of the 1,6 million [post-apartheid] houses delivered by March 2004, some 72% were delivered through the project linked subsidy and another 10% through the consolidation subsidy”. The problem is that the policy requires contractors to: 1. Be registered in the National Home Builders Registration Council –

NHBRC an organization that provides warranty protection to consumers (NHBRC, 2006)

CIB World Building Congress 2007 2069

2. Be registered in the Construction Industry Development Board – CIDB, an organization that registers contractors working for public projects (CIDB, 2004)

3. Follow the standards and specifications of performance defined by the Department of housing (2003).

In specifying these criteria, informal contractors are largely excluded from the delivery of subsidized housing other than through the provision of labour as sub-contractors. However, the informal sector already plays a major role in the construction industry. It is difficult to estimate the number of informal construction enterprises in the country - some figures range from 2,500 to 40,000 (Merrifield, 2000). However, very little is known about how this informal housing stock is produced, delivered and marketed. This research seeks to provide a better understanding of the way in which the informal sector brings housing to the bottom poor in the South African city of Cape Town. 2. RESEARCH METHODS In order to understand the logic, processes and strategies of the informal sector, empirical research complemented by the review of literature in the field was undertaken. Informal housing solutions were studied in the following settlements of the Cape Town metropolitan area: a. Mitchell’s Plain b. Mfuleni c. Guguletu d. Wallacedene e. Khayelitsha Mitchell’s Plain, Mfuleni and Wallacedene are informal settlements that started as squatter camps in the periphery of the Cape Town urban area and that have recently benefited from infrastructure upgrading as part of the government-subsidized housing projects. These projects correspond to site-and-service schemes in with informal constructions have been built on serviced plots. Guguletu and Khayelitsha are well established and semi-consolidated areas of the first ring of townships in Cape Town. All of the settlements are located in historically marginalized areas that were designated as non-white areas during the apartheid regime.

Interviews were held with residents and aerial photos, reports, drawings, pictures and articles about these settlements were analyzed.

The patterns found in the informal solutions (in these five settlements) were then compared with formal subsidized housing projects conducted by NGOs in the Western Cape. These projects were used as a control group


in order to identify the patterns that characterize (by contrast with the formal sector) the informal industry. The formal projects studied were: f. Netreg in Bonteheuwel: 192 subsidized units developed as a PHP

project in 2006 by the Irish NGO The Niall Mellon Foundation, in partnership with the local NGO Development Action Group (DAG). Formal contractors were hired for the construction of the houses.

g. Freedom Park in Mitchell’s Plain: under construction in 2006, this 488 unit project of subsidized housing is being conducted by the Niall Mellon Foundation and DAG.

h. Mfuleni: more than 200 subsidized units developed as a PHP project. Under construction by the Niall Mellon Foundation and DAG, this project hires formal contractors for the construction of the houses.

i. Wallacedene: More than 15 units built by Habitat International. A mix of sweat equity, contractors, hired construction workers and volunteers is used for the construction.

j. Guguletu: More than 10 units under construction by Habitat International. A mix of sweat equity, contractors, hired construction workers and volunteers is used for the construction.

Officers of the construction companies involved, the Niall Mellon Foundation, Habitat International and DAG were interviewed and, when appropriate - official reports were collected and analyzed. Plans of the houses and the settlements, aerial photos, press releases and pictures were also collected and analyzed.

The research on informal settlements permitted the identification of an emerging - yet largely ignored in literature - industry of low-cost shelters. Discovering the importance of this industry in Cape Town showed also that it represents very well several of the competitive advantages that have been discovered in the informal sector. This study was then enlarged to examine it as a primary case study. Owners of two informal construction enterprises established in the townships of Khayelitsha and Mfuleni were interviewed; the authors studied their products and visited their “selling points”. This paper will refer to these two informal enterprises as “Khayelitsha Shacks” and “Township Shacks”. Finally, and following the case-study research method proposed by Robert Yin (1984), this study compared the patterns found in our studies with patterns found in previous research in order to obtain ‘analytical generalizations’. 3. RESEARCH RESULTS The level of affordability obtained by the informal and the formal sectors is different. Building the minimum product offered by the formal sector costs in the region of R40,000 which corresponds to the development of the site plus the subsidy for a top structure in 2006 (this excludes additional


administrative fees required for PHP projects). A study conducted by the independent firm Shisaka (2004) demonstrated that the average value of an informal unit, as perceived by the owners, is R4,000.

However, few housing products exist between the R4,000 and the R40,000 brackets. In a study conducted in 2000, Boaden and Karam found that very few subsidized units are sold (those in the market are informally transferred for about R10,000). Legal standards and norms do not make it financially viable to (formally) build any housing product below the R40,000 threshold. This creates a ‘housing gap’, a sector of the market for which not enough products are offered. Unfortunately, this housing gap prevents low-income families from ‘climbing’ the housing ladder by selling their products and buying a better one and keeps the low-income housing market ‘frozen’ and inactive (Shisaka, 2004; Boaden and Karam, 2000; Napier, 2005).

Why there is such an important gap between the prices of the products of both industries? The immediate answer to this question might be that the formal sector obviously provides a product that is better than an informal shack. This might be true, informal shacks do not have proper foundations and floors, whereas subsidized houses are made of durable materials, are serviced, and are bigger and better insulated. However, this answer also underestimates some of the competitive strategies that the informal sector has developed in order to increase product affordability.

Lizarralde and Davidson (2006) found a similar gap between post-disaster ‘formal’ projects and the products of the informal sector and identified several competitive strategies that allow the informal sector to increase affordability. Their study compared common patterns found in informal settlements in Colombia and South Africa with patterns found in formal projects in El Salvador, Honduras, Colombia and Turkey. Comparing these patterns with similar results found in India and other developing countries, the authors concluded that despite contextual differences, various common patterns can be identified among spontaneous housing solutions and also, but differently, among post-disaster reconstruction projects. The article tabulated the common strategies that characterise the formal projects against those that characterise the competitive advantages of informal constructions.

Adapting the table proposed by Lizarralde and Davidson (2006) to the case studies of the Cape Town area, it is possible to identify 13 patterns that can be compared among formal and informal constructions (see Table 1).

Concurring with the results of Lizarralde and Davidson, Table 1 indicates that different patterns remain constant among both formal and informal constructions. However, the patterns of the formal constructions contradict those commonly found in the informal ones. Table 2 summarizes these differences clarifying the pattern that best characterizes each of the construction types.


Table 1. Occurrence of the patterns in the case studies, adapted from Lizarralde and Davidson (2006). “Y” means that the pattern occurs, “N” that the pattern does not occur and

“Na” that the pattern is not pertinent or the data was not available to identify the pattern.

Informal constructions

Formal constructions

Category Patterns

a. M

itche

ll’s

Pla

in

b. M

fule

ni

c. G

ugul

etu

d. W

alla

cede

ne

e. K

haye

litsh

a

f. N

etre

g

g. F

reed

om

h. M

fule

ni

i. W

alla

cede

ne

j. G

ugul

etu

1. Flexible use of enclosed and open spaces

Y Y Y Y Y N N N N N

2. Variety in the layout of the units Y Y Y Y Y N Na

N Y N

Housing form

3. Variety of materials and designs in the façade

Y Y Y Y Y N Na

N N N

4. Based on growth and progressive construction

Y Y Y Y Y N N N N N Housing evolution

5. Integration of domestic and commercial activities in one unit

Y Y Y Y Y N N N N N

6. Intensive use of recycled materials and components

Y Y Y Y Y N N N N N

7. Combination of different materials and technologies. Progression from ‘light’ to solid technologies.

Y Y Y Y Y N N N N N

Principles and priorities

8. Delimitation of the land and fencing is a priority and a constant feature

Na

Y Y Y Y N N N N N

9. Cluster distribution of the units Y Y Y Y Y N N N N N 10. Hierarchy of streets and paths N

a Y N

a Y Y N Y Y N N

11. Variety of plot sizes and forms Na

Y Y Y Y N N N N N

12. One plot occupied by more than one unit

Y Y Y Y Y N N N N N

Settlement layout

13. Mix of home ownership and rental Na

Y Y Y Y N N N N N


Table 2. Comparison of the patterns found in informal and formal constructions. Most patterns

of informal constructions correspond to competitive advantages.

Informal constructions Formal constructions

Flexible use of enclosed and open spaces and the activities conducted in them

Drastic difference between open and closed spaces and activities

Variety of layouts and forms Repetition and uniformity in forms and layouts

No uniformity in façade. Increased variety of materials, colours, textures, etc

Façade uniformity and use of same finishes, textures, materials, etc

Based on growth and progressive construction. The unit is constantly improved and enlarged

Little care for growth and progressive construction of the basic unit

Integration of domestic and income generation activities (both occur in the same unit)

Domestic and income generation activities are not integrated (differentiation of uses)

Intensive use of recycled materials and components

Little use of recycled materials and components

Combination of technologies (wood, metals, bricks, concrete blocks, etc). Progression form light to ‘solid’ technologies

Use of one technology and uniformity between the units. No progression of technologies

Delimitation of land and fencing is a priority and a constant feature in all settlements

Delimitation of land and fencing is not a priority

Units create clusters around open spaces Row distribution of units

Hierarchy of streets and paths Uniformity of open spaces (same dimensions and forms)

Variety of plot sizes and forms Uniformity of plot sizes and forms

One plot occupied by more than one unit One plot occupied by one house

Mix of home ownership and rental Separation of home ownership and rental

Most of the patterns found in informal constructions correspond to competitive advantages that allow this sector to increase affordability. Some examples are explored in more detail below.

Housing units and plots in the informal settlements largely vary to accommodate a plurality of family types, across a range of household sizes, incomes, and economic activities. Different plot sizes reflect the different purchase powers, household sizes and family priorities. Houses are always kept to the minimum area needed for each household growing only when more space is required and resources are available – at the pace of each individual family. Due to this increased flexibility, each family always occupies a space in which the invested capital reflects – at every


moment in time – the resources that the family is willing to invest in both the land and the house.

The combination of domestic and income generation activities not only permits women to take care of their children and their houses while working but also increases the affordability of the construction. In this way, the resources invested in income generation simultaneously capitalize the homes and vice versa (Kellett and Tipple, 2000). The combination of technologies, the use of recycled materials, the construction of additional units or spaces in the plot (for rental accommodation or for extended families) also contribute to make the products of the informal sector affordable to the bottom poor.

In contrast, the affordability of formal projects relies on the repetition of one or two unique models and on reducing variations and alternatives (see Fig. 1). This repetition seeks to reduce costs by buying a limited variety of components in large numbers (by economy of scale) and by avoiding difficulties in the construction process. Thus, a limited number of contractors perform the same activity over and over again. This process also facilitates the distribution of products among beneficiaries as it reflects as a non-biased distribution of resources. This implies using a limited number of technological options (and therefore of materials) and avoiding customized variations of the basic model.

Fig. 1. Left: Informal construction in a serviced plot in Mfuleni. Right: Formal constructions developed by a NGO partnership in Netreg (Cape Town).

It is frequently believed that informal units in developing countries appear rather randomly through spontaneous self-help whereby the occupants build their own shelter. This is certainly the case in many situations, however, in the Cape Town area, some informal shacks are produced by a sophisticated industry of prefabrication in which very little is made in a spontaneous or random manner. The multiplicity of choice and variety that characterize the informal sector in developing countries is - in the case of South Africa - compatible with innovative products and industrial standardization. This can be analyzed and understood in respect of the enterprises, the products and the services of this informal building industry.


A. The enterprises of ready-made shacks With 3 employees, and more than seven years in the market, Khayelitsha Shacks delivers an average of 25 shacks per month. Initially starting in business as an informal builder, the owner and manager of the enterprise quickly realized that he could buy more recycled and new material and use this to sell a larger volume of pre-fabricated units than he could build ‘traditionally’. The owner now owns a truck, a shabeen (informal canteen in the townships) and a house in a well established middle class neighbourhood in the coastline. The business is based in Khayelitsha but it also serves other townships of the Cape Town area (Mfuleni, Mitchell’s Plain, Guguletu, Hout Bay, etc). The enterprise delivers its products and services to areas as remote as Stellenbosh (a 1.5 hour drive from Khayelitsha).

Another enterprise, Township Shacks, also based in Khayelitsha, has a selling point in Mfuleni in which a salesman is in charge. In the case of South Africa, in which the government enforces through legislation an affirmative action to empower historically marginalized groups, the fact that both enterprises are owned by a black person is very important. These enterprises have grown slowly over the last ten years without access to formal construction projects and without access to formal financial products. They create jobs and train employees, and they bring capital to the informal settlements.

Fig. 2. The owners and managers of the informal construction enterprises Khayelitsha Shacks

(left) and Township Shacks (right) B. The products The core product of both enterprises is the corrugated metal sheet shack of 3m by 2.6 m with a sloped roof. This product includes a simple wood window and a door and is sold for R1,900 with a deposit required of at least R500. Other products include the double shack (3m by 5,2m for R3,900) and customized units for special orders. All the products include


transportation to the site and installation. The single shack is installed in less than 30 minutes by nailing together the four panels and the roof (see Figs. 3 and 4).

As many other informal shacks, the units do not include floor and are installed directly on the ground without foundations or services. When asked about the lack of proper flooring and foundations, the owners of the enterprises explained that some shack owners might move their shacks up to three times in one month and that having a permanent ‘solid’ floor is therefore a wasted investment.

The shacks combine different types of corrugated iron sheets (different gauges and different profiles). They also combine new and recycled materials, but the best sheets are often used for the roof in order to avoid water leaks. Only the front façade of the shack is often painted and no internal insulation is provided to the units. However, the light structure in wood easily allows the residents to add an internal wall (usually in cardboard or wood sheets) and to add roof insulation. The structure permits maximum flexibility to the users for later additions and modifications of the basic module.

Often, the core units are later enlarged with extra rooms or additional space for income generation (a ‘spaza’ shop, rental accommodation, etc).

Fig. 3. Exhibition of pre-fab shacks from different enterprises in Lansdowne, a main road in Khayelitsha.

C. The process The manager of Khayelitsha Shacks buys recycled and new materials according to the opportunities of the market. He then stocks the corrugated sheets, the spare sheets and the wood in a storage site in Khayelitsha. Some panels are then built and assembled to simulate a finish house in the exhibition area in the sidewalk of the main road. When a client arrives he or


she is conducted to the pre-fabricated units assembled. If a deal is concluded (and a deposit is paid) then the manager uses the deposit to buy the materials required for the roof, the window and the door. These components are not usually stocked in large quantities and are often obtained only when the transaction has been confirmed (and the deposit as been paid) as a means of minimizing the costs of holding stock. The employees then deliver the product and assemble the units on site.

Township Shacks also has a pick-up car for transporting main materials. However, it also uses a modified shopping trolley to transport small materials in short distances (see Fig. 5).

The same profile of wood (2 by 1 inches) is used for both vertical and horizontal structural elements. This avoids complications in the purchasing of materials and permits the managers of the enterprise to negotiate good prices by buying large quantities of the same product. However, more than one profile of wood is required for the studs of the corners and main ‘beams’. In this case, two or three profiles of wood are nailed together to produce the required structural support.

One of the most important barriers for informal business growth is financing. According to the owner of Khayelitsha Shacks, his limited access to credit largely limits his capacity to keep more materials in stock and to profit from good prices (by buying in large numbers and during good sales). Financing capacity is also a difficulty for potential buyers. According to Dianne Hawker, a reporter of the Cape Argus newspaper, some pre-fabricated shack enterprises suffer from the high rates of default payments by the customers. Hawker found that after paying the first deposit and receiving the product, some clients fail to pay the remaining balance (Hawker, 2006). However, this is one of the few options of credit that these users have to acquire housing.

So far, these enterprises have not received formal training; it is largely unknown how their owners acquire new knowledge and skills. But certainly, they are channels of communication and knowledge transfer that are ignored by the authorities.

About 10 shacks without roofs are exhibited in the main access road to Khayelitsha where seven other enterprises are established. Despite that only minor differences exist between the products and prices of different enterprises, the proximity of them and their unit-exhibition potentially permits clients to compare quality and prices and select their chosen provider. Colourful prototypes help to attract clients in the absence of signs and advertisement. Even though there are not deliberate intentions of brand differentiation between the enterprises, their location in a busy street guarantees visibility and recognition.


Fig. 4 The products of Khayelitsha Shacks (left) and Township Shacks (right)

Fig. 5. Transportation means used by Khayelitsha Shacks (left) and Township Shacks (right) 4. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS Through the development of this product, process and organization, the informal sector has evolved a way of providing a solution that the formal sector is not able to deliver. It delivers housing solutions below the R40,000 bracket and products that are flexible to transport and that can be easily and quickly build and rebuilt. In addition, it provides one of the few financial and credit services that are available for the bottom poor.

The disadvantages commonly found in the formal projects include: (i) insufficiency to meet the quantitative demand of urban housing; (ii) incapacity to respond to the bottom poor with products below the R40,000 level; (iii) repetition and lack of imagination (boring layouts and designs); (iv) limited adaptability of the products to meet individual needs and expectations (by following repetition and unimaginative standardization); and (v) limited capacity of the products to represent the real investment capacity of the owners, as they pay little attention to progressive building and growth.

Nevertheless, the informal sector also has some significant competitive disadvantages: (i) it does not provide efficient solutions for


floors (this causes major health problems); (ii) its products lack proper thermal insulation; (iii) it cannot participate in the subsidized housing sector (due to legal restrictions); (iv) it does not provide efficient solutions for infrastructure (water, sewage, electricity, roads), floors and foundations - even though it provides solutions for top structures - and (v) it does not respect norms and standards. Thus five main findings were obtained from this study:

1. The strategies used to increase affordability are radically different in the formal and the informal sectors. While the formal industry relies on standardization, repetition, and the use of new materials and a single technology, the informal sector takes full advantage of variety, multiplicity, recycling and combination of technologies.

2. Both the formal and informal sectors have competitive advantages and disadvantages. A better knowledge of these advantages and disadvantages is pre-requisite to reduce the estimated 3 million-unit housing deficit in South Africa and to reduce the housing ‘gap’ that prevents users from ‘climbing’ the housing ladder.

3. In the particular context of South Africa, helping informal construction enterprises means helping historically marginalized (black-owned) small companies. Through increased innovation, these enterprises have demonstrated entrepreneurship capacity to generate jobs and business responsibility.

4. The existing legislation and common building practices in South Africa largely ignore the informal enterprises in the provision of subsidized housing. While the provision of subsidized houses relies almost exclusively on the formal sector, the townships keep growing using resourceful strategies for improved efficiency and affordability. Too often, the solutions and priorities of the “formal projects” ignore or contradict the ones of the informal sector, demonstrating that public organizations and NGOs still have much to learn from the informal strategies, logic and processes.

5. The informal sector needs more participation in the housing sector and cannot keep being ignored by NGOs and governments. NGOs can set up an example of appropriate housing solutions in South Africa and must recognize the importance of technology transfer from the informal to the formal sectors.

In conclusion, the provision of low cost housing is a clear example of the separation of the formal and informal economies in South Africa. The example of pre-fabricated informal housing provision illustrates that this separation is less of a difference in kind that a difference of degree. The informal sector has the ability to develop innovative housing products that better suit the rapidly changing needs of households in the informal sector and in doing so, make rational decisions to maximize the size of their market by providing a range of products and minimizing their cost through


a highly efficient delivery process. Targeted interventions in this nascent industry, e.g. through the provision of credit would not only narrow the gap between the informal and formal construction sectors but would also allow a wider diversity of building solutions to be developed though more sophisticated structures, higher quality materials etc. that would enable the ‘housing gap’ to be, if not closed, then at lease radically narrowed. 5. REFERENCES Bhatt V. and Rybczynski W., 2003, How the other half builds. In Time-saver standards for urban design, edited by Watson, D., Plattus, A. and Shibley, R., (New York: McGraw-Hill), pp. 1.3.1-1.3.11. Boaden, B. and Karam A., 2000, The informal housing market in four of Cape Town’s low-income settlements. (Cape Town: University of Cape Town). CIDB, 2004, South Africa Construction Industry: Status report, 2004. CIDB. Consulted in October 28, 2006. http://www.cidb.org.za/Resource/report.pdf. Department of Housing, 2003, Design and construction of houses.

Republic of South Africa. http://www.nhbrc.org. PDF document consulted in Nov. 8, 2006. Department of Housing, 2006, Housing programs and subsidies (Pretoria: Department of Housing, Communication Services). Hawker, D., 2006, Riding wave of shack business boom. Cape Argus News, May 29, 2006. p. 3. Keivani, R. and Werna E., 2001, Refocusing the housing debate in developing countries from a pluralist perspective. Habitat International. Vol 25, 191-208. Kellett, P. and Tipple G., 2000, The home as a workplace: A study of income generating activities within the domestic setting. Environment and Urbanization, 12(1), 203-213. Lizarralde, G. and Davidson C., 2006, Learning from the poor. In Third i- Rec conference proceedings. (Florence: i-Rec). In press. Merrifield, A., 2000, The role of the construction industry in the delivery of infrastructure in South Africa. In Infrastructure mandate for change 1994- 1999, edited by Khosa M., (Pretoria: HSRC), 63-84. Napier, M., 2005, Core housing and subsidies in South Africa: Addressing the unintended outcomes. In World Congress on Housing; Transforming housing environments through design, (Pretoria: IAHS). PDF File in electronic publication. NHBRC, 2006, Registration of home builders. In National Home Builders Registration Council Web site. http://www.nhbrc.org/Registrations/Registrationofhomebuilder.htm

Consulted in Nov. 4, 2006.


http://www.cidb.org.za/Resource/report.pdf

http://www.nhbrc.org/

http://www.nhbrc.org/Registrations/Registrationofhomebuilder.htm%20%20%20%20Consulted%20in%20Nov.%204

http://www.nhbrc.org/Registrations/Registrationofhomebuilder.htm%20%20%20%20Consulted%20in%20Nov.%204

PHP Policy Working Group, 2006, Report on progress in the PHP Policy Working Group, (Pretoria: CSIR).

Shisaka, 2004, Township Residential Property Markets: Final report, Findings, conclusions and implications, (Rosebank: Shisaka). Turner, J.F.C., 1972, Housing as a verb. In Freedom to Build, edited by Turner, J.F.C. and Fichter, R., (New York: Macmillan), 148-175. Yin, R., 1984, Case study research: Design and methods, (London: Sage Publications).


ready-made shacks

Documents