Performance monitoring and evaluation of metropolitan By Kgosi Lucas Maepa

Performance monitoring and evaluation of metropolitan  By Kgosi Lucas Maepa
Performance monitoring and evaluation of metropolitan
municipalities in Gauteng, South Africa
By
Kgosi Lucas Maepa
A Thesis submitted in partial fulfilment for the requirements of
the degree:
Philosophiae Doctor (PhD) in Public Affairs
University of Pretoria
Faculty of Economic and Management Science
School of Public Management and Administration
Supervisor: Professor. Dr. Chris Thornhill
November 2014
THESIS OUTLINE
I.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
ii
II.
DECLARATION
iii
III.
ABSTRACT
iv
IV.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
vii-xiv
V.
TABLES
xv-xvii
VI.
FIGURES
xviii
VII.
GRAPHS
xiv-xxi
VIII.
LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
xxii-xxiv
IX.
ANNEXURES
xxiv
i
I.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Glory be to God through our Lord and saviour Jesus Christ,
To my loving wife, friend and partner Winnie including my three special children Dimpho;
Mashubathele “Shubi” and Rolihlahla “Roli” Maepa. To my parents, Isaac and Sheila Maepa;
my sisters Shonisani, Mpho, Aluta and younger brother Moscow; thank you for the love and
support. I completed this PhD to motivate all of you, to become better than me.
To my friends and brothers Mr. Muzi Mavuso; Dr. Louis Siebrits; Mr. Sam Mhlaba and Mr.
Brendon Vandayor – thank you for being there for me when I needed you the most. A special
thank you also goes to Cadre Danny Msiza, a successful entrepreneur, my business mentor and
leader.
To my promoter and supervisor, Prof. [Emeritus] Chris Thornhill, thank you for the guidance
and support, you are one of the best Public Administration and Management
academics/scholars in the entire world.
To my other two academic coaches Prof. Johannes Britz [Provost and Vice Chancellor at
University of Wisconsin Milwakee - USA] and Prof. Deon Rossouw [CEO: EthicsSA] thank you for
the support. To Prof. Jerry Kuye, thank you for the opportunity you gave me to study towards a
PhD. To my life coach Prof. Ezekiel Moraka [Deputy Vice Chancellor at Tshwane University of
Technology - TUT], thank you for always being there for me.
To my political home and the oldest liberation movement in Africa, the African National
Congress [ANC] and in particular my political leader, mentor and senior, Cadre David Makhura
[Premier of Gauteng Province] – thank you. Working under your guidance and leadership has
had impeccable impact on my character, commitment, determination and fortitude – you have
significantly shaped my political world view tremendously.
To all my family members, friends and comrades in and outside the ANC, thank you for the
support and encouragement – I treasure you.
To all the people of South Africa [especially the participants in urban informal settlements and
their public representatives], including other people who assisted me to put together this piece
of work – which will contribute to our growing and maturing democracy - I am deeply humbled,
grateful and for that, I thank you.
Kgosi Maepa [Pretoria, South Africa 2014]
ii
II.
DECLARATION
I hereby declare that all the work done in this research study [Performance monitoring and
evaluation of metropolitan municipalities in Gauteng, South Africa] is my own original work that
was done independently without assistance. All the sources used were referenced using the
Harvard method of referencing.
__________________________
_______________
Signature [Kgosi Lucas Maepa]
Date
UP Student number: 97182542
iii
III.
ABSTRACT
The research study has been undertaken to assist metropolitan municipalities in Gauteng,
South Africa with a conceptual framework and guide in terms of how they should conduct
performance monitoring and evaluation [PME], Impact Evaluation (IE) – of the United Nations
[UN] Millennium Development Goals [MDGs] with regards to the provision of minimum basic
service in Urban Informal Settlements [UIS] in the three identified metropolitan municipalities
of Ekurhuleni, Johannesburg and Tshwane.
In pursuit of meeting the objectives of this study, both qualitative and quantitative studies were
conducted. Important salient thematic analysis regarding performance monitoring and
evaluation were located in existing legislation, public administration texts and in other
management theories associated with the discipline and domain of Public Administration.
The study has seven objectives:
a) to locate the concept of performance monitoring and evaluation [PME] in the
Discipline of Public Administration;
b) to discuss and extrapolate the essence of PME, analyse the policy framework that
guides PME systems in the South African context and in particular the local sphere of
government;
c) to discuss the international PME systems in the public sector and consider lessons
that are relevant for the South African environment;
d) to analyse and discuss the local sphere of government before and after democratic
rule in South Africa with special reference to the evolution of local government
legislation;
e) to discuss and extrapolate current issues in the South African local government
sphere with special focus on community participation, municipal demarcation
concerns, protest action in municipalities;
f) to conduct an empirical study, investigate and compare using two sets of survey
questionnaires - by assessing the Impact Evaluation [IE] on the delivery of basic
iv
minimum services [i.e. electricity, water, sanitation and waste collection/removal] in
the three identified municipalities against set targets determined by Statistics South
Africa Census 2001&2011; Housing Development Agency [HDA] of the Department
of Human Settlement [DHS] and Millennium Development Goals [MDGs] – in the
South African context; and
g) to discuss practical considerations in institutionalising PME processes in local
government and propose recommendations with guidelines for an effective and
efficient PME system in the local government sphere in Gauteng, South Africa.
In achieving these objectives, the ultimate aim of the Thesis is to make recommendations for an
effective and efficient PME system in the local government sphere in Gauteng, South Africa –
which will ensure that the performance monitoring and evaluation introduced by the South
African government, through the “Government-wide Monitoring and Evaluation system”
[GWM&E] under the Department of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation [DPME] in
municipalities and in particular metropolitan municipalities in Gauteng Province - affects
delivery of minimum basic services in informal settlements.
Sample surveys were preferred in the method. The purpose of a sample survey is to collect
standardised information from a carefully selected sample of respondents. This type of survey
is carried out by means of a structured instrument such as a questionnaire or observation guide
– for purposes of the current study, a structured questionnaire was used. Sample surveys are
appropriate when the research design requires comparable information about a relatively large
number of subjects – which is the situation in UIS. A total of 395 surveys were conducted,
analysed and processed from the three metropolitan municipalities. The sample consists of
three city managers and 392 randomly selected participants in UIS in the three selected
metropolitan municipalities of Ekurhuleni; Johannesburg and Tshwane.
A cluster sampling technique has been selected for the purpose of this study. The sample
population in UIS was divided into groups or clusters, and random samples of these clusters
were selected. All observations and determinations in the selected clusters were then included
v
in the sample frame. UIS that are 20 years and older and not yet formalised were specifically
selected and a random sample of the required sample selected per metropolitan municipality.
Since the researcher cannot get a complete list of the members of a population to study but
can get a complete list of groups or 'clusters' of the population – cluster sampling was selected.
In the case of UIS, information on the population is not readily available as a result of in-andout migration. The random sample produced a list of subjects so widely scattered that
surveying them would prove to be far too expensive – that is the reason why cluster sampling
was used in the empirical study.
In this study, a two-stage cluster sampling technique was used, which means that a simple case
of multistage sampling was obtained by selecting cluster samples in the first stage and then
selecting a sample of elements from every sampled cluster in the second stage. Questionnaires
were then administered; results processed; analysed and recommendations made.
In sum, practical considerations in institutionalising PME processes in local government and
recommendations for an effective and efficient PME system in the local government sphere in
Gauteng, South Africa have been outlined. The recommendations were proposed in a context
of an urban informal settlement [UIS] environment - to check how the South African
government policy “Government-wide Monitoring and Evaluation system” [GWM&E] at a
municipality - affects efficient and effective delivery of minimum basic services in urban
informal settlements.
vi
IV.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
1.1. The local sphere of government in the South African context
1
1.2. Definitions and operationalisation of key concepts
4
1.3. Motivation for the research
11
1.4. Problem statement
13
1.5. Research objectives
15
1.6. Research question
17
1.7. Sequence
17
1.8. Research methodology
18
1.9. Administrative processes and approval
24
CHAPTER 2: PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION PERSPECTIVE OF THE STUDY
2.1. Introduction
25
2.2. Location of the study of performance monitoring and evaluation [PME] in the discipline of
Public Administration
28
2.3. New public management [NPM]
35
vii
2.3.1. NPM - a paradigm of questions rather than of answers
40
2.3.2. Accountability in New Public Management [NPM]
45
2.3.3. Post-New Public Management [NPM] era
48
2.4. The domain of Public Administration in a contemporary state, with specific reference to
South Africa
50
2.5. Performance monitoring and evaluation [PME] as a reform programme
53
2.6. The concept of governance and good governance
59
2.6.1. Governance
59
2.6.2. Good governance
61
2.6.3. The King Report on Corporate Governance and implication to the sphere of local
government
63
2.6.3.1. The Business Judgement Rule [BJR]
65
2.7. Conclusion
68
CHAPTER 3: PRINCIPLES OF PERFORMANCE MONITORING AND EVALUATION
3.1. Introduction
70
3.2. Government-wide Monitoring and Evaluation [GWM&E]
72
3.3. Legislative requirements for performance monitoring and evaluation [PME]
77
3.3.1. Measuring municipal performance
80
viii
3.4. Explaining the concept of performance monitoring and evaluation [PME]
82
3.4.1. Comparisons and measurements in performance monitoring and evaluation [PME]
86
3.4.2 Impact Evaluation [IE] in performance monitoring and evaluation [PME]
87
3.5. Millennium Development Goals [MDGs] in context
91
3.5.1. South African government approach towards realisation of MDGs
95
3.6. Benefits of a result-based performance monitoring and evaluation system
97
3.7. Evaluation and its benefit for a municipality
100
3.8. Link between monitoring and evaluation
103
3.9. Challenges and complexities of policy influence
107
3.9.1. The conceptual and technical challenges
107
3.9.2. The nature of policy influence
108
3.9.3. The practical problems that constrain the production and use of knowledge
109
3.9.4. The theory of change [ToC]
109
3.10. Contribution of PME in good governance of metropolitan municipalities
111
3.11. Concerns associated with PME outcomes
114
3.12. Conclusion
116
ix
CHAPTER 4: PERFORMANCE MONITORING AND EVALUATION [PME] –
INTERNATIONAL EXPERIENCE
4.1 Introduction
4.2.
Examples and experiences of
118
performance monitoring and evaluation [PME] in
randomly selected countries
119
4.2.1. The United States of America [USA] experience
119
4.2.2. The United Kingdom [UK] experience
124
4.2.3. The Australian experience
125
4.2.4. The Asian experience
127
4.2.4.1. China
127
4.2.5. The Latin American experience
129
4.2.5.1. Chilean experience
129
4.2.5.2. Colombian experience
131
4.2.5.3. Mexican experience
133
4.2.6 The African experience
134
4.3.
Performance monitoring and evaluation [PME] and government reform at an
international level
140
4.4.
Three dimensions of success in PME
142
4.5.
Credibility and legitimacy of performance monitoring and evaluation [PME]
144
4.6.
Independent Evaluation Group [IEG]
145
x
4.7.
International performance monitoring and evaluation [PME] associations
147
4.7.1. Global
147
4.7.2. Latin America
147
4.7.3. Africa
148
4.8.
149
Conclusion
CHAPTER 5: EVOLUTION OF METROPOLITAN MUNICIPALITIES IN SOUTH AFRICA
5.1.
Introduction and contextual overview: Population
5.2.
Local government during colonialism and apartheid in South Africa - origins and
characteristics of urban areas [1800 -1994]
5.2.1. The sanitation syndrome
5.3.
152
155
159
Local government sphere during the post-apartheid era in South Africa [1994 - 2013] –
major developments
163
5.3.1. The post-apartheid legislation in local government
165
5.4.
168
Constitutional obligations of a metropolitan municipality
5.4.1. The challenges of demarcation of municipal boundaries
173
5.4.2. The new municipal boundaries of the City of Tshwane
177
xi
5.5.
State of local government in South Africa
181
5.6.
Community participation in local government
185
5.6.1. Hindrances to public participation - the problem of patronage politics
191
5.7.
193
Urban informal settlements [UIS] in metropolitan municipalities
5.7.1. Definition of an informal settlement [IS]
196
5.8.
205
Protest action in metropolitan municipalities in Gauteng Province
5.8.1. The phenomenon of violent protest
210
5.8.2. Gauteng specific protest action
213
5.8.3. Issues raised / complains by protesters
217
5.9.
The role of performance monitoring and evaluation [PME] in metropolitan
municipalities
221
5.9.1 National evaluation policy framework and involvement of the donor community
224
5.9.2. The character of the South African PME system
226
5.10. Conclusion
229
CHAPTER 6: EMPIRICAL QUANTITATIVE STUDY AND ANALYSIS OF RESULTS
6.1.
Introduction
231
6.2.
Methodology
232
6.2.1. Cluster sampling - processing of community [i.e. UIS] survey results
xii
233
6.2.2. Advantages and disadvantages of cluster sampling method
235
6.2.3. Sample determination for the study
6.2.4. The sample frame
235
238
6.3.
240
Confidence interval and level
6.3.1. Representative calculation for the empirical study and the two-stage cluster sampling
242
6.3.2. The questionnaires used
6.4.
244
Results - ‘Survey questionnaire: For Government Representative – (City Manager, his or
her representative)’ - [Annexure A]
6.4.1.1.
247
Summary of results from each City Manager in the three identified metropolitan
municipalities
6.5.
248
Results – ‘Survey questionnaire: For community members in informal settlements’
[Annexure B]
261
6.6.
Analysis of participants responses
313
6.7.
Profile of residents living in an informal settlement that are NOT formalised and is 20
years or older, in the three Gauteng metropolitan municipalities
318
6.7.1. Eradication of informal settlements – the 2004 ‘Informal Settlements Upgrading
Programme Business Plan’ [ISUPBP].
319
6.8.
Impact Evaluation based on SSA Census 2001 and 2007 Community Survey
321
6.9.
Impact Evaluation based on the MDGs country report of South Africa in 2013
322
6.10. Conclusion
329
xiii
CHAPTER 7: SUMMARY, CONCLUSION, RECOMMENDATIONS and REFERENCES
7.1. Chapter 1
335
7.2. Chapter 2
336
7.3. Chapter 3
337
7.4. Chapter 4
338
7.5. Chapter 5
339
7.6. Chapter 6
340
7.7. Conclusion
341
7.8. Recommendations
342
7.9. Areas of consideration for future research
343
7.10. Researcher’s notes
344
7.11. References
345
xiv
V.
TABLES
Table 3.1. Primary uses or purposes of evaluation studies [sourced and adapted from Patton,
1997, in Babbie and Mouton, 2007].
102
Table 3.2. The link between Monitoring and Evaluation
106
Table 4.1. A summary of unique experiences from selected group of countries in performance
monitoring and evaluations [PME]
138
Table 5.1. [The three metropolitan municipalities in Gauteng Province, South Africa]
154
Table 5.2. Legislative provisions for urban Blacks during apartheid
162
Table 5.3. State authority in terms of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa
163
Table 5.3.1. The three phase transition of local government from 1993 – 1998
165
Table 5.4. The three categories of municipalities
171
Table 5.7. Different definitions of informal settlements in South African municipalities
196
Table 5.8. Frequency of protests per month
206
Table 5.8.1. [a] Frequency of violent protest by year between 2007 - 2011
211
Table 5.8.2. [a] Gauteng Province protest action by year between 2007 – 2011
213
Table 5.8.3. [a] Protesters complains
219
Table 6.2.2. Advantages and disadvantages of cluster sampling method
235
xv
Table 6.2.3.1. UIS found in the three metropolitan municipalities
236
Table 6.2.3.2. Number of UIS that are 20 years or older in each metropolitan municipality
237
Table 6.2.3.3. Formalised UIS that are 20 years and older in each metropolitan municipality
237
Table 6.2.3.4. UIS that are 20 years and older which have NOT been formalised per municipality
238
Table 6.2.4. Determination of the sample frame
238
Table 6.3. The margin of error for sample sizes ranging from 10 to 10,000
241
Table 6.3.1. Apportionment based on representative formula
243
Table 6.4.1. [a] People living in Informal settlements around Gauteng Province in 2001
258
Table 6.4.1. [b] ESTIMATION [own calculation]: People living in Informal settlements around
Gauteng Province in 2007
258
Table 6.4.2. Households according to SSA Census 2011, compared to information provided by
city managers
259
Table 6.5.1. Percentage distribution of the population by sex, Censuses 1996, 2001 and 2011,
and CS 2007
262
Table 6.5.4. Measure of inequality [Gini coefficient] in Gauteng’s metropolitan municipalities
277
Table 6.5.7. Contribution of each Gauteng urban informal settlement in the three metropolitan
municipalities in terms of access to electricity
285
Table 6.5.9. Access to sanitation per municipality [Empirical study]
xvi
291
Table 6.5.9.1. Access to sanitation per municipality by HDA in 2001
292
Table 6.5.9.2. Access to sanitation per municipality by HDA in 2011
293
Table 6.5.10. Access to waste collection/removal in Gauteng municipalities [2007]
297
Table 6.5.10.1. Percentage access of households to a weekly waste removal service
298
Table 6.5.10.2. Combined figure of collected / removed waste per municipality [Empirical study]
299
Table 6.5.14. Frequency of meetings with the ward councillor
307
Table 6.6.1. Analysis of participant’s responses on the survey questionnaire
314
Table 6.6.2. Order of priority in terms of participants responses with regards to minimum basic
services
316
Table 6.8.1. Access to electricity comparisons with Census 2001 and Community Survey 2007
321
Table 6.8.2. Access to water provision comparisons with Census 2001 and Community Survey
2007
321
Table 6.8.3. Access to sanitation provision comparisons with Census 2001 and Community
Survey 2007
322
Table 6.8.4. Access to waste collection/removal comparisons with Census 2001 and Community
Survey 2007
322
Table 6.9.1. Similarities between South African development objectives and the MDGs
324
Table 6.9.2. Proportion of households below Food Poverty (R321 per month in 2011 prices)
325
Table 6.9.3. Percentage of indigent households receiving free basic service
xvii
326
VI.
FIGURES
Figure 1.2 Location of public administration
30
Figure 3.1 Components of Government-wide Monitoring and Evaluation system (National
Treasury, 2007: 9)
74
Figure 5.1. Population density in Gauteng Province [source: 2011 Quality of Life in the Gauteng
City-Region conducted]
155
Figure 5.8. [a] Average number of protests per month between Feb 2007- Aug 2012
207
Figure 5.8. [b] Average protest per month by season and by year
207
Figure 5.8. [c] Average protest per month by season and by year
208
Figure 5.8. [d] Major service delivery protests, by year
209
Figure 5.8. [e] Service delivery protests by province (January - October) 2013
209
Figure 5.8.1. The annual growth rate of violent protest
212
Figure 5.8.2. [a] Protest action by Province
213
Figure 5.8.2. [b] Protest action by Province
214
Figure 5.8.2. [c] Gauteng protest action by district municipality
215
Figure 5.8.2. [d] Satisfaction (or not) with government
217
Figure 5.8.3. [a] Protesters complaints
218
Figure 6.5.7. Energy use by poor communities in 2011
284
Figure 6.5.8.3. Water source more or less than 200m away
289
Figure 6.5.10. National percentage households with access to waste collection/removal 300
Figure 6.5.10.1. Composition of general waste in 2011 based on percentage by mass
302
Figure 6.5.14. Participation in various fora
309
xviii
VII.
Graphs
Graph 6.4.1 – Number of informal settlements in the municipality and shacks that are marked
248
Graph 6.4.2. – Where are the shacks found or located?
249
Graph 6.4.3. – Municipal provision of electricity
250
Graph 6.4.4. – Municipal provision of water
250
Graph 6.4.5. – Municipal provision of sanitation
250
Graph 6.4.6. – Municipal collection/removal of waste
251
Graph 6.4.7. – Municipality’s fomalisation plan
251
Graph 6.4.8. – Municipality’s budget for informal settlements
251
Graph 6.4.9. – Informal settlements formalised to date
252
Graph 6.4.10. – Number of service delivery protests experienced by the municipality in the past
two financial years
252
Graph 6.4.11. – Main issues / complaints raised by protesters
253
Graph 6.4.12. – Municipality’s estimated population per household in informal settlements
254
Graph 6.4.13. – Municipality’s enterprise-wide performance monitoring and evaluation
division/ office
254
Graph 6.4.14. – Number of people working in the municipality’s performance division
255
xix
Graph 6.4.15. – Frequency at which the municipality conducts performance monitoring and
evaluation
255
Graph 6.5.1. Gender
261
Graph 6.5.1.1. Age group
263
Graph 6.5.1.2. Race group
265
Graph 6.5.2. Disability
266
Graph 6.5.2.1. Old age pension
267
Graph 6.5.2.2. Children
268
Graph 6.5.3. Government grant
269
Graph 6.5.3.1. Grant type
270
Graph 6.5.4. Employment
271
Graph 6.5.4.1. Years of employment
272
Graph 6.5.4.2. Town where you are employed
273
Graph 6.5.4.3. Means of travelling to work
274
Graph 6.5.4.4. Type of employment
275
Graph 6.5.4.5. Monthly income
276
Graph 6.5.4.6. Indigent registration
278
Graph 6.5.5. When did you move into the informal settlement?
279
Graph 6.5.6. Shack marking
281
Graph 6.5.7. Electricity
282
Graph 6.5.7.1. Type of electricity or lighting
283
xx
Graph 6.5.8. Water
286
Graph 6.5.8.1. Type of water source
286
Graph 6.5.8.2. Frequency of water supply
287
Graph 6.5.9. Sanitation
290
Graph 6.5.9.1. Type of Sanitation
291
Graph 6.5.10. Waste collection/removal
297
Graph 6.5.11. Informal settlement registration with the municipality
302
Graph 6.5.11.1. Formalisation programme of informal settlements
303
Graph 6.5.11.2. When will formalisation take place?
303
Graph 6.5.12. Do you have a representative in the informal settlement?
304
Graph 6.5.12.1. Who is your representative in the informal settlement?
305
Graph 6.5.13. Do you know the Ward Councillor?
306
Graph 6.5.14. Frequency of meetings with the Ward Councillor
307
Graph 6.5.15. Municipal bill
310
Graph 6.5.15.1. Reason for the bill
310
Graph 6.5.15.2. How often do you receive a bill?
311
Graph 6.6. Analysis of participant’s responses on the survey questionnaire
315
Graph 6.6.2. Order of priority in terms of participants responses on minimum basic services
317
xxi
VIII.
LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
AfrEA – African Evaluation Association
APRM – African Peer Review Mechanism
BJR – Business Judgement Rule
CoE – City of Ekurhuleni
CoG – Cooperative Governance
CoGTA – Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs
CoJ – City of Johannesburg
CONEVAL – Consenjo Nacional de Evaluación de la Política de Desarrollo Social
CoT – City of Tshwane
CSG – Child Support Grant
CWIQ – Core Welfare Indicators Questionnaire
DPME – Department of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation
DMAs – District Management Areas
DoRA – Division of Revenue Act
DWA – Department of Water Affairs
ESRC - Economic and Social Research Council
FPPI – Framework for Programme Performance Information
GAO - Government Accountability Office
GCIS – Government Communications and Information Systems
GCRO – Gauteng City Region Observatory
GDP – Gross Domestic Product
GGLN – Good Governance Learning Network
xxii
GPG – Gauteng Provincial Government
GWM&E – Government-wide Monitoring and Evaluation
IDP – Integrated Development Plan
IE – Impact evaluation
IEG - Independent Evaluation Group
IDEAS – International Development Evaluation Association
3ie – International Initiative for Impact Evaluation
IOCE – International Organisation for Cooperation in Evaluation
ISUPBP – Informal Settlements Upgrading Programme Business Plan
LGTA – Local Government Transition Act
MDB – Municipal Demarcation Board
MEC – Member of Executive Committee
MFMA – Municipal Finance Management Act
MIG – Municipal Infrastructure Grant
MoF – Ministry of Finance
NDP – National Development Plan
NGO – Nongovernmental organisation
NPM – New Public Management
NEPF – National Evaluation Policy Framework
NSF - National Science Foundation
OECD – Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development
OMB - Office of Management and Budget
PART - Programme Assessment Rating Tool
PEPs – Portfolio evaluations plans
xxiii
PME – Performance monitoring and evaluation
PPP – Public Private Partnership
PSC – Public Service Commission
ReLAC – Red de Seguimiento, Evaluación Sistematización en América Latina Caribe
SALGA – South African Local Government Association
SAMEA – South African Monitoring and Evaluation Association
SDBIP – Service Delivery and Budget Implementation Plan
SANC – South African Cities Network
SSA – Statistics South Africa
SASQAF – South African Statistics Quality Framework
ToC – Theory of chance
UIS – Urban Informal Settlement
UK – United Kingdom
UN – United Nations
USA – United States of America
USAID – United States Agency for International Development
QoLS – Quality of life survey
IX.
Annexures
Annexure A
367
Annexure B
374
xxiv
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
1.1.
The local sphere of government in the South African context
When describing the local sphere of government in the South African context, it is important to
refer to the actual mandate of local government as outlined in the preamble of the Local
Government: Municipal Structures Act, 117 of 1998 - it states that:
A vision of democratic and developmental local government in which municipalities fulfill their
Constitutional obligations to ensure sustainable, effective and efficient municipal services,
promote social and economic development, encourage a safe and healthy environment by
working with communities in creating environments and human settlements in which all our
people can lead uplifted and dignified lives.
According to the South African Constitution, the local sphere of government is given effect by
section 151 (1). The section indicates that the local sphere of government consists of
municipalities, which must be established for the whole of the territory of the Republic. It is
also noted in section 151 (1) that the executive and legislative authority of a municipality is
vested in its municipal council. Thus, a municipality has the right to govern, on its own initiative,
the local government affairs of its community, subject to national and provincial legislation, as
provided for in the Constitution in section 151 (1). However, the national or a provincial
government may not compromise or impede a municipality's ability or right to exercise its
powers or perform its functions.
The Constitution in section 152 (1) describes the objects of local government as follows:
i.
to provide democratic and accountable government for local communities;
ii.
to ensure the provision of services to communities in a sustainable manner;
iii.
to promote social and economic development;
iv.
to promote a safe and healthy environment; and
1
v.
to encourage the involvement of communities and community organisations in the
matters of local government.
The interpretation is that a municipality must strive, within its financial and administrative
capacity, to achieve the objects set out in section 152 subsection (1). Other descriptions of local
government find expression within the spirit of the Constitution, according to Koma (2010:
113), local government could be described as public organisations authorised to manage and
govern the affairs of a given territory or area of jurisdiction. It refers to a sphere of government,
and not an individual municipality. All the individual municipalities in South Africa make up the
collective sphere, known as local government (Roux, 2005: 64).
Part B of Schedule 5 [exclusive provincial competence] of the 1996 Constitution, identifies the
following services that fall within the ambit of the sphere of local government and its
constituent municipalities. These are: water, electricity, town and city planning, road and storm
water, waste collection, emergency services, for example, fire-fighting, licenses, fresh produce
market, parks and recreation, security, libraries and economic planning. For purposes of this
study, minimum basic services means: water, sanitation, electricity, waste management.
Municipalities are required to develop the communities they serve (cf sections 152(1)(c) and (e)
of the Constitution, 1996) (Thornhill, 2006(a): 319). The core function of municipalities is the
rendering of a variety of basic but essential services to the community within its jurisdiction.
(Roux & Nyamukachi, 2005: 695).
In a research paper, Naidoo, & Kuye argue that when the new South African government came
into power, it was evident that there was an absence of minimum basic services, such as water,
proper sanitation and electricity in many rural communities. In some communities, however,
minimal services were provided (Naidoo & Kuye, 2005: 620). They make the following
observations, that in 1995 it was estimated that approximately eight million people from
previously disadvantaged communities did not have adequate sanitary facilities and a mere fifty
percent [50%] of South Africans had waterborne sewerage. In the following year 1996, it was
2
estimated that approximately fifteen to sixteen million people did not have piped water. In
1994, it was reported in the White Paper on the Transformation of the Public Service (WPTPS)
(1995:7) that people living in urban areas in South Africa are better provided with higher levels
of services as compared with those in rural areas.
As observed by Roux (2005: 3) & Patel (2011: 1) there have been various protest actions and a
wave of unrest from various communities, demanding that municipalities provide effective and
efficient delivery of minimum basic services. The so called service delivery protests in the postapartheid era in South Africa [i.e. protest actions], that are taking place in various municipalities
and more so in metropolitan municipalities are conducted in the main by people who live in
areas defined as “informal settlements” and to a large extent, almost all protest actions are
about the provision of basic municipal services in one way or the other – a detailed discussion
will follow in Chapter 5.
An important point to mention at this stage is that the service delivery protests happen in
municipalities because local government is the closest sphere of government to the people. It is
to be expected that a core function of municipalities should be the rendering of a variety of
basic but essential services to the community within its jurisdiction (Roux, 2005: 69).
Furthermore, Thornhill (2008: 492) states that local government is often the first point of
contact between an individual and a government institution. This context will be the foundation
on which this study will be based. The study will specifically focus on how performance
monitoring and evaluation [i.e. IE – Impact evaluation], which is inherent in the control function
of municipalities, can assist in making sure that the local sphere of government in South Africa
provides effective and efficient delivery of minimum basic services in UIS.
3
1.2.
Definition of key concepts
1.2.1. Basic municipal services – according to Local Government: Municipal Finance Management Act,
56 of 2003 - basic municipal service means a municipal service that is necessary to ensure an
acceptable and reasonable quality of life and which, if not provided, would endanger public
health or safety or the environment. In this study, basic municipal services have been limited to
water, sanitation, electricity and waste management [collection].
1.2.2. Councillor – As provided for by the Local Government: Municipal Systems Act, 2000 will be
used, which means a member of a municipal council.
1.2.3. Department of Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs – focus in the study will be on
the Cooperative Governance [CoG] component. The department was previously called DPLG.
1.2.4. Executive Mayor - means the councillor elected as the executive mayor of the municipality in
terms of section 55 of the Local Government: Municipal Structures Act, 117 of 1998.
1.2.5. Evaluation is the systematic and objective assessment of an ongoing or completed project,
programme, or policy, including its design, implementation, and results. The aim is to
determine the relevance and fulfilment of objectives, development of efficiency, effectiveness,
impact, and sustainability. An evaluation should provide information that is credible and useful,
enabling the incorporation of lessons learned into the decision-making process of both
recipients and donors. The National Evaluation Policy Framework – NEPF (NEPF, 2011: 3)
defines evaluation as:
The systematic collection and objective analysis of evidence on public policies, programmes,
projects, functions and organisations to assess issues such as relevance, performance
[effectiveness and efficiency] and value for money, and recommend ways forward.
4
Both definitions give context, since the study has an objective of appraising the sphere of local
government and metropolitan municipalities on the subject of effective and efficient delivery of
basic services. The NEPF (2011: 1) further explains that evaluations contribute to the
improvement of public policy interventions and expenditure programmes by providing
evidence-based assessments of their relevance and performance. Evaluation also serves to
strengthen accountability by providing reliable information on progress in the achievement of
public objectives to stakeholders, often identifying the key factors driving success or failure.
1.2.6. Impact Evaluation [IE] – assesses the changes that can be attributed to a particular intervention
[e.g GWM&E], such as a project, programme or policy, both the intended ones, as well as
ideally the unintended ones.
1.2.7. Integrated Development Plan [IDP] – an IDP is a plan used by municipalities in South Africa to
plan future development in their areas. Basically, an IDP is a “Grand plan” for a specified area
[i.e. Ward] that gives an overall framework for development. The main objective of compiling
an IDP is to coordinate the work of the local and other spheres of government in a coherent
and integrated plan to ensure among others, that there is effective and efficient delivery of
basic services to communities.
1.2.8. Informal settlement – an informal settlement is defined as a group of non-permanent
structures not on a formally registered residential property (Housing Development Agency,
2012: 14). For the purposes of this study, the latter definition will be used to define informal
settlements in general. Moreover, the current study focuses on Urban Informal Settlements
[UIS] which are similar to informal settlements; the difference is that UISs are found in urban
areas or metropolitan municipalities.
1.2.9. Gauteng Province – Gauteng, in Sesotho [one of the nine official languages in South Africa]
means a "place of gold", Gauteng (which was previously known as the Pretoria-WitwatersrandVereeniging or PWV area) is one of the nine provinces of South Africa built on the wealth of
5
gold found deep underground – 40% of the world's reserves. The Province, previously formed
part of the old Transvaal Province in the apartheid spatial planning framework. After
democratic elections on the 27th April 1994, it was among the first provinces to be renamed in
December of the same year.
1.2.10. Governance – In this study, a definition provided by Naidoo in her thesis will be used.
In her thesis [“Leadership and governance for sustainable public service: the case for selected
South African public service organisations”], Naidoo (2004: 30) provides various definitions of
governance. In one definition, she argues that governance refers to practices that enable
government activity, where such activity is broadly defined as the production and delivery of
publicly supported goods and services. From the combination of the work of Heinrich and Lynn
(2000: 1) & Kotze (1998: 15); Naidoo defines in sum governance as – directing, implementing
and coordinating public policy, by individuals or institutions, to achieve a common goal – this
definition will be used in this thesis.
Naidoo argues that governance is about relationships and accountability for results. What is
argued here is that governance entails who has influence, who makes the decisions and how
decision makers are held accountable (Naidoo, 2004: 30). This definition will be adopted and
used in the study as it assists with the context of practices enabling government activity
through managerial function [the performance monitoring and evaluation], which is a catalyst
for the production and delivery of publicly supported goods and services [water, sanitation,
electricity and waste collection].
1.2.11. Good governance – Gildenhuys and Knipe (2000: 91) state that the adjective “good” is almost
always used and appended next to governance like “effective” or “sound” governance. In this
study, governance will be considered and accepted as “good” if the identified metropolitan
municipalities in particular and the local sphere of government in South Africa in general have
moved to a level where it is a norm to deliver effective and efficient basic municipal services to
the communities they serve; especially in communities where people live under conditions of
6
squalor, abject poverty and depressing underdevelopment – like those found in informal
settlements around metropolitan municipalities in Gauteng, South Africa.
1.2.12. Metropolitan Municipality - Metropolitan municipalities represent the large densely populated
and urbanised regions that encompass multiple cities in South Africa. A definition in Chapter 7
of the South African constitution “section 155 (1)” will be used; it states:
“Category A”, which is essentially a metropolitan municipality, is a municipality that has
exclusive municipal executive and legislative authority in its area.
The Local government: Municipal Structures Act, 117 of 1998 defines this category of local
government as conurbations or in common language "centres’ of economic activity", areas "for
which integrated development planning is desirable", and areas with "strong interdependent
social and economic linkages".
1.2.13. Monitoring – monitoring generally means to be aware of the state of a system. The National
Evaluation Policy Framework (NEPF), defines evaluation as:
Monitoring is the continuous and systematic collection, recording and reporting of information
in order to track progress towards the achievement of the objectives of an intervention, and
identify the need for corrective action.
An OECD [Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development] definition will also be
used, it states:
Monitoring is a continuous function that uses the systematic collection of data on specified
indicators to provide management and the main stakeholders of an ongoing development
intervention with indications of the extent of progress and achievement of objectives and
progress in the use of allocated funds.
7
1.2.14. Municipal council or council - it means the council of a municipality referred to in section 18 of
the Municipal Structures Act, 117 of 1998. The South African Constitution [section 157] which
deals with composition and election of municipal councils; further explains that a municipal
council consists of - members elected in accordance with subsections (2), (3), (4) and (5) – of
section 157; or if provided for by national legislation.
1.2.15. Municipal Demarcation Act – means the Local Government: Municipal Demarcation [MD] Act 27
of 1998.
1.2.16. Municipal Finance Management Act - means the Local Government: Municipal Finance
Management Act [MFMA], 56 of 2003.
1.2.17. Municipal Structures Act - means the Local Government: Municipal Structures Act, 117 of 1998.
1.2.18. Municipal Systems Act - means the Local Government: Municipal Systems Act, 32 of 2000.
1.2.19. Official - a person contracted by a municipality or municipal entity to work as a member of the
municipality or municipal entity otherwise known as an employee.
1.2.20. Performance – According to the business dictionary definition (Business Dictionary.com),
performance means:
The accomplishment of a given task measured against present known standards of accuracy,
completeness, cost, and speed. In a contract, performance is deemed to be the fulfilment of an
obligation.
1.2.21. Public participation – public participation is involvement of communities and community
organisations in the affairs of the municipality. The Municipal Structures Act [MSA], 117 of
1998, provides that Category A municipalities [which is the subject of the study] with subcouncil or ward participatory systems, annually report on the involvement of communities and
community organisations in the affairs of the municipality.
8
1.2.22. Service delivery and budget implementation plan [SDBIP] - according to the MFMA (56 of
2003), SDBIP means a detailed plan approved by the mayor of a municipality in terms of section
53(1)(c)(ii) for implementing the municipality’s delivery of municipal services and its annual
budget, and which must indicate:
(a) projections for each month of:
(i) revenue to be collected, by source; and
(ii) operational and capital expenditure, by vote;
(b) service delivery targets and performance indicators for each quarter; and
(c) any other matters that may be prescribed, and includes any revisions of such plan by the
mayor in terms of section 54(1)(c).
1.2.23. Service delivery protest – according to Roux (2005: 3) the so called service delivery protests
started in 2004 in a South African township called Harrismith in the Free State Province. After
that, protests grew and became common. In short, the so called service delivery protests in
South Africa are protest actions which are really about dissatisfaction of communities with local
government “snail-pace” [in some instance no service] in the rendering of basic services such as
water, sanitation, electricity and waste management.
1.2.24. Ward – in the South African local government sphere a “ward” means an electoral district
within a municipality used in local politics. The Municipal Systems Act [part 1: General, 2]
defines a process of delimitation of wards; it is indicated that the Municipal Demarcation Board
[which operates through the Municipal Demarcation Act, 1998] after consultation with the
Electoral Commission, for purposes of an election must delimit all metropolitan municipalities
and all local municipalities that must have wards, into wards. Moreover, the number of wards
in a metropolitan or local municipality must be equal to the number of ward councillors
determined for the municipality in terms of section 22(2) of the same Act.
9
1.2.25. Ward committees – these are committees at a ward level found in certain metropolitan and
local municipalities. The Local Government: Municipal Systems Act, 117 of 1998 in Section 72,
explains that “only metropolitan and local municipalities of the types mentioned in sections
8(c), (d). (g) and (h) and 9(b) may have ward committees”. Section 72 (3) of the Act, further
indicates that “the object of a ward committee is to enhance participatory democracy in local
government”. The main functions and powers of ward committees are defined in section 73,
and it is indicated in the section that:
(a) Ward committees may make recommendations on any matter affecting its ward:
(i) to the ward councillor; or
(ii) through the ward councillor, to the metro or local council, the executive committee, the
executive mayor or the relevant metropolitan sub-council:
(b) Has such duties and powers as the metro or local council may delegate to it in terms of section
32.
10
1.3.
Motivation for the research
According to the South African Local Government Association [SALGA] established in terms of
Organised Local Government Act, 52 of 1997 – when the process of democratisation began,
municipalities were subordinate creatures of statute, comprising a multiplicity of fragmented
institutions, racially segregated, which, as a result, provided unequal services to different
communities. Hence it is argued that the transformation of local government was directed at
removing the racial basis of government and making it a vehicle for the integration of society
and the redistribution of municipal services from the well-off areas to the poor.
After the historic 27 April 1994 democratic elections in South Africa, the newly elected
government decided to conduct its first post-apartheid local government elections in 1995.
Local government in South Africa is regarded as a platform for effective and efficient delivery of
minimum basic services. This is a sphere where government directly connects with citizens.
Constitutionally, the local government sphere’s mandate is carried out by the current 278
municipalities in South Africa that are categorised into local municipalities, district
municipalities as well as metropolitan municipalities. It is therefore important to measure
impact and evaluate performance of municipalities, for purposes of this study focus will be on
metropolitan municipalities.
Metropolitan municipalities are densely populated urban areas – they are the so called big
cities in South Africa. Three of them are located in Gauteng Province [as indicated in Table 5.1].
They are the cities Ekurhuleni, Johannesburg and Tshwane. As expected, metropolitan
municipalities have large budgets. They are expected to plan, design and implement some of
the biggest capital infrastructure projects and facilitate the effective and efficient delivery of
minimum basic services to all communities they serve – more so for poor people who live in
impoverished communities. In the case of Gauteng Province, these people are mostly found in
urban informal settlements [UIS]. This is according to South African government’s agenda for
development in the national, provincial and local spheres (SSA, 2003: 17) which also integrates
the United Nations [UN] Millennium Development Goals [MDGs].
11
Metropolitan municipalities often become the biggest beneficiaries because of their size and
population when it comes to the Division of Revenue Act [DoRA], which is an Act of Parliament
enacted annually in terms of Section 214 (1) of the Constitution, 1996. DoRA allocations are
made available to municipalities through the National Treasury. In addition to their mandatory
collections of rates and taxes, national government also adds other grants [i.e. money allocated
to municipalities for specific purposes, e.g. Municipal Infrastructure Grant (MIG) for the
development of infrastructure and to advance the Urban Renewal Programme - URP] to
metropolitan municipalities, to ensure that they deliver on their mandate.
For reasons mentioned above and coupled with the current South Africa’s national agenda of
development [NDP – National Development Plan, 2030] - it is essential that politicians and
administrators assigned with the stewardship of allocating and spending government resources
take their task seriously. Especially politicians and administrators with the task of managing
metropolitan municipalities in particular – should conduct regular performance monitoring and
evaluation [PME] of programmes and projects in the municipal IDPs and SDBIPs - to ensure that
there is effective and efficient delivery of services as outlined in section 72 (1) of the Local
Government: Municipal Finance Management Act, 56 of 2003.
The purpose of this study is to investigate whether the introduction of the performance
monitoring and evaluation [PME] system – in particular Impact Evaluation [IE] in the South
African public sector in the local government sphere, has improved the delivery of minimum
basic services. The study will establish whether metropolitan municipalities in Gauteng Province
conduct periodic and regular performance monitoring and evaluation of the set priority targets
for
providing
minimum
basic
services
[electricity,
water,
sanitation
and
waste
collection/removal] in UIS. The United Nations Millennium Development Goal 7, will be used as
a measure.
In essence, the study is to a large extent about establishing accountability in selected
metropolitan municipalities and report on inputs, outcomes and results as they relate to the
delivery of minimum basic services. The other part of the study will be to generate research
knowledge in the domain of Public Administration about what works with regards to public
12
policy reforms like PME in a municipality and to build up an evidence base for future policy
development for a municipal council administration.
It is envisaged that the results from this study will benefit both academia and government in
understanding the benefits of good governance, performance monitoring and evaluation
systems in the local government sphere – in particular Impact Evaluation [IE]. This research also
broadens the scope of knowledge in the field of public administration and management and in
particular the managerial function in a local municipality setup.
1.4.
Problem statement
South Africa has relevant legislation in the form of the Public Finance Management Act [PFMA],
1 of 1999 in the national and provincial spheres and the Local Government: Municipal Finance
Management Act [MFMA], 56 of 2003 in the local government sphere. Government institutions
[in particular municipalities and their entities] continue to experience difficulties of coordination in their governance as indicated by the Auditor General in the past three financial
years [2009-2012]. There is a need for performance monitoring and evaluation [in particular
Impact evaluation – IE] of municipal programmes and projects to assess impact – more so in
areas where people live in conditions of squalor, abject poverty and underdevelopment – to
check if South Africa is advancing or regressing in its pursuit to achieve the United Nations [UN]
Millennium Development Goals [MDGs] – in particular Goal 7. For this study, focus will be on
urban informal settlements [UIS] in the three identified metropolitan municipalities in Gauteng,
South Africa.
Municipal programmes and projects are contained in the municipality’s Integrated
Development Plan [IDP] and implemented by a municipality’s administration through the
Service Delivery and Budget Implementation Plan [SDBIP] in particular for the provision of
effective and efficient delivery of minimum basic services. An IDP document focuses on
economic and social development for a specific area; it sets a framework for various processes
13
for development. For instance an IDP defines how land should be used, what infrastructure and
services are needed and how the environment should be protected.
As required by legislation Local Government: Municipal System Act, 32 of 2000, all
municipalities must produce an Integrated Development Plan [IDP]. The municipality has coordinate the IDP process and production, moreover, it has to make sure that all stakeholders in
the area who impact on and/or benefit from development in the area are included and
participate and express themselves [needs and aspirations of the constituency] in the end-toend process of planning and outcomes of an IDP.
A municipal ward’s IDP document is an important catalyst for development, as both the
community and the ward councillor become major beneficiaries. When coordinated effectively
and efficiently, an IDP gives a councillor an opportunity to make decisions based on the needs
and aspirations of his/her constituency. In the main, an IDP process has five phases, which
normally takes six to nine months to complete:
i.
analysis [collecting data];
ii.
strategies [vision and objectives];
iii.
projects [design and content of projects];
iv.
integration [all development plans are put together]; and
v.
approval [public comment and then council approves].
For purposes of this study, the areas of interest and research are those that are mostly located
in densely populated UIS that are found in metropolitan municipalities [Ekurhuleni,
Johannesburg and Tshwane] in Gauteng Province. Moreover, these are UIS areas where the
provision and continuous supply of minimum basic services of water; sanitation; electricity and
waste collection/removal remain limited or in other areas is non-existent.
The current situation can, to some extent be associated and linked with historical episodes of
separate development and apartheid policies of black urban settlements and separate
14
development [as argued in chapter 5 of this Thesis]; in particular the spatial planning and
development of cities, especially the so called informal settlements.
Thornhill (2006(a): 317) argues that governance requires co-operation among the governmental
bodies, the administrative/managerial sectors and society in providing public services. The
whole notion of governance is complex and the involvement of civil society and communities in
the governance of metropolitan municipalities in South Africa are difficult. It requires the
performance monitoring and evaluation [PME] to attain effective and efficient delivery of
minimum basic services.
The thesis will investigate whether the performance monitoring and evaluation and in
particular Impact Evaluation [IE] as introduced by the South African government through the
“Government-wide Monitoring and Evaluation system” [GWM&E]; under the Department of
Performance Monitoring and Evaluation [DPME] and in metropolitan municipalities in Gauteng
Province can assist in assessing and measuring the delivery of minimum basic services in urban
informal settlements [UIS].
1.5.
Research objectives
In describing and clarifying the problem statement and explaining the methodology used - it is
important that objectives be clearly defined to make sure that there is correlation and proper
delineation in the study.
The seven objectives of the study are outlined below:
a) to locate the concept of performance monitoring and evaluation [PME] in the
Discipline of Public Administration;
b) to discuss and extrapolate the essence of PME, analyse the policy framework that
guides PME systems in the South African context and in particular the local sphere of
government;
c) to discuss the international PME systems in the public sector and consider lessons
that are relevant to the South African environment;
15
d) to analyse and discuss the local sphere of government before and after democratic
rule in South Africa with special reference to the evolution of local government
legislation;
e) to discuss and extrapolate current issues in the South African local government
sphere with special focus on community participation, municipal demarcation
concerns and protest action in municipalities;
f) to conduct an empirical study, investigate and compare using two sets of survey
questionnaires – by conducting Impact Evaluation [IE] on the delivery of basic
minimum services [i.e. electricity, water, sanitation and waste collection/removal] in
the three identified municipalities against set targets determined by Statistics South
Africa Census 2001 & 2011; Housing Development Agency [HDA] of the Department
of Human Settlement [DHS] and the Millennium Development Goals [MDGs] – in the
South African context; and
g) to discuss practical considerations in institutionalising PME processes in local
government and propose recommendations with guidelines for an effective and
efficient PME system in the local government sphere in Gauteng, South Africa.
There is a clear and unambiguous need to conduct a rigorous interdisciplinary study of
governance and public management with special focus on performance monitoring and
evaluation in the local sphere of government. It then follows that municipalities in South Africa
have to develop mechanisms to assess whether performance levels result in effective and
efficient service delivery. The current research will:
i.
compare the current municipal performance in UIS with that in earlier reporting
periods;
ii.
compare actual municipal outcomes in UIS, to targets set by national government in
particular the Department of Human Settlements [DHS] in the Informal Settlements
Upgrading Programme Business Plan [ISUPBP] of 2005 and the MDGs; and
16
iii.
compare municipal performance among major categories [i.e. the delivery of basic
services – electricity, water, sanitation and waste collection/removal] in UIS or among
geographic area served.
Such comparisons are likely to provide important information and reduce the likelihood of
municipalities ignoring problems that face specific segments of the population in urban
informal settlements. Although such efforts often result in major data comparability problems,
in some instances reasonable comparisons can be fairly made.
1.6.
Research Question
For purposes of the study and in pursuit of developing a comprehensive conclusion responding
to the set objectives, it is important to address the following question that is related to the
topic.
a) Why is governance, performance monitoring and evaluation [PME], and in particular Impact
Evaluation [IE] in metropolitan municipalities significant?
1.7.
Sequence
Chapter 1
Introduction
Research methodology
Problem statement
Sequence
Chapter 2
Public Administration and Management perspective of the study
Chapter 3
17
Essence of performance monitoring and evaluation
Chapter 4
Performance monitoring and evaluation [PME]: International experience
Chapter 5
Metropolitan municipalities in Gauteng, South Africa
Chapter 6
Empirical quantitative study and analysis of results
Chapter 7
Summary, conclusion and references
1.8.
Research methodology
Methodology concerns organising assumptions, the concepts and definitions that underlie any
systematic inquiry (Landau, 1972: 178). These are the elements that provide a field with
coherence and relevance. Hence a close and continuing concern with the logic and procedure
of analysis remain a necessity for any discipline if it is to locate and clarify its principal points of
reference. The argument advanced by Landau (1972: 178) is that even though public
administration is an applied field, it must have an empirical, rigorous, and systematic core.
The empirical study will be conducted and operated on the basis of knowledge of authors,
participants, community, municipal officials in performance monitoring and evaluation.
Context-dependent knowledge and experience are at the very heart of expert in performance
monitoring and evaluation activity. This will be the underlying principle that influences the
empirical study. Such knowledge and expertise also lie at the centre of the case study as a
research and teaching method of learning.
18
According to Flyvbjerg (2006: 222) phenomenological studies of the learning process emphasize
the importance of context-dependent knowledge, case studies and similar methods. It is only
because of experience with cases that one can become an expert. If people were exclusively
trained in context-independent knowledge and rules, that is, the kind of knowledge that forms
the basis of textbooks and computers, they would remain at the beginner’s level in the learning
process. This is the limitation of analytical rationality; it is inadequate for the best results in the
exercise of a profession, as student, researcher, or practitioner.
The argument advanced by Flyvbjerg in the preceding paragraph, means that the case study
method allows a researcher or practitioner to move from just being a context-independent
knowledge researcher to become a virtuoso expert in a particular field of study. Another
important value of case study research is the closeness to real-life situations and its multiple
wealth of details. This can be explained more comprehensively in three respects:
[a] It is important for the development of a nuanced view of reality, including the view that
human behaviour cannot be meaningfully understood as simply the rule governed acts found at
the lowest levels of the learning process and in theory.
[b] Cases are important for researchers’ own learning processes in developing the skills needed
to do effective research. If researchers wish to develop their own skills to a high level, then
definitive, context-dependent experience is just as central for them as to professionals learning
any other specific skills.
[c] Specific experiences can be achieved via continued proximity to the studied reality and via
feedback from those under study.
19
Predictive theories and universal views cannot be found in the study of human affairs. Contextdependent knowledge and experience are therefore, more valuable than the search for
predictive theories and universals. It is the intention of the researcher in this study to analyse:

literature;

official documents; and

interviews with key participants in the sphere of local government.
Qualitative and quantitative methods will be combined and used in this study. A triangulation
case study method will be the preferred method as data collected from both primary and
secondary data sources.
McCurdy and Cleary (1984: 54) argue that scholars have not conclusively demonstrated that the
discipline of Public Administration lends itself to systematic exploration. The purpose of ongoing research is not sufficiently directed toward theory-building or proposition testing.
Furthermore, Public Administration as a field of study does not employ agreed upon methods
and research designs for analysing and classifying data. Neither do practitioners have generally
accepted research criteria to apply to the analysis of topics of fundamental interest in the field.
The criteria utilised for the research include an emphasis on specific social science-based
methodology. Hence, for the purpose of the thesis, scientifically proven methods in the other
fields of study outside Public Administration will be used in the methodology.
Sample surveys are the preferred method in the empirical component of the study. The
purpose of a sample survey is to collect standardised information from a carefully selected
sample of respondents. These types of surveys are carried out by means of a structured
instrument such as a questionnaire or observation guide. For purposes of the current study, a
structured questionnaire will be used. Sample surveys are appropriate when the research
design require comparable information about a relatively large number of subjects – which is
the case in point with regards to research in UIS.
20
1.8.1. Unit of analysis
Urban Informal Settlements [UIS] in the three identified metropolitan municipalities in
Gauteng, which are Ekurhuleni, Johannesburg and Tshwane – will be the unit of analysis.
1.8.2. Sampling
Two sample surveys will be conducted, which includes in each sample three city managers and
392 participants in UIS respectively:

three city managers or their representatives [one per metropolitan municipality – three
in total];

community members from each metropolitan municipality identified, from informal
settlements will be selected and surveyed [i.e. 14 individuals per informal settlement
will be randomly selected and surveyed]; and

a representative sample of UIS that are older than 20 years will be selected randomly in
each metropolitan municipality and the total number will be determined using a
formula based on the number of UIS in each municipality that are 20 years and older].
A total of 395 surveys will be conducted, analysed and processed from the three metropolitan
municipalities. Community members in UIS from each metropolitan municipality will be
selected [i.e. randomly] from the following categories:

Males [Youth, 35> and not more than 55 yrs, Elderly 60>]

Female [Youth, 35> and not more than 55 yrs, Elderly 60>]

People living with disabilities [disability as defined in the South African Constitution]

Africans, Whites, Coloured and Indians
A cluster sampling technique has been selected for the purpose of this study. This is a sampling
technique where the entire population is divided into groups, or clusters, and a random sample
of these clusters is then selected. All observations and determination in the selected clusters
are included in the sample. In the study, populations in UIS are divided into groups. Firstly,
21
those that are not yet formalised and secondly are those that are 20 years and older. A random
sample of the required sample is then selected per metropolitan municipality.
Cluster sampling is typically used when the researcher cannot get a complete list of the
members of a population he/she wishes to study, but can get a complete list of groups or
'clusters' of the population. In the case of UIS, information on the population is not readily
available as a result of in-and-out migration. Cluster sampling is also used when a random
sample would produce a list of subjects so widely scattered that surveying them would prove to
be too expensive to justify the effort. This is the case with people who live in UISs.
In this study, a two-stage cluster sampling will be used, where a simple case of multistage
sampling is obtained by selecting cluster samples in the first stage and then selecting a sample
of elements from every sampled cluster. A population of N clusters in total will be considered
from all informal settlements selected. In the first stage, n clusters will be selected using
ordinary cluster sampling method. In the second stage, simple random sampling will be used
(Pfeffermann & Rao, 2009: 1) – when selecting specific UIS. The method will be used separately
in every cluster and the numbers of elements selected from different clusters will not be
necessarily equal. The total number of clusters N, number of clusters selected n, and numbers
of elements from selected clusters will be pre-determined. The two-stage cluster sampling has
been selected to minimise survey costs and at the same time control the uncertainty related to
estimates of interest (Ahmed, 2009: 1).
1.8.3. Geographical location
Although there are eight metropolitan municipalities in South Africa, this study will focus on the
three identified metropolitan municipalities in Gauteng Province, South Africa, to limit the
research to one Province following a similar policy regarding UIS.
1.8.4. Data collection arrangements
Primary data will have two collection methods or parts, namely A and B.
22
Part A
-
Government documents and reports
-
Speeches and debates by government office bearers
-
Official papers presented at conferences and workshops [President, Ministers and Mayors]
-
Acts
-
White Papers
-
Minutes of meetings
-
Books
-
Surveys and statistics
-
Theses and dissertations (both published and unpublished)
Part B
An empirical study will be conducted using a survey questionnaire which will be distributed to
the identified participants as indicated in the sampling method. Communication will be done
via email to officials and through face-to-face interviews with participants in urban informal
settlements [UIS], including role players involved in performance monitoring and evaluation in
the three identified metropolitan municipalities.
Secondary data
Information will be collected from:
-
Research that has been conducted in PME within the discipline by relevant scholars in the field
-
Articles and journals
-
Newsletters and pamphlets
-
Newspaper articles
-
Other relevant and credible material and sources
23
1.8.5. Limitations
This study will focus on collecting primary and secondary data from 1990 till 2014 to cover
various stages and epochs of the development of urban informal settlements [UIS] in the three
metropolitan municipalities identified - a cumulative period of 24 years. This period has been
selected based on the history of South Africa and the changes effected since 1990. More
importantly the period includes 20 years since democratic rule in 1994. UIS that will be
surveyed in the empirical research study will also be 20 years or older.
1.9.
Administrative processes and approval
The success of the study will depend largely on the empirical component which has a survey
questionnaire with chronology and relevant questions related to the problem statement,
objectives and sample method used. Most of all, success will be determined by the cooperation of the identified participants.
The Ethics Committee of the University of Pretoria approved the research study and its ethical
considerations. The Gauteng MEC for Local Government also approved that the researcher
work with identified municipalities and use relevant documents [of which most documents are
already available for public use] in the study.
A letter of consent to conduct the relevant surveys and engage participants both in and outside
government will be drafted and attached to all questionnaires [each participant signed a
questionnaire]. Data collected from this study will be stored for 10 years and will only be used
for the purposes of this study.
24
CHAPTER 2: PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION PERSPECTIVE OF THE STUDY
2.1. Introduction
This research represents an investigation into Public Administration as a discipline, because it
plays an important role in building the knowledge base that the field of public management and
administration must possess. Emphasis on research methodology and design are both critical
and essential if inquiry in public administration and management is to progress. Stallings (1986:
229) argues that a doctoral thesis does not separate theory from practice (or vice versa), but
rather identifies a three-way relationship between practice, theory, and method where method
refers to techniques of theory elaboration and clarification rather than the techniques of
management.
According to one of the foremost pioneers in the discipline of Public Administration, Woodrow
Wilson [the person who identified the study of Public Administration that had been developed
much earlier in Europe from the work of the German and Austrian Cameralists of the sixteenth
century]. In his article entitled “The study of Administration”; which was published in June 1887
in the Political Science Quarterly (2, 1887-222) and which is generally considered as the origin of
the study of Public Administration (Thornhill, 2006 (b): 795 - 797) - Woodrow Wilson argues
that “… the field of administration is a field of business. It is removed from the hurry and strife
of politics.” From Woodrow Wilson’s assertion above - Thornhill notes from Wilson, that:
“(T)he object of administrative study is to rescue executive methods from the confusion and
costliness of empirical experiment and set them upon foundations laid deep in stable principle”
(Ibid.). He also made it clear that the study of administration should be clearly distinguished
from the study of politics. He acknowledges a science of administration for America must be
principles which have democratic policy very much at heart. And to suit American habit, all
general theories must, as theories, keep modestly in the background, not in open argument
only, but even in our minds – lest opinions satisfactory only to the standards of the library
25
should be dogmatically used as if they must be quite as satisfactory to the standards of practical
politics as well.” (Ibid.)”.
McCurdy and Cleary (1984: 54) argue that the criteria for judging research in the field of public
administration should be the presence of a basic research purpose, internal and external
validity, theoretical impact and demonstration of causal relationships, an important topic, and
presence on the cutting edge of the field – characteristics which this research will meet.
Stallings argues further and states that most successful studies combine the quantitative data
of the positive tradition with the qualitative data of the phenomenological tradition. The latter
are especially useful in identifying the "rationale" for research in a thesis. It is the rigorous and
systematic application of method of whatever type that creates the detachment of the outsider
in the research process, a detachment otherwise difficult to achieve when the researcher in all
other respects is really an insider (Stallings, 1986:239).
Other authors in the field of public administration (Landau, 1972: 178) argue that even though
public administration is an applied field, it must have an empirical, rigorous, and systematic
core. Thesis research, just like the current study of performance monitoring and evaluation in
metropolitan municipalities provides an opportunity for the development of the building blocks
necessary to advance the field, as well as a testing ground for research standards.
It is important to understand political dynamics when undertaking a study in the field of Public
Administration. Crous (2004: 575) argues that government and the activities it undertakes to
deliver services are the result of political dynamics. This is supported by Thornhill (2006(b): 805)
who argues that one core issue that distinguishes Public Administration from other related
disciplines is the political milieu within which its operational activities are performed. All
government actions directly affect the public and, where peoples’ needs are not addressed,
people experience inconvenience and even hardship (Van Rooyen 2007: 45).
26
All administrative and managerial issues that form the study of Public Administration and
Management are dominated by public policy, which is ultimately the final domain of the
political authority concerned. The argument advanced by Thornhill (2006(b): 805) is that the
political environment puts the domain of the discipline of Public Administration and
Management into a category of exclusivity – so it can be indicated that politics direct and
control the domain of Public Administration and Management.
The argument in the above paragraph, as advanced by Thornhill is that the programmes of
government should contribute towards an enhanced quality of life for all. This implies that the
outcomes of public administration and management must be aimed at service delivery and the
improvement of the general welfare of the people – within a political context. Furthermore,
Thornhill & Hanekom (1995: 195) state that in the public sector, the endeavour should always
be for action which will lead to the improvement of the quality of service rendered by public
institutions. In this research, municipal councils will be investigated.
The Constitution in section 156 (1) outlines the powers and functions of municipalities.
(1) A municipality has executive authority in respect of, and has the right to administer the
following:
(a) the local government matters listed in Part B of Schedule 4 and Part B of
Schedule 5; and
(b) any other matter assigned to it by national or provincial legislation.
(2) A municipality may make and administer by-laws for the effective administration of the
matters which it has the right to administer.
(3) Subject to section 151(4), a by-law that conflicts with national or provincial legislation is
invalid. If there is a conflict between a by-law and national or provincial legislation that
is inoperative because of a conflict referred to in section 149, the by-law must be
regarded as valid for as long as that legislation is inoperative.
(4) The national government and provincial governments must assign to a municipality, by
agreement and subject to any conditions, the administration of a matter listed in Part A
of Schedule 4 or Part A of Schedule 5 which necessarily relates to local government, if:
27
(a) that matter would most effectively be administered locally; and
(b) the municipality has the capacity to administer it.
(5) A municipality has the right to exercise any power concerning a matter reasonably
necessary for, or incidental to, the effective performance of its functions.
The current study of performance monitoring and evaluation [PME] in metropolitan
municipalities should be understood in the context of section 156 [5] of the Constitution. It is a
mechanism applied in a transformed local sphere of government [i.e. since the year 2000] and
promoted by the national sphere of government, with the sole intention of contributing
towards an enhanced quality of life for all – its outcomes, outputs and results [i.e. Impact
evaluation – IE] are aimed at service delivery and the general welfare of the people.
2.2. Location of the study of performance monitoring and evaluation [PME] in
the discipline of Public Administration
In the book, JJN Cloete’s South African Public Administration and Management - 10th revised
edition, Thornhill (2012: 86), when discussing the functions constituting public administration,
summarises activities undertaken in administrative executive institutions into the following
classifications:
i.
Generic administrative and managerial;
ii.
Instrumental;
iii.
Functional [line functions].
The current study of performance monitoring and evaluation falls within the class of generic
administrative and managerial functions [consisting of two sub-sections, (a) Conceptual and
directive functions and (b) Managerial functions] and its location is under the sub-section of
managerial functions (Thornhill, 2012: 87) – which focus on the functions performed in an
administrative executive institution. The study will therefore be an investigation of a
28
managerial phenomenon, because performance monitoring and evaluation [PME] is a
managerial function in terms of its location in the practice of public administration.
In essence, municipal PME is a control function used by administration and management. It is
about conducting regular performance monitoring and evaluation of programmes and projects
in the municipal SDBIP and ensuring that there are effective and efficient delivery of services as
outlined in section 72 (1) of the Local government: Municipal Finance Management Act, 56 of
2003. The outcomes of a properly implemented PME programme in a municipality by
management should yield results that assist in other managerial aspects and functions of a
municipality. This includes proper advice for the municipal council on line functions and in
particular issues around: budgeting [i.e. Finance], planning; policy, governance, compliance and
risk management. The schematic representation (Figure 1.2.) below depicts the location of the
study.
29
Figure 1.2 Location of public administration
Public Administration system [Control]/Political dimension driven by political values [goals set
in the Integrated Development Plans – IDP and the ruling party’s manifesto priorities]
Managerial function
Performance monitoring and evaluation [plan action – SDBIP]/Implementation dimension
driven by material values [value for money in municipal projects and programmes]
Check executive actions [outcome/goal/material motive]
Outcomes of PME: advise municipal council on line functions and in particular: Budgeting
[Finance], Planning, Policy implementation, Governance, Compliance and Risk Management
Public Administration should be studied with the inclusion or rather the acknowledgement of
managerial concepts. Thornhill (2006 (b): 799-800) argues that Schwella in an article entitled:
“Public Administration or Public Management – another perspective or why not Public
Administration and Public Management” which appeared in SAIPA Journal of Public
Administration (20 (1), March 1985) is the strongest proponent for the introduction of
30
management. Schwella mooted the concept of Public Management as part of the study of
Public Administration. Furthermore, it is stated that in this article that Schwella argued in
favour of the (re)introduction of the terminology into the academic literature as in international
literature. In South African Public Administration literature this represented a major shift in the
approach to the study of the Discipline. Public sector matters formerly studied in the Discipline
of Public Administration should thus be studied within the paradigm of Public Management.
It should be stated at this point that day-to-day administrative and managerial issues and
problems should not automatically be taken as the core issues in the field of public
administration - meaning that the substance or content of a particular practical problem does
not make it theoretically important. Stallings (1986: 237) argues that administrative and
managerial issues and problems need to be reconstituted so that they are subsumed under
more general patterns having the same form. Furthermore, its study must be carried out in
such a way that more will be known about the problem in the end beyond a mere descriptive
historical anecdote.
The current research study of performance monitoring and evaluation [PME], although it is in
the main an administrative and managerial issue of control – the outcomes of the study will
greatly contribute and have direct effect on other public administration related aspects that are
also important in the governing of a municipality, in particular: Budgeting [i.e. Finance],
Planning, Policy implementation, Governance, Compliance and Risk Management. This means
that PME cuts across various functions of administration and management of a municipality. It
has a significant impact - which makes it a critical area in the overall administration,
management and control of a municipality. It can therefore be argued that the study of PME
has potential to make a significant contribution and add value to the domain of Public
Administration in the local sphere of government and particularly at a municipality. As argued
by Stallings (1986: 237) in the paragraph above – it can be indicated that the study of PME in a
metropolitan municipality is going to be carried out in such a way that more will be known
about the problem in the end, beyond a mere descriptive historical anecdote, in particular:
31
Budgeting [i.e. Finance], Planning; Policy implementation, Governance, Compliance and Risk
Management.
According to Stallings (1986: 239) the core problems in the field of public administration for a
doctoral programme must rise above the individual and particular problems of day-to-day
practical administration. The study concern those activities that overworked public officials,
who seldom have time to evaluate during normal working hours. The function of the university
doctoral programme should always be to provide an intellectual "sanctuary" in which doctoral
students, regardless of their occupational roles, may step back and contemplate the meaning of
public activity and its relation to the rest of society. Furthermore, Stallings (1986: 237) argues
that firsthand experience alone cannot be the primary method of knowing in a doctoral
programme. Hence, efficiency and effectiveness in the public sector are determined by the
conduct and attitude of the functionaries performing their respective duties. Lethargy and
immobility are caused by the attitude and performance of individuals and not by the
introduction of management in the public sector (Cloete, 1984. 41).
In recent years, public administration theory has occasionally connoted a heavy orientation
toward critical theory and post-modern philosophical notions of government, governance, and
power (Thornhill, 2006 (b): 796). Many Public Administration scholars support a classical
definition of the term which gives weight to constitutionality, service, bureaucratic forms of
organisation, and hierarchical government. The current study will be focused on the service and
bureaucratic forms of the local sphere of government – metropolitan municipalities, which is
one of the three spheres of government as defined in the Constitution of the Republic of South
Africa, 1996.
Metropolitan municipalities are required by law to measure their performance; the Local
Government: Municipal Finance Management Act, 56 of 2003; puts a particular obligation on
the accounting officer of a municipality. It is important to indicate that PME policy
implementation is a more recent development. There is a need for continuous monitoring of
32
executive actions to ensure that municipal targets are met. More importantly, all executive
actions must be subject to critical performance indicators (Thornhill, 2012: 145).
It is important to explain the word performance in the context of this study. The definition used
in this study is the one found in the “business dictionary” (Business Dictionary.com). The
definition has been specifically selected, as it gives context and premise on which the study will
be based, that of monitoring and evaluating “effective and efficient delivery of basic service” –
the context of the word performance given in this study is that “what's measured gets
managed”.
According to the business dictionary definition, performance means:
The accomplishment of a given task measured against present known standards of accuracy,
completeness, cost, and speed. In a contract, performance is deemed to be the fulfilment of an
obligation, in a manner that releases the performer from all liabilities under the contract.
Van der Waldt (2004: 34) argues that performance is about the efficiency relationship between
inputs and outputs; the reduction of inputs or the cost of inputs; the following of due process
and equity and the relationship among inputs, outputs and outcomes. The Local Government:
Municipal Finance Management Act, 56 of 2003 [MFMA]; puts particular obligation on the
accounting officer of a municipality. In section 72 (1) dealing with the “Mid-year budget and
performance assessment”, the accounting officer of a municipality must by 25 January of each
year assess the performance of the municipality during the first half of the financial year, taking
into account:

the monthly statements referred to in section 71 for the first half of the financial
year;

the municipality’s service delivery performance during the first half of the
financial year, and the service delivery targets and performance indicators set in
the service delivery and budget implementation plan [SDBIP];
33

the past year’s annual report, and progress on resolving problems identified in
the annual report; and

the performance of every municipal entity under the sole or shared control of
the municipality, taking into account reports in terms of section 88 from any
such entities.
It is also expected from the accounting officer, according to section 72 (1) of the MFMA, 56 of
2003; to submit a report on such a performance assessment to:

the mayor of the municipality;

the National Treasury; and

the relevant provincial treasury.
In essence, performance monitoring and evaluation [PME] in municipalities finds its location
under in section 72 (1); in particular where the section states that the municipality’s service
delivery performance during the first half of the financial year, and the service delivery targets
and performance indicators set in the service delivery and budget implementation plan [SDBIP].
In this study, the word performance will be used together with monitoring and evaluation
[PME] so that clarity is provided that monitoring and evaluation is conducted and coupled to
performance measurement in a municipality as required in section 72 (1) of the MFMA, 2003.
In essence, performance monitoring and evaluation [PME] is an action performed under the
guidance of management and an implementation dimension [reform programme] used by
municipalities to obtain value for money of programmes and projects they undertake.
It has been argued that PME is not necessarily a panacea for ills associated with poor
government performance. However, it is clear from the discussions above that PME can
contribute in ensuring that the public sector and in particular the sphere of local government
accounts for its actions with regards to its programme action and implementation – moreover
PME outcomes can contribute and add value to other aspects of management functions. This
study focuses on pubic management, which is a division or a sub-field in the discipline of Public
34
Administration – known as the Public Management [PM], which is an outcome of activities that
were conceptualised and occurred in the 1980s called New Public Management [NPM]. The
following section of the chapter will discuss in detail the concept of NPM and the resulting postNPM era – which is PM.
2.3. New Public management [NPM]
According to Pollitt (2011: 4) defining NPM is the first step, but in itself is not at all easy. In its
origins it is strongly associated with UK Prime Minister Thatcher and US President Ronald
Reagan, and with the New Zealand Labour government of 1984. Neither Mrs. Thatcher nor
Ronald Reagan supported the ‘planning’ approach which had been the orthodoxy in the US and
UK public sectors of the 1960s and early ‘70s. During their periods in power in the 1980s they,
and many of their advisers according to Pollitt (2011: 4) favoured what they considered to be a
‘business-like’ approach. Over a period of time and partly through doctrine and partly through
trial and error, this general attitude crystallised into a more specific set of recipes in the public
sector reform space. Pollitt (2011: 4) indicates that by the early 1990s a number of influential
commentators appeared to believe that there was one clear direction – at least in the
Anglophone world [mainly UK and US]. This general direction was soon labelled as the New
Public Management [NPM] or in the US [Re-inventing Government]. A pair of American
management consultants [Osborne and Gaebler], who wrote a best-seller entitled Reinventing
government and then became advisers to the US Vice President on a major reform programme,
were convinced that the changes they saw, were part of a global trend. They claimed that
entrepreneurial government, as they called it, was both worldwide and inevitable (Osborne and
Gaebler, 1992: 325-328).
Hood (1991: 3) provides more clarity, when stating that the wave of public sector reform that
began in the 1980s is commonly referred to as the new public management [NPM]. The term
NPM refers to a focus on management, not policy, and on performance appraisal and
efficiency; disaggregating public bureaucracies into agencies which deal with each other; a style
of management that emphasises, inter-alia output targets, limited term contracts, monetary
35
incentives and freedom to manage [including other phenomena that are not relevant to this
study - like user pay basis; the use of quasi-markets and contracting out to foster competition
and cost-cutting].
For those who support the concept of NPM, it is seen as a catechism - meaning it answers to
preconceived questions as to how government performance might be improved through
simulating market discipline and forces. The issue is that NPM is undoubtedly serving shortterm political ends in some instances. Public administration concerns studies that are geared at
resolving long-term political problems. Such a catechism from its supporters and as with all
catechisms distorts and discourages the deep searching coupled to investigation of partisan
claims and contested ideas. For example resistance to change, as those with the NPM's answers
are prone to interpret sceptical reactions, may in theory and practice be something altogether
different to those with questions - a reflection of the essential dynamics of those policy
domains within the public sector where problems of legitimacy, consensus, information, and
interdependence are prevalent and hard to solve.
The concept of NPM concerns performing functions more efficiently in the public sector, and is
the culmination of various reform efforts in different areas of traditional public administration.
Hood (1991: 4) describes NPM as a shorthand name for the set of broadly similar administrative
doctrines which dominated the bureaucratic reform agenda in OECD [Organisation for
Economic Cooperation and Development] countries in the 1970s. According to OECD, corporate
governance operates on several key principles [i.e. as agreed in 1999]:
a) a clear distinction exists between ownership and management where it is generally
assumed that there is conflict of interests [though that need not always exist];
b) clear corporate objectives are in place which, other than profit maximisation and protection
of shareholder rights, could also include concern for the environment, corporate
responsibility;
36
c) performance standards are very specific for those in management to meet and/or exceed,
and incentives are built into the system to encourage them to do so;
d) leading from (c), accountability is the core concept as the Board of Directors [in this instance
referring to municipal councils] seeks to ensure that management is answerable for all
actions taken in the name of the firm; and
e) in the final analysis, disclosure and transparency are thus central to good corporate
governance; an example of this is the clear disclosure of pay and governance principles in
companies.
NPM has at its roots, a theoretical framework that draws upon various economic theories
primarily public choice, agency, and transaction cost. Central to these theories is the view that
individuals are maximisers of self-interest, which goes against the grain of traditional public
administration which is centred on propagation of the common good (Bhatta, 2003: 6). NPM
asserts that the performance of public organisations is enhanced when managers are given
operating discretion and are held accountable for their actions and results. It also concentrates
on values of efficiency and marketisation, hence the focus on corporate governance. According
to Bhatta (2003: 6) NPM incorporates three components:
(a) marketisation – introducing market competition into public sector production;
(b) disaggregation – decoupling policy and executive functions; and
(c) incentivisation – linking incentives to performance.
A deduction from the argument advanced in the preceding paragraphs about the historical
foundations of NPM, is that NPM is an attempt to replicate private sector values and practices
in the public sector. Together with contracts, competition, and incentives, the intention is to
prove that what worked in the private sector can be replicated in the public sector as well. As
37
argued in the paragraphs above, the view that individuals maximise self-interest [private sector
way of thinking] opposes traditional public administration which is centred on propagation of
the common good [i.e. individual interest – private sector approach versus collective interests –
public sector approach]. As it will be indicated in the sections to follow in the NPM debates in
this chapter [2.3.1 – 2.3.3] whatever concepts or methods which work in the private sector
would not necessarily replicate the same results in the public sector. This is because the private
sector environment does not mirror the public sector although some of the experiences can be
shared between the two sectors.
In South Africa for instance, new legislation in the local sphere of government has to an extent
explicitly demonstrated that the public sector has in a way become involved in matters that
were by origin, the domain of the private sector. Section 76 of the Local Government: Municipal
Systems Act, 32 of 2000 [MSA] provides for different mechanisms municipalities have at their
disposal for rendering services to the municipal community. These mechanisms are:
[i] a department or other administrative unit within its administration or a business unit devised
by the municipality;
[ii] a service agreement with a municipal entity, another municipality or an organ of state;
[iii] a community based organisation or other non-governmental organisation; or any other
institution, entity or person legally competent to operate a business activity.
In addition, the MFMA, 2003 has in its chapter 10, a similar provision as chapter 6 of the Public
Finance Management Act, 1 of 1999 which in essence provides for the utilisation of public
entities in the delivery of public services. These public entities are now a feature in
metropolitan municipalities in Gauteng Province and they are governed by Sections 84 and 85
of the municipal legislation found in MFMA, 56 of 2003.
It can be argued that the application of corporate governance principles in the public sector has
placed its focus less on notions of shareholders and more on the themes like leadership,
environmental management, risk management, delivery of basic services and performance
38
monitoring of government programmes and projects. The research will take a management
approach, which in this study means an activity in motion that will implement a particular
system of performance monitoring and evaluation in operation within the local government
sphere. The rigorous interdisciplinary study of government and public management are
flourishing (Heinrich and Lynn, 2000: 1).
The Public Service Commission [PSC] argues that a PME system augments managerial processes
and provides evidence for decision-making (PSC, 2008: 4). The question that should be asked, is
whether the quality of the PME information provided is appropriate and relevant in the current
administration in South Africa, even critically - how well it fits into existing managerial
processes. The point made by the PSC, is that PME cannot replace effective and efficient
management practices; rather it augments and complements management to assure efficient
and effective delivery of services – which in this study, means the delivery of minimum basic
services as an important objective of analysis in this thesis.
For the study to find expression and be rooted in the public sector, it has to be guided by policy
in the form of legislative framework. In the public sector, nothing can be done with regard to
any matter before a policy on it has been accepted by the legislature or other competent
institution to declare that action must be taken to reach one or more objectives – meaning that
when a policy is in place, other generic administrative and managerial functions can commence
(Thornhill, 2012: 88).
According to Hood (1991: 3) New Public Management’s [NPM] popularity seems to be linked to
four administrative megatrends. These include attempts to [a] slow down or reverse
government growth in terms of overt public spending and employees; [b] the shift toward
privatisation and quasi-privatisation and away from core government institutions, with
renewed emphasis on subsidiarity in service provision; [c] the development of automation,
particularly in information technology, in the production and distribution of public services and
lastly, [d] the development of a more international agenda increasingly focused on general
39
issues of public management, policy design, decision styles and intergovernmental cooperation, on top of the older tradition of individual country specialisation in public
administration. For purposes of this study, the main focus will be on the last megatrend [d]
above.
It must be mentioned that the agenda in this study. which also refers to an international trend
and increasingly focused on general issues of public management [PM initiative which is
strongly reform orientated] as it will be argued later in the survey of literature, is focused on the
generic issues of public management, in particular the performance monitoring and evaluation
in the local government sphere of specialisation in South Africa.
2.3.1. NPM - a paradigm of questions rather than of answers
According to authors in the field of public management and administration (Gardner 1997: 23)
probing the ironies of the NPM makes possible the deepening of insight into governance; but
only the possibility. The argument advanced is that the fields of public management and of
administration have too often been lured into intellectual cul-de-sacs where public
management is pushed into a psychobabble according to Gardner (1997: 23): a psychobabble of
leadership without authority, public administration into its original sin of separating
administration and politics, and both into the fervour of value-based, anti-political approaches
to public leadership, a NPM of continuous:
[i] steering, not rowing,
[ii] results, not process,
[iii] production, not politics,
[iv] empowerment, not power, and
[v] collaboration, not conflict.
40
This NPM argument has, to a large extent, been recasting management as institutional design
and statecraft and by appealing to political economy for a rationale. The NPM ironically
invigorates the project that Michel Crozier, Terry Moe, and Elinor Ostrom have promoted for
many years; which is the development of a theory that integrates politics and administration.
This neo-economic outlook was a comprehensive theoretical frame within which to situate
facts and suppositions and it did not work (Lynn, 1998: 232).
It is important to indicate that NPM as a concept has been proven to be unsuccessful over the
years in public administration – especially in the public sector due to its neo-economic outlook.
Any form of research that includes NPM must, therefore, be done with the older tradition of
individual country specialisation in public administration. The current study will therefore
follow suit and confine itself to proven principles and applications in the field of public
management and administration.
The claim that a neo-economic NPM system in public affairs has been inexorably replacing
bureaucracy with virtual markets around the world, has from its first appearance seemed
tenuous to many academics in Public Administration and Management. According to Lynn
(1998: 232) NPM is in actual fact an ephemeral theme [hence the discussion to follow about
post-NPM in 2.3.3.] that will fade away with time for several reasons:

the initial shape of the Westminster reforms [in the United Kingdom] that inspired the term
will eventually be disfigured in the course of political succession, and partisans and scholars
alike will see new opportunities in proclaiming the metamorphosis or demise of the NPM;

as comparative work across countries and sectors accumulate, fundamental differences
among reforms will begin to eclipse superficial similarities;

the term "new" will be viewed as an inconvenient adjective for emerging forms or objects
of inquiry; and

political debate will require a fresh theme to attract attention to and support for the next
wave of ideas for administrative reform (Lynn, 1998: 232).
41
It could be argued that NPM cannot be the panacea for challenges in the public sector in
general and municipality’s administration in particular. Over a period of time, it has been
observed and studied that the logic of governance in the public sector has a different starting
point than the logic of competitive markets in the private sector. In fact, the public sector is
governed by formal authority vested in the state by a constitution and by the legitimate actions
of officials.
Elected political office bearers or public representatives are not constitutionally restricted from
authorising the production of goods and services under public authority, and from using public
resources that might just as well be, or are, produced privately [e.g. service enterprises] – this
argument has been made [2.3. above] with the example in the South African local government
environment, wherein the Section 76 of the Local Government: Municipal Systems Act, 32 of
2000 which provides for different mechanisms municipalities have at their disposal for
rendering services to the municipal community. Moreover, these public representatives are not
legally prohibited and restricted from regulating private production in order to accomplish their
mandated "political" objective – what this implies is that elected political office bearers may
legally authorise the production of collective goods and may create "political property rights,"
access to and control over public resources for which there is no private production.
The argument is that the most fundamental distinction between public and private
organisations is the requirement of operating according to specific legislation. Public
organisations exist to administer the law and every component of their structure; employees;
budget; and right of existence. The most important consideration is that public institutions are
the product of legal authority. Thus, public institutions are official actors bound by
constitutional and public law, possessing only the discretion that the law deliberately or
implicitly allows. In many ways, NPM will have a legacy that is viewed as a paradigm of
questions rather than of answers. The following five probing questions as argued by Lynn
(1998: 235) assert the argument:
42

How can the researchers conceptualise the performance of governments in terms of the
many types of outputs and outcomes, results and processes, having value to democratic
constituencies?

How can the researchers evaluate the contributions of actual and proposed administrative
reforms, for example, those premised on competition or on outcome measurement, to
governmental performance?

What are the positive and normative implications of different approaches to situating the
power to allocate and take risks with public resources?

Within the larger picture of democratic governance of legislatures, of public and
administrative law, of fiscal and budgetary policies, of administrative structures, and of
policy designs—how can the researchers answer the question: in what ways and to what
extent do institutions, leadership, and management matter in the creation of effective,
accountable democratic states?

How can researchers mobilise theoretical literatures and systematic empirical methods to
assist in these analyses so that findings accumulate to durable insights?
Most of these probing questions about NPM have not received adequate answers. Answering
these questions would at least have established NPM as a strong component in the discipline of
Public Management and an influential part of the domain - but NPM has failed over a period of
time to live up to this expectation. Sustained consideration of such questions is the legacies
that will forever be differentiating between the genuine character of the field of Public
Management and that of NPM which is not based on a theoretical framework.
43
The character of NPM has created a platform for authors in the field of public management and
administration to dismiss it as unsustainable, because it lacks the necessary basic knowledge
and tenets of the discipline of Public Management and Administration. As an example, most
governments are anxious to be efficient and effective; so they hastily embrace performance
measurement as a panacea for ineffectiveness and inefficiency. This they do by documenting or
celebrating this rote response – but unfortunately this is not an adequate scholarly response to
justify an NPM initiative as a tenet in the field of Public Management and Administration. For
an NPM initiative to succeed it needs a strong government reform programme – meaning that
managerial success in the public sector requires stronger political will to achieve set objective in
influencing the politics - administration dichotomy.
Some governments and in particular administrators argue that performance-oriented
government may currently have the power of fashionable doctrine by introducing and
advancing NPM philosophy as a quick way to assist them to perform effectively. For a period of
time, public institutions and managers may actually perform better without the pressure of
accountability. But public administration research must be able to account for governmental
outcomes, and improvement must be measured, if the requirement of performance-driven
governance is to remain relevant, be sustained by knowledge and the statecraft derived from it.
Using the concept of governance that recognises a consistent theoretical argument, that is
based on tested theories and principles of public administration and in a manner analogous to
the role theory plays in the study of business strategy – perhaps this approach can inevitably
strengthen public administration's capacity to ask and answer the right questions. Instead of
creating more questions as it has been the case with NPM. Lynn (1998: 236) suggests that
public administration must develop a theory linking politics and administration just as business
administration conceptually links markets and firm behaviour. In a way it means to build a
foundation for the discipline of Public Administration to produce more knowledge beyond the
post-NPM-era and be accountable, which seems to be one of the biggest criticisms of NPM.
44
2.3.2. Accountability in New Public Management [NPM]
A wide variety of market-based concepts summarised under the heading of New Public
Management [NPM] have entered government, in particular local authorities and urban politics
(Pollitt 1990). NPM or what Peters (1996: 28) calls “generic government” because the NPM
philosophy maintains that management is an essentially non-sector-specific function;
emphasises the need for competition among different service providers and the empowerment
of customers (Osborne & Gaebler 1992: 19-20). The overall goal of NPM is to create a publicchoice-style, market like exchange between the producers and consumers of urban services in
which consumer choice, rather than preferences among elected officials, decides what services
they will be offered and by whom. The focus on costs; efficiency; demand and professional
management are the centerpieces of the NPM strategy – this strategy advocates managerial
supremacy.
Managerial governance which is a concept advanced by NPM theory also referred to as the
“managerial revolution”. It emphasises professional participation over elite political
involvement. The NPM slogan of “letting the managers manage” (Osborne and Gaebler 1992:
19-20) is an example of the assumption that politics is not a priority in NPM. According to Pierre
(1999: 380) managerial governance draws on a wide variety of instruments – for instance it
uses contracts with profit making organisations in the provision of selected public services, new
strategies of recruitment to managerial positions in the public sector, increased discretion to
these positions, internal markets and other forms of competition both within the public sector
and between public and private providers [i.e. PPP’s], and a redefinition of the role for elected
politicians. South Africa has seen the emergence of Public Private partnerships [PPPs] in the
public sector.
No systematic evaluation [test of accountability] of NPM and the “managerial revolution” in
public service production has become apparent. Managerial governance probably has assisted
in increasing the efficiency in service production, not least because it has brought in private-
45
sector expertise into the public sector. With regard to the efficiency of internal markets and
customer choice, the effects are more uncertain. NPM is a contested reform strategy in
jurisdictions where Rechtstaat ideals still dominate the organisational culture of the public
sector (Peters & Pierre 1998: 14).
In the introductory section of this chapter it was argued (Crous, 2004: 575) that government
and the activities it undertakes to deliver services are the result of political dynamics. This view
is supported by Thornhill (2006(b): 805) that one core issue distinguishes Public Administration
from other related disciplines is the political milieu within which its operational activities are
performed – the approach of NPM has been considered to be alien and mis-aligned to values
that define the character, discipline and domain of Public Administration.
There are three main concerns regarding NPM that have, to a large extent exposed its inability
to foster and entrench accountability in its models of reform. In this section of the chapter, the
three concerns will be discussed. They are:
i.
NPM’s inability to define alternative models of accountability;
ii.
NPM places the public sector in an undesirable permanent dependency-mode on
professional management resources inside and outside its agencies and organisations;
and
iii.
Bringing NPM into urban politics assumes a degree of organisational flexibility in local
government that does not exist in various countries.
As argued by Osborne and Gaebler (1992: 19-21) the first common problem in New Public
Management [NPM] has been its inability to define alternative models of accountability.
Although NPM advocates argue that managerial governance offers citizens a more direct and
influential input on the governance of urban public services compared to the traditional system
of local government, they also tend to be quiet on how their model defines political control and
accountability (Peters & Pierre 1998) – which are the cornerstones and pillars in the classical
46
discipline of Public Administration. The important requirement is that politicians must be held
accountable for service production although they may have virtually no control due to
legislation of Public Private Partnerships [PPPs].
The second problem is that managerial governance as outlined by NPM theory, places the
public sector in an undesirable permanent dependency-mode on professional management
resources inside and outside its organisations. Traditional qualities associated with public
employment such as education in Public Administration and law do not carry much weight as
business management ideals are to govern public service production and delivery. To some
extent, this may well be a short-term problem. However, bringing in expertise from the private
sector may be just as much a problem as a solution because these professional groups usually
fail to understand the public sector’s emphasis with due process. The introduction of NPM thus
means a clash of two distinctly different organisational and professional cultures that will not
be resolved easily. The argument by Pierre (1999: 379) is that the values that are indigenous to
the public sector and public office are alien to strict business management practices and vice
versa.
The third and final concern is that, bringing NPM into urban politics assumes a degree of
organisational flexibility in local government that does not exist in some countries – in
particular South Africa. Citizenry’s choice introduces an element of considerable uncertainty to
local government, which has far-reaching organisational consequences. For instance, offering
parents’ choice with regard to which school they should send their children means that
government can no longer plan education spending in different geographical areas with the
same degree of accuracy as in the previously used planning system, which was based on
demographic data. To cope with this uncertainty, public organisations must become flexible
enough to be able to reallocate resources on a fairly short notice to those service areas where
the demand is the biggest. Alongside the NPM campaign there is a similar need for more
flexible government (Peters 1996: Chapter 4).
47
Extrapolating the fact is that managerial governance [i.e. NPM], accords only a minimal role to
politicians. The emphasis of this governance method is on output performance according to
private management standards. Managerial governance [i.e. NPM] blurs the public-private
distinction, not least on an ideological level, by portraying service producers and the citizenry as
actors in markets and by identifying market-based criteria as the main criteria for evaluation –
which is alien to the discipline and domain of Public Administration (Pierre, 1999: 379). A lack of
accountability in NPM has been one of its biggest failures in the public sector, which may have
led to its demise. Academics and practitioners in the discipline and domain of Public
Administration have moved beyond NPM and are now referring to the post-NPM-era.
2.3.3. Post-New Public Management [NPM] era
An important outcome and an emerging issue from NPM and in particular, one of its
components has been ‘agencyfication’ of the public sector environment – which, according to
Bhatta (2003: 4), refers to the practice of creating types of agencies in the pursuit of the
attainment of government goals. To a considerable extent, the composite theme in NPM has also
been the role of agencies and public entities – both refer to one and the same thing.
After the 1990s, which is also the period defined as the post-New Public Management [NPM]
era, one of the key developments in public management has been the rise of autonomous
agencies which are largely mandated to provide services to the citizenry. At the same time they
must not be in control of senior government officials and public representatives [i.e. Ministers].
The reasons for creating autonomous bodies vary, but they usually concern managerial
autonomy of public entities known as State Owned Enterprises [SOEs] in the South African
public sector environment - with specialised functions or deliberate intention of separating
policy implementation and policy advice from policy-making. Other reasons include enabling
collaborative partnerships between different public organisations (Bhatta, 2003: 7).
48
Only if the New Public Management [NPM]’s academic admirers would avoid the trap of
becoming a cult of programmed believers, then NPM would have three constructive legacies for
the field of public administration (Lynn, 1998: 231), namely:

a stronger emphasis on performance-motivated administration and inclusion in the
administrative canon of performance oriented institutional arrangements, structural forms,
and managerial doctrines fitted to particular contexts, thus, advances in the state of public
management;

an international dialogue on and a stronger comparative dimension to the study of state
design and administrative reform; and

the integrated use of economic, sociological, social-psychological, and other advanced
conceptual models and heuristics in the study of public institutions and management, with
the potential to strengthen the field's scholarship and the possibilities for theory-grounded
practice.
It could therefore be argued that NPM academic admirers are programmed believers in the
notion of NPM and in the process they fail to bring the concept of NPM into the mainstream of
Public Administration and Management as a solid subfield with a constructive legacy – hence
the focus beyond NPM. There are particular thematic areas and solid themes that are emerging
in the post-NPM era. According to Bhatta (2003: 2) it is now becoming increasingly apparent
that the application of the contents of New Public Management [NPM] is being crystallised
under three emerging themes: (i) a re-emphasis on the values of public sector standards and
ethical behaviour; (ii) a fresh look at how the centre of government can be strengthened so as
to not only veer away from the apparent haphazard and vertical-silo nature of policy-making
and service delivery, but also to provide much-needed coherence and impetus on instituting a
whole-of-government ethos in the public sector and (iii) the application of the principles of
good corporate governance in the business, economic, and public management domains.
49
The current study of performance monitoring and evaluation will be focusing on the third
theme, which puts emphasis on applying principles of good corporate governance in the public
administration and management domain. In orthodox terms, corporate governance denotes
the manner in which corporations are administered and managed. It is usually taken in contrast
with public sector governance, which refers to administration and management of public sector
agencies. Corporate governance principles are now found in the post-NPM to be applicable in
the broader public sector, where non-public service agencies are clustered and used in the
delivery and procurement of government services. This situation has led to a point where
academics and practitioners in the discipline of Public Administration must assess and evaluate
the domain and the practice of the discipline in a contemporary state.
2.4. The domain of Public Administration in a contemporary state, with specific
reference to South Africa
In the early 1990s the discipline and domain of Public Administration in South Africa had to
consider the so called New Public Administration Initiative [NPAI] which was published in what
came to be known as Mount Grace I. The first major gathering to debate NPAI happened in
1991. Anne McLennan termed the process the advent of ‘democratic administration’
(McLennan, 1997: 120). The focus of the Mount Grace Conference deliberations was the
character of the post-apartheid public service, the nature of appropriate public sector training
for the new administration, and the state of the Public Administration discipline that was to
serve in the post-apartheid public sector.
In reflecting on the state of the discipline, participants argued that the current theory, teaching
and practice of Public Administration were in crisis. Specifically, teaching and practice was too
descriptive: lacking sufficient analytical, explanatory and predictive techniques; reductionist:
restricting and reifying the domain of Public Administration to one view of the administrative
processes only (Cameron & Milne, 2009: 386).
50
Hoag (2012: 123) argues that with the advent of democracy and the broad transformation of
state institutions into integrated, national and inclusive entities - the South African public
administration has purportedly entered a new era that is based on principles of equity and
meritocracy. While South Africa has adopted these policies, as part of a New Public
Management [NPM] paradigm, administrative reform has been largely driven by domestic
actors. Unlike many other African countries, South Africa’s adoption of NPM did not depend on
the compulsion of international financial institutions and donors. Instead, the South African
academics and practitioners initiated change in how they approached public administration in
the new post-apartheid era.
The NPAI was a process, an initiative, a concept and a commitment to change. It was proposed
that the initiative captures the spirit of transition in South Africa and as the potential for the
future. Details are contained in the Mount Grace Papers: The New Public Administration
Initiative and the Mount Grace Consultation. The debate on NPAI was centrally a
reconsideration of the study of Public Administration. It proposed the extension of the areas of
interest to civic, non-governmental and community organisations.
The questions posed, include whether a new mode of doing was required to meet the needs of
the new demands by the newly liberated society (Thornhill, 2006: 800-801). The Initiative was a
clear call to reconsider not only the extent of the study of Public Administration. It also
introduced a debate for a paradigm shift in the study of the Discipline. It was argued that the
traditional descriptive approach to the study emphasising processes and procedures should be
changed to a value-oriented public management approach. The attention in the study of the
Discipline and in the public administrative practices should thus be on the importance of the
implementation of policies and social programmes to cater for the needs of the newly
demarcated and fully integrated society.
51
The deliberations indicate that the study of the Discipline should emphasise rigorous scientific
analysis, explanation and prediction; be socially and professionally relevant; and be
development oriented. It also highlights the need to reconsider the extent and nature of the
services for which the state has to accept responsibility. Academics entered the debate on the
teaching of Public Administration with a view to improving the quality of the role the state
could play in society. This implied that it became necessary to review the paradigm of Public
Administration. It already paved the way for an effort to ensure that the domain of the
Discipline will be relevant and strengthen the link between the academic discipline and the
practice (Thornhill, 2006 (b): 800).
In 2000, Mout Grace II was convened. The deliberations demanded of academics to debate the
Discipline; to reconsider the training needs of the public officials and to avoid falling into the
trap of the finite needs fallacy; the competition for scarce resource opportunities fallacy; the
one best way fallacy; the unidisciplinary fallacy, and the orthodox fallacy. Mount Grace II was in
fact a clarion call for academics to critically assess their contributions to the development of the
public service adhering to particular community values, but intent on providing efficient and
effective services to meet the changing needs of society (Thornhill, 2006 (b): 801).
Based on an overview of journal articles from 1994 to 2006 in two academic journals in the field
of public administration in South Africa, [Journal of Public Administration and Administratio
Publica], Cameron and Milne arrived at a conclusion that there was very little theory
development in the Discipline. Further, they held a view that most research was descriptive and
normative and there was very little testing of validity or causality (Cameron & Milne, 2009:
391). The study of performance monitoring and evaluation [PME] is aimed at the development
of public services at a municipal level to ensure that delivery of services adhere to particular
needs and values of communities. It is a study that tests validity and causality in urban informal
settlements [UIS] found in three selected metropolitan municipalities in Gauteng, South Africa.
52
2.5. Performance monitoring and evaluation [PME] as a reform programme
The possibility exists that NPM could be equated to administrative reform (Carstens &
Thornhill, 2000: 177). According to thesaurus dictionary - reform [c.1300], means "to convert
into another and better form," from O.Fr. reformer [12c.], from L. reformare "to form again,
change, alter", from re-"again" + formare "to form". The noun means, the improvement or
amendment of what is wrong, corrupt, unsatisfactory: e.g. social reform.
The argument that will be presented in this section is that performance monitoring and
evaluation [PME] is an NPM initiative supported by a strong reform programme that has been
given authority by political leaders. It has been discussed that NPM was introduced during
reform programme in the 1980s in some industrialised countries [i.e. United Kingdom, United
States, Australia, New Zealand]. Some NPM measures could only be effectively applied when
supported by an official reform programme, which implied that politicians must also pursue
reform goals and regard NPM as a means to attain such goals.
In South Africa, PME has been introduced by the Presidency under the Department of
Performance Monitoring and Evaluation as a reform programme. The Ministry of Performance,
Monitoring and Evaluation task is to set expectations of improved outcomes across government
and manage a results-oriented approach across the three spheres and other organs of state. It
will review the data architecture of government so that the required performance information
is generated. The three main focus areas of the Ministry of Performance, Monitoring and
Evaluation will be (SA - The Presidency, 2009: 19):

Management of outcomes through Ministerial accountability for improving delivery
performance: The Ministry will play a supporting role in establishing the performance
agreements with Ministers/MECs and sectoral delivery agreements, focusing on a small
set of outcomes and a selected group of outputs. Ministers/MECs. This may also include
legislation on programme evaluation and other M&E dimensions.
53

Institutionalising the Government-wide Monitoring and Evaluation system: The
Ministry’s work will build on existing initiatives with a renewed focus on improving
input, output and outcome measures. The capacity building strategy for GWM&E will be
strengthened to accelerate development of technical skills required for outcomesfocused performance management.

Unblocking service delivery: The delivery unit will assist in a limited number of
institutional environments to help turn around blockages and non-delivery.
The Green Paper on improving government performance intimates that:
to improve service delivery standards …we must do more with less. The focus has to be on value
for money. Wasteful and unproductive expenditure and corruption cannot be afforded…. This
part of the process is about improving our efficiency; it is about reducing the unit cost of the
service we provide. Ensuring that the outputs deliver the outcomes that have been politically
chosen, is a measure on whether government is being effective. Genuine change based on
critical self-reflection is required. That means changes in how we behave not just superficial
adjustments to existing processes, systems and formats.
Similar to industrialised countries in their reform programmes of the 1980s, South Africa is
starting to focus on reform programmes that will assist government to improve efficiency;
implement cost and programmes reduction and to become effective. Performance monitoring
and evaluation is considered as a reform programme that will ensure that government achieves
its reform objectives. Reform refers to the process or procedure of becoming better by
removing or abandoning imperfections faults and errors (Thornhill, 1994: 4).
The argument of Thornhill above, is that the objectively perceivable imperfections, faults and
errors must be a motive or rationale for reform – which the green paper advocates. The fact of
the matter is that not all political bodies, or governments, would regard the same set of
54
circumstances as imperfections or faults. The decisions depend on their value systems and
political persuasion of what constitutes acceptable processes and outputs. It can also be argued
that not all political institutions have the political courage and support to attempt to take action
to change undesirable imperfections, faults or errors. Only a legitimate government, which has
an electoral mandate and political support, would have the strength and opportunity to
channel; muster resources and rely on electoral mandate to change undesirable situations;
inefficiencies and ineffectiveness in its systems.
According to Carstens & Thornhill (2000: 178) - countries such as the United Kingdom, Australia,
New Zealand and Canada, which introduced administrative reform since the 1980s have two
focus areas. Firstly an unambiguous demand for results in terms of efficiency, effectiveness,
and quality of service, and secondly, the replacement of highly centralised hierarchical
structures with decentralised management structures. Moreover, reform is a government
action as it has been alluded to in the Green Paper in the paragraph above. Karim (1992:31)
argues that politicians and public managers could lead the process, or have a strong personal
influence, but for a reform action to be successful it must be able to generate the continuous
support of politicians and senior officials.
The South African government through the office of the President, in the Department of
Performance Monitoring and Evaluation [DPME] has set twelve priority outcomes for
government since 2011. They are:
i.
Basic Education: Quality basic education,
ii.
Health: A long and healthy life for all South Africans,
iii.
Safety: All people in South Africa are and feel safe,
iv.
Employment: Decent employment through inclusive economic growth,
v.
Skills: Skilled and capable workforce to support an inclusive growth path,
vi.
Economic Infrastructure: An efficient, competitive and responsive economic
infrastructure network,
55
vii.
Rural Development: Vibrant, equitable, sustainable rural communities contributing
towards food security for all,
viii.
Integrated Human Settlements: Sustainable human settlements and improved quality of
household life,
ix.
Local Government: Responsive, accountable, effective and efficient Local Government
system,
x.
Environment: Protect and enhance our environmental assets and natural resources,
xi.
Internal and External Relations: Create a better South Africa, a better Africa and a better
world,
xii.
Public Service: An efficient, effective and development oriented public service and an
empowered, fair and inclusive citizenship.
These priority outcomes are important in ensuring that there is reform in the three spheres of
government which will enhance service delivery for citizens. Outcome nine [ix] is an area of
focus in this study – PME contributes to a responsive, accountable, effective and efficient local
government system.
Performance monitoring and evaluation [PME] is a reform initiative set out by the Presidency
under the Department of PME and one of its key responsibilities is to conduct performance
monitoring and evaluation on the twelve outcomes; as set by the office of the President. The
Presidency expects that this reform will enhance the performance of government service
delivery programmes and have an effect on the behaviour of individuals involved [i.e. public
officials and political office bearers]. In his foreword on the National Policy Evaluation
Framework [NPEF, 2011]; the Minister of PME Mr. Collins Chabane states:
We have moved to establish plans for our priority outcomes, to deliver them and to monitor
them. This policy framework provides the next essential part of the jigsaw, setting out the basis
for a government-wide evaluation system to be applied across the public sector, but initially
focusing on our priority areas. It should assist to provide a marked step-up in performance of
the public sector and contribute to the establishment of a culture of continuous improvement.
56
The framework for PME in South Africa is based on the section 195 in the Constitution which
mandates inter alia that in the principles of public administration:
[i] efficient, economic and effective use of resources must be promoted;
[ii] must be development-oriented;
[iii] must be accountable; and
[iv] transparency must be fostered by providing the public with timely, accessible and accurate
information.
It is international practice that reform actions be introduced through the direct involvement of
politicians whose actions are aimed at improving the operations of government and public
administration to attain national goals. According to Quah, (1992: 121) administrative reform
requires changes on two important fronts in particular [i] the structure and procedures of the
public bureaucracy (i.e. reorganisation or the institutional aspect) and [ii] the attitudes and
behaviour of the public bureaucrats involved i.e. the attitudinal aspect. It is further argued by
Carsterns & Thornhill (2000: 178) that the scope of reform interventions includes changing the
operational structures of governments, namely their departments, altering their work methods
and procedures and the behaviour and attitudes of the managers and operational employees.
Reform could be applied comprehensively spanning the total public sector, or selectively.
Reform interventions are measures which are related to the reform goals and objectives of
politicians to deliberately change the status quo. However, not all initiatives of public managers
to change the status quo are reform interventions. Administrative reform must be sanctioned
by politicians, but are often initiated by senior public officials.
For this reform to be effective - it would require relevant policy, procedures, re-structuring,
human resource training and adjustment of processes in administration – which have already
been effected by the South African government to a considerable extent since 2009. This must
take place in all spheres of government. Managerial issues will also have to be considered with
the authority by politicians and legislators. An important consideration that must be noted, is
57
that to change the undesirable status quo is not an easy task. The approach of reformers during
the reform process, which could be incremental improvements or a strategic departure from
the status quo, determines the nature and extent of the reform interventions. This means that
a wrong approach or a lack of understanding or support from both the public and public
officials can stall reform and have detrimental effects.
For reforms to be successful, politicians who are the main role-players must make sure that
there is support from both the public and the officials responsible in the administration.
Although support of officials in government is necessary, it is at a secondary level – the most
important stakeholder, who should support any government reform, are the citizens as thy are
the recipients of the services produced by the public institution.
It has been argued that government interventions which are introduced to attain reform goals
similar to performance monitoring and evaluation [PME] - are known as New Public
Management [NPM]. However, NPM is only the utilisation of a particular style of management
to effect these reform goals – as it has been the case with the introduction of PME in the South
African public administration environment. It has been indicated that PME is applied within a
reform framework where the national reform goals are clear and politicians, in particular the
Presidency and the Minister of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation are leading the process.
Public managers, who aspire to introduce NPM initiatives supported by reform interventions
[i.e. PME], could find it difficult to implement it successfully if the head of state is not
committed and a broad political will to support it, is lacking. Carstens & Thornhill (2000: 190)
argue that South Africa must differentiate between reform, and NPM initiatives, which was
introduced during reform programmes since the 1980s in some industrialised countries. Some
NPM measures could only be effectively applied when supported by an official reform
programme, which implies that politicians must pursue reform goals and regard NPM as a
means to attain such goals and not an end in itself. This is the case in this study as argued in the
58
preceding paragraphs. One of the effective policy application conduits to realise reform
programmes is to infuse them into governance.
2.6. The concept of governance and good governance
The focus on government has broadened with the diffusion of responsibilities and capacities for
action within society. As a result, the meaning of governance has broadened with the diffusion
of responsibilities in society to a point where even the concept governance has the adjective
good added. Gildenhuys and Knipe (2000: 91) argued that the adjective “good” is almost always
used and appended next to governance like “effective” or “sound” governance.
2.6.1. Governance
The concept of governance entered the literature of Public Administration in the late 1980s.
There was, unfortunately, no clear definition attached to the term (cf. Naidoo, 2004: 104). As a
result, the term governance has different meanings attached to it, for instance the World Bank
defines governance as the process of policy making through active and cohesive discussion
among policy makers who are interconnected through a broad range of networks (Kooiman
2003; World Bank 1994). Lynn, L. E., Jr.; Heinrich, C.J. & Hill ,C.J. (2000: 234) argues that the
term governance is widely used in both the public and the private sectors. This characterises
both global and local arrangements, and refer to both formal and informal norms and
understanding. Because the term has strong intuitive appeal, precise definitions are seldom
thought to be necessary.
The United Nations has a closely associated and similar definition, which states that governance
is a comprehensive concept referring to the combined effort of political and public institutions
in conjunction with the private sector [including non-governmental organisations] in providing
services to society. Thornhill (2006: 803) argues that governance is an indication of a significant
59
new development in the practice of public administration, and by implication also in the
Discipline.
According to Najem & Hetherington (2003: 2) the concept of governance has been expanded by
the World Bank and other international aid donors, non-governmental organisations,
academics and Western governments and politicians to encompass a much broader and more
generalised range of ideas and policies, to the extent that it is not always clear what, exactly, is
meant when one is using the term. A more robust perspective on governance has been coined
by a group of authors - Suk Kim; Halligan; Cho; Oh & Eikenberry (2005: 647). They argue that
the meaning of governance originated from a collective but different schools of thought. Their
argument is that by its nature, governance is a multiple-stakeholder process (Hemmati 2002)
and a function of the many ways that individuals and institutions, both public and private,
manage their common affairs [Commission on Global Governance 1995]. The UNDP (1995)
states that the concept of good governance as it is currently used, include all of the following:
i.
economic liberalisation and the creation of market friendly environments;
ii.
transparency and accountability with respect to both economic and political decisionmaking;
iii.
political liberalisation, particularly democratic reforms;
iv.
rule of law and the elimination of corruption; the promotion of civil society;
v.
the introduction of fundamental human rights guarantees, especially with respect to
political rights such as freedom of expression, freedom of assembly and freedom from
arbitrary imprisonment; and
vi.
the adoption of policies designed to safeguard long-term global interests like education,
health and the environment.
It can be argued that the process and concept of governance includes actors beyond
government, including the market and civil society institutions. Rhodes (1997) asserts that
governance means there is no one centre, but multiple centres and no sovereign authority. For
some, this trend entails government transformed into governance (Albrow 2001), whereas for
60
others, governance complements rather than replaces government (Offe 2005). From all the
different interpretation it can be argued that the process and concept of governance is complex
and requires application based on context. For the purpose of this study the context is the local
sphere of government in a municipality.
2.6.2. Good governance
According to Kuye (2007: 560) the concept of good governance is the main determinant of
governance requirements in any modern state. Suk Kim; Halligan; Cho; Oh & Eikenberry (2005:
647 - 648) argue that good governance, efficient and effective public administration, are
necessary conditions to achieve sustainable development. They state that good governance is
indispensable for building peaceful, prosperous, and democratic societies and is marked by
several major characteristics. Its components are transparency, participation, consensus
orientation, accountability, responsiveness, effectiveness and efficiency, and equity and
inclusiveness in accordance with the rule of law. According to Suk Kim et al. (2005: 648), key
aspects include:
i.
government reform and innovation,
ii.
local governance,
iii.
transparency,
iv.
participation, and
v.
social integration and development
The first and second key aspects of good governance – as they relate to government reform and
local governance are relevant and important in this study of performance monitoring and
evaluation [PME]. Their importance cannot be overemphasised because it refers directly to the
critical aspects of reducing costs by implementing a more centralised decision making process
and creating a more flexible and responsive local sphere of government for the benefit of local
residents. In this study, governance will be considered and accepted as “good” if the identified
61
metropolitan municipalities in particular and the local sphere of government in South Africa
have moved to a level where it is a constitutional requirement to deliver effective and efficient
basic municipal services to the communities they serve; especially in communities where
people live under conditions of squalor, poverty and underdevelopment – like those found in
urban informal settlements adjacent to metropolitan municipalities in Gauteng, South Africa.
In 2002, the report of the Secretary-General of the UN on the Role of Public Administration in
the implementation of the Millennium Declaration [A/57/262 - E/2002/82], argues that the
problem many developing countries face is not only how to generate more resources, but also
how to ensure that resources are utilised efficiently and towards projects that benefit the
neediest in society. Improving public resource mobilisation and management are above all an
issue of good governance, and not just a technical matter (United Nations, 2002: 1).
In the study of Public Administration, the presence has to be acknowledged of so-called private
sector phenomena e.g. stakeholder interest; shareholders; risks; and client preferences. This is
particularly obvious in the municipal sphere of service rendering through public-private
partnerships and public entities as provided for in the relevant municipal legislation. Reference
was made to The Local Government: Municipal Systems Act, 2000 and the Local Government:
Municipal Finance Management Act, 2003 which refers to the new concept of governance
relating to the extended area of operation of the public sector.
The local sphere of government has experienced increased participation of the private sector in
the so called Public-Private-Partnerships [PPPs]. These partnerships are used for small and big
infrastructure delivery as innovative methods and value-for-money solutions. As an example
the South African government has developed what is called National Treasury’s PPP Manual as
a way of regulating PPP project cycles for government at all three spheres, outlining policy and
providing procedural clarity (South Africa - National Treasury, 2004: I).
This current way of considering the provision and procurement of public services has also
ushered in a dimension of corporate governance principles found in the King I - 1994, II – 2002
62
and III - 2009 reports - which were originally aimed at the private sector. The King reports are
now also applicable to section 239 institutions as outlined in the South African Constitution,
1996. Section 239 defines an organ of state which includes institutions in one of the three
spheres of government i.e. department of state or administration. A municipality and its
entities are also part of section 239 institutions as areas of interest in this study.
2.6.3. The King Report on Corporate Governance and implication to the sphere of local
government
In July 1993, the Institute of Directors [IOD] in South Africa requested a retired Supreme Court
of South Africa’s judge Mervyn E. King SC, to chair a committee on corporate governance. Judge
King viewed this as an opportunity to explain to the newly established democratic South African
public on the working of a free economy. The King committee's report was to be the first report
of its kind in South Africa (King I, 1994: chapter 1).
According to authors Vaughn & Verstegen Ryan (2006: 506) the history of corporate
governance in South Africa can be traced to the early 1990s as a response to the changing
political landscape, a shift in corporate control structures and a desire to be competitive in a
global market. A committee commissioned by the IOD issued the King Report on Corporate
Governance (Kakabadse and Korac-Kakabadse, 2002). A second, more comprehensive King
Committee Report [King II] was issued in 2002 and the third in 2009. The authors argue that the
primary objective of the King Report is to promote the highest standards of corporate
governance in South Africa by advocating an integrated approach to governance in the interest
of a wide range of stakeholders (Barrier, 2003; Kakabadse and Korac-Kakabadse, 2002).
The King I report is applicable to all companies listed on the main board of the Johannesburg
Stock Exchange, in particular large public entities as defined by the Companies Act, 61 of 1973
of South Africa [now repealed by Companies Act, 71 of 2008]; banks, financial and insurance
companies as defined by the Financial Advisory and Intermediary Services Act, 37 of 2002; and
63
large unlisted companies. It defined “large” as companies with shareholder equity over R50
million, but encouraged all companies to adopt the code (King I, 1994: Chapter 20).
King II, in addition to those types of organisations listed in King I, is applicable to departments
of State or national, provincial or local government administration falling under the MFMA, 56
of 2003 and public institutions or functionaries exercising a power or performing a function in
terms of the Constitution, or exercising a public power or performing a public function in terms
of any legislation, excluding courts or judicial officers. In the introductory part of the report it
quotes the words of Sir Adrian Cadbury in the Corporate Governance Overview, 1999 World
Bank Report, he stated:
Corporate governance is concerned with holding the balance between economic and social
goals and between individual and communal goals…the aim is to align as nearly as possible the
interests of individuals, corporations and society
As it was the case with King I, King II encourages all companies to adopt the applicable
principles from the code (King II, 2002: 7). The key principles of the King II report cover the
following areas about directors and their responsibility: risk management; internal audit;
integrated sustainability reporting and accounting and auditing. The King II (King II, 2002: 11-12)
committee identifies seven primary characteristics of good corporate governance:
i.
discipline,
ii.
transparency,
iii.
independence,
iv.
accountability,
v.
responsibility,
vi.
fairness, and
vii.
social responsibility.
In contrast to King I and II, the King III is applicable to all entities, public, private and non-profit.
King encourages all entities to adopt the King III principles and explain how these have been
64
applied or are not applicable. The code of governance is applicable from March 2010 (King III,
2009). The report incorporates a number of global emerging governance trends:
i.
Alternative dispute resolution;
ii.
Risk-based internal audit;
iii.
Shareholder approval of non-executive directors’ remuneration; and
iv.
Evaluation of board and directors’ performance.
It also incorporated a number of new principles to address elements not previously included in
the King reports:
i.
IT governance
ii.
Business Rescue
iii.
Fundamental and affected transactions in terms of a director’s responsibilities during
mergers, acquisitions and amalgamations.
The code of corporate governance is not enforced through legislation. However, due to
evolutions in South African law many of the principles put forward in King II are now embodied
as law in the Companies Act, 71 of 2008. In addition to the Companies Act, there are additional
applicable statutes that encapsulate some of the principles of King III such as the MFMA, 56 of
2003, PFMA, 1 of 1999 and the Promotion of Access to Information Act, 2 of 2000. This is
important and relevant to the study due to its applicability to a municipality and its council as a
minimum standard for good corporate governance.
2.6.3.1. The Business Judgement Rule [BJR]
The King II committee developed and integrated its fundamental principles into tangible
guidelines for minimum standards of corporate governance. The report addresses the
accountability and responsibilities of boards and individual directors, along with the processes
of auditing and accounting, and offered a series of recommendations for further improvements
65
in South African corporate governance. It also introduced a rule called Business Judgement Rule
[BJR] (King II, 2002: 69).
Essentially, the rule protects directors against being held accountable for business decisions,
however unwise they subsequently turn out to have been, if they were made on an informed
basis, in good faith, and without any conflict of interest, and if the decision was rational at the
time in all the circumstances (King II, 2002: 70). According to the King II report, the business
judgment rule, based on this view, is not a general shield for directors. Their decisions exist
alongside their duty of care - which is an entirely separate and distinct, although
complementary concept. A separate analysis of whether or not a director has complied with the
duty of care is always necessary. This duty applies whether or not a business judgment has
been made. So, for instance, if the directors fail to monitor the affairs of the company, there
could be liability under the duty of care, and the business judgment rule would have no
application (King II, 2002: 70).
The Companies Act, 71 of 2008 [also known as ‘the new Act’] introduced the business judgment
rule [BJR] into South African company law for the first time. In South Africa, at common law,
directors are liable for negligence to the company, i.e. they have a duty of care, but are said not
to be liable for errors of judgment, taken on good faith. This last can also be expressed in a
different way. For instance, in Levin v Feld and Tweeds Ltd it was stated that it was no part of
the business of a Court to determine the wisdom of a course adopted by a company in the
management of its own affairs. In sum, the business judgment rule means that shareowners
should not be entitled to damages by reason of judgment calls made by directors, save in the
circumstances where the directors have failed to exercise business judgment on an informed
basis, with no conflict of interest and on a basis of the decision being rational in all the
circumstances at the time of the decision (King II, 2002: 70). The opposite will only apply if
reason was biased or made in bad faith [mala fides] and not on an informed basis.
66
According to Natasha Bouwman who is the Company Secretary and Legal Specialist at IOD [May
19, 2011 – Money Marketing], the [BJR] has been developed in the US and implemented there
effectively, in order to:

deter a risk-averse culture among directors as their liability increases. It is envisioned
that the rule could assist to prevent directors not taking part in risky activities that could
be beneficial to the company;

persuade competent individuals to take up the position of director;

avoid ‘judicial second guessing’: The evaluation of business decisions by judges after the
event is problematic because judges then have the benefit of hindsight – something the
directors did not have when making decisions; and

avoid shareholder management of the company and if certain decisions made by
directors are protected by means of the business judgement rule, shareholders will be
wary of bringing legal action against directors, owing to the potential of failing in their
action and the legal costs involved.
In essence, the business judgement rule [BJR] that is contained in the new Act, can be invoked
in instances where directors of companies in South Africa are faced with claims based on
breach of a director’s duty of care and skill, as well as claims based on breach of a director’s
fiduciary duties. The King I, II, III codes of good governance have been considered by the South
African government and their guiding principles are now also applied in the public sector. The
Business Judgment Rule [BJR] in the King Code is applicable to all organs of state (cf. section
239, Constitution, 1996).
Thornhill (2006 (b): 804) argues, that the [BJR] in the King Code means that councillors in a
municipality could personally be held accountable for decisions that turn out to be detrimental
to a particular community if a decision was taken without considering all the facts; was biased
and mala fides. This is a novel concept in the public sector and exemplifies the merging of the
traditional two clearly demarcated sectors each operating under rather different sets of ethical
guidelines and decision-making rules. Governance in contemporary society has created a
67
further need to reconsider the implications of the decision-making processes. The King Report
could be cited as a major deviation from the traditional concept of public sector decisionmakers not being accountable for decisions taken as a result of the political values attached to
the facts in coming to particular conclusions.
2.7. Conclusion
Discussions in this chapter have clarified that the study of performance monitoring and
evaluation [PME] is indeed located in the discipline of Public Administration. It was argued that
PME is an action performed under the guidance of management and an implementation
dimension used by the public sector to obtain value for money in programmes and projects
they undertake.
An important feature in the chapter that was highlighted is that performance monitoring and
evaluation [PME] is a central tool for the government reform programme used by the
Presidency in South Africa to manage interventions; improve practice; ensure efficiency;
effectiveness and accountability. PME is connected to policy implementation – conversely, it
can therefore be argued that PME ensures that policy is implemented and outcomes are
evaluated and monitored to give results.
It is important to mention, that the study will be specific in investigating whether government
policy [GWM&E] is implemented through the introduction of performance monitoring and
evaluation [PME] to assess Impact Evaluation [IE] in the service delivery budget implementation
plans [SDBIP] of the identified metropolitan municipalities - as they relate to the provision of
basic municipal services especially in the urban informal settlements [UIS].
In this chapter, the debates about the role of pre-and-post-NPM were extensively discussed
and how the post-NPM era has produced a theme that is a critical aspect of administration and
management in the public sector. Specific reference was made to the concepts of governance
68
and how corporate governance principles of the private sector have now been applied and
relate to issues in the public sector - in particular the King report’s business judgement rule
[BJR] and its implications on section 239 institutions [i.e. a municipal council]. The BJR can be
applied where politicians [i.e. councillors] in a municipal council are found to be acting in
contravention of the rule.
The discussions in the chapter and arguments with regards to the important issue of what must
exactly constitute the themes that will define the discipline and domain of Public
Administration or whether is it still relevant to consider some aspects of NPM – were
highlighted and extrapolated. An issue that could be emphasised in the different discussions in
the chapter is that the key to reform in the public sector governance remains the level of strong
political will and authority. The next chapter will consider the principles and essence of
performance monitoring and evaluation [PME].
69
CHAPTER 3: PRINCIPLES OF PERFORMANCE MONITORING AND EVALUATION
3.1. Introduction
Performance measurement is not new (Bouckaert, 1994: 90) – the indication is that it is as old
as the discipline of Public Administration itself. In the nineteenth century Woodrow Wilson
wrote about the need to design an administrative system that will perform well against
efficiency criteria and F.W. Taylor advocated a generic approach towards measuring the
efficiency of workers (Dunsire, 1973). However, interest in the study of measuring of public
sector performance became more advanced over the last quarter century and developed along
several dimensions (Bouckaert, 1994: 90). A capable, efficient, effective and delivery orientated
state is essential to achieve sustainable socio-economic development. It has been established
that with the emergence of globalisation, there are growing pressures on governments and
organisations to be more responsive to the demands and needs of multifaceted stakeholders
and to be rigorous in good governance, accountability and transparency, greater development,
effectiveness, and delivery of tangible results.
According to Kusek & Rist (2004: xi), governments, parliaments, citizens, the private sector,
nongovernmental organisations [NGOs], civil society, international organisations, and donors
are among the stakeholders interested in improving performance. As demands for greater
accountability and real results have increased, there is an attendant need for enhanced resultsbased performance monitoring and evaluation [PME] of policies, programmes, and projects.
Performance monitoring and evaluation [PME] has become a powerful public management tool
[reform programme] that can be used to improve the way governments and organisations
achieve results. Just as governments need financial, human resource, and accountability
systems, governments also need effective performance feedback systems – which are required
for proper PME.
Performance monitoring and evaluation [PME] of government programmes in different spheres
have become important aspects of reform in modern public sector management in the post70
New Public Management [NPM]. In this chapter discussions will be narrowed to extrapolate the
South African context. The South African government in the office of the President has since
2009, prioritised PME as a necessary reform programme in pursuit of its agenda of socioeconomic transformation. The Department of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation [PME]
was established to implement this new reform and associated policies in all spheres of
government.
Transformation is different from reform. Originally, the word transformation according to
Thesaurus dictionary was conceptualised in 1400–50s. It originates from Late Latin (stem of
trānsfōrmātiō) change of shape. It means to change in form, appearance, nature, or character.
PME is therefore a reform programme in a transformed political environment of local
government since 2000, when the new system of local government was introduced in South
Africa.
In this chapter, a debate on the essence and principles of PME will be the main issue. It is
important to give context to the debate in the chapter by repeating the words of the South
African Minister of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation Collins Chabane, in particular his
foreword in the National Policy Evaluation [NEPF]; he stated:
“If we are to improve our performance we have to reflect on what we are doing, what we are
achieving against what we set out to achieve, and why deviations are occurring, or unexpected
results occurring. We cannot advance without making mistakes on the way, but we must
evaluate and learn from our successes and our mistakes. Without this we cannot improve.”
The Minister’s introduction provides a summary of the principle and essence of PME. An
important variable that affects PME in municipalities will be discussed; but more emphasis will
be on the essence of PME in the South African context and how the South African government
intends to implement this reform programme – especially in how metropolitan municipalities
measure their success in providing basic access and ameliorating the living conditions of people
in urban informal settlements [UIS] – which are the unit of analysis in this study.
71
3.2. Government-wide Monitoring and Evaluation (GWM&E)
The Constitution, 1996 in section 164 states:
Any matter concerning local government not dealt with in the Constitution may be prescribed by
national legislation or by provincial legislation within the framework of national legislation.
According to the National Evaluation Policy Framework [NEPF], the policy framework for the
Government-wide Monitoring and Evaluation System [GWM&E] was approved by Cabinet in
2005 and provides the overall framework for Monitoring and Evaluation systems in South
Africa. The policy framework draws from three data terrains for PME purposes, each of which is
the subject of a dedicated policy describing what is required for PME to be fully functional.
National Treasury has issued a Framework for Programme Performance Information [FPPI] and
Statistics South Africa [SSA] has issued the South African Statistics Quality Framework [SASQAF].
The National Evaluation Policy Framework [NEPF] completes the legislative framework for PME
in South Africa (NEPF 2011: 1).
The GWM&E Policy Framework recommends that departments and other organs of state
should first concentrate on monitoring outputs and immediate outcomes and use this as a
platform for evaluation of outcomes and impact. The aims of the Evaluations Framework are to
encourage government institutions to regularly evaluate their programmes, provide guidance
on the approach to be adopted when conducting evaluations and provide for the publication of
the results of evaluations (SA - The Presidency, 2009: 16). The GWM&E indicates that PME
processes can assist the public sector in three ways (SA - National Treasury, 2007: 8). These
include, [i] evaluating its performance and identifying the factors which contribute to its service
delivery outcomes, [ii] assist in providing an evidence base for public resource allocation
decisions and [iii] identify how challenges should be addressed and successes replicated in
government.
South Africa has recently commenced in terms of institutionalising performance monitoring and
evaluation [PME] in the public sector through legislation [i.e. The revised Green Paper on National
Planning] - work is underway to establish PME in spheres, especially the local government
72
sphere at a municipality. From a national perspective, the GWM&E system aims to enhance
PME systems by describing them and explaining how they relate to each other (SA - National
Treasury, 2007: 8). The GWM&E system has three components [Figure 3.1.]. They are (a)
programme performance information, (b) social, economic and demographic statistics and (c)
evaluations. The current study will focus on (c) – Evaluations.
Among its various expectations, the GWM&E system will produce the relevant outputs related
to municipalities. The anticipated outputs include improved quality of performance information
and analysis at programme level within national departments, provincial departments and
municipalities [inputs, outputs and outcomes]; improved monitoring and evaluation of
outcomes and impact across the whole of government through, government programmes of
action bi-monthly reports; annual country progress reports based on the national indicators;
projects to improve PME in selected institutions across government and capacity building
initiatives to build capacity for PME and foster a culture of governance and decision making
which responds to PME finding (SA - National Treasury, 2007: 9). In the empirical study in
chapter 6 – results will be compared to the country’s annual progress report based on national
indicators.
73
Figure 3.1 Components of Government-wide Monitoring and Evaluation system (National
Treasury, 2007: 9)
The National Treasury document on “Framework for Managing Programme Performance
Information” (2007:25), notes that:
The DPLG (now under the Department of Cooperative Governance - CoG post the 2009 elections)
is responsible for monitoring the performance of provincial governments and municipalities in
relation to the fulfilment of their constitutional functions, particularly delivery of minimum basic
services. The national department is aided in this function by the provincial departments of local
government. The Department is responsible for developing and implementing an integrated
monitoring, reporting and evaluation system for local government, and for supporting the
successful implementation of the Government-wide Monitoring and Evaluation System. The CoG
is also responsible for the development and implementation of monitoring, reporting and
evaluation of the performance of provincial departments of local government and individual
municipalities.
74
According to the Policy Framework for the GWM&E System, PME processes can assist the
public sector in evaluating its performance and identify factors which contribute to its service
delivery outcomes. PME is uniquely oriented towards providing its users with the ability to draw
causal connections between the choice of policy priorities, the resourcing of those policy
objectives, the programmes designed to implement them, the services actually delivered and
their ultimate impact on communities. PME assists in providing an evidence base for public
resource allocation decisions and in identifying how challenges should be addressed and
successes replicated (NEPF, 2011: 1).
The main issue emanating from NEPF (NEPF, 2011: 1) and which the current study of PME is
about – is that in South Africa, the need for more systematic evaluation of policy interventions
and expenditure programmes by government is urgent – considering the need for
implementation of the National Development Plan [NDP] and attaining the Millennium
Development Goals [MDGs]. Public role players need to have better information on whether
government is undertaking its activities in the right way to achieve its political mandate with set
objectives and to understand why the results of policy interventions and public expenditure are
below expectation. Some of the challenges at present concerning evaluation [i.e. as identified
by the Presidency], include:

lack of clear policy and strategic direction concerning the issue of evaluation;

a need to promote the use of knowledge from both evaluation and research;

improving the knowledge base;

confusion on what is evaluation, performance auditing, research;

evaluation work exists but is not necessarily known, either within departments or

externally;

lack of co-ordination between organisations and fragmentation of approaches;

poor quality plans making evaluation difficult;

inadequate use of evaluation, leading to a perception that it is a luxury;
75

a lack of institutionalisation of evaluation in the government system.
It is important to mention that national planning is related to PME. In the Green Paper: National
Strategic Planning, the former Minister in the Presidency: National Planning, Mr. Trevor Manuel
indicates that government proceeds from the understanding that governance consists of a
continuum of activities which relate to one another and that planning, co-ordination and
performance management are interrelated. These functions call for close interaction and
collaboration. (Green Paper, 2009: 2). The activities include:

policy development

strategic and operational planning

resource allocation

implementation

performance monitoring and evaluation.
The interpretation by the Minister of National Planning is that PME is an important variable in
the planning processes of government. PME information therefore relates directly to the
production of policy; how government should develop plans; allocate resources and implement
programmes for effective and efficient delivery of services for its citizens. PME as a central tool
to manage interventions, improve practice and ensure accountability, is highly challenging in
these contexts (Jones, 2011: 1). Policy change is a highly complex process shaped by a
multitude of interacting forces and actors. Outright successes in terms of achieving specific
hoped-for changes are rare and the work that does influence policy is often unique and rarely
repeated or replicated, with many incentives working against the sharing of good practice.
The following discussions in the chapter will be focused on the South African situation and its
PME environment as it relates to the sphere of local government and in particular metropolitan
municipalities. The legislative environment and requirements necessary to ensure that
76
government policies are implemented and a continuum of related activities that interconnect
with one another are addressed.
3.3. Legislative requirements for performance monitoring and evaluation [PME]
Performance monitoring and evaluation [PME] is necessary for the improvement of municipal
services. According Van der Waldt, Venter, Van der Walt, Phutiagae, Khalo, van Niekerk and
Nealer (2007: 115) - in order to maintain, sustain and continuously improved municipal services
– performance should be monitored to ensure that the implementation is done according to
what is planned. The argument advanced is that PME should not only focus on financial
performance, but should also include non-financial performance through systems and policies.
PME of municipalities cannot be effectively exercised by National government without a clear
legal basis. Intrusion into constitutionally guaranteed local government autonomy will only be
accepted by municipalities if it has a basis in the Constitution. The institutional framework
should not locate PME in one particular department or sector. If local government legislation
locates PME responsibilities with a particular Minister it risks creating the misconception that
PME is the responsibility of that department only and that sectoral departments have no
dealing with local government (De Visser, 2005: 275). The argument advanced is that the legal
framework for PME should be geared towards providing an ‘early warning system’ to obviate,
as far as possible, interventions into municipalities – this means that a set of interconnected
and integrated legal framework is required.
The Constitution, 1996 in section 152 mandates the local government sphere and places a
premium on the effective, efficient and economic use of resources to address the needs of the
people in municipalities. Moreover, the Constitution sets the framework for accountable,
outcome-based and a well governed municipality. This is where PME can be used as one of the
systems to achieve this constitutional imperative. Van Heerden (2009: 47) argues that the
credibility of a government depends, to a large extent, on the way public administration is
77
executed in service of the country’s inhabitants. Democracy, as reflected in Section 195 of the
Constitution, 1996 [195 (1) Public administration must be governed by the democratic values
and principles enshrined in the Constitution], demands that government activities should be
transparent, responsible and accountable, and performed by honest and ethically motivated
officials. Moreover, the Constitution imposes an obligation on national and provincial
governments to support and strengthen the capacity of municipalities to manage their own
affairs, to exercise their powers and to perform their functions [Section 154(1)].
Policies exist in municipalities, where a legislated performance management approach is
encouraged by the 1998 White Paper on Local Government. The White Paper on Local
Government states in its concluding sections that integrated development planning, budgeting
and performance management are powerful tools which can assist municipalities to develop an
integrated perspective of development in their area. Furthermore, the White Paper asserts that
by involving communities in developing municipal specific key performance indicators, this
action increases the accountability of the municipality – this argument is fundamental in
shaping the objectives of this study.
The Municipal Systems Act, 32 of 2000 [sections 38, 39 and 41] outlines the establishment and
development of a performance management system in municipalities. Section 40 is more
specific regarding the monitoring and review of performance management system: it states
that a municipality must establish mechanisms to monitor and review its performance
management system. Other sections of the Act in the same chapter outline other important
areas such as:

Section 41 - core components;

Section 42 - community involvement;

Section 43 - general key performance indicators;

Section 44 - notification of key performance indicators and performance targets;

Section 45 - audit of performance measurements.
78
The Public Audit Act, 25 of 2004 [20(2)(c)] requires the Auditor-General's audit reports to reflect
an opinion or conclusion on the reported information relating to performance against
predetermined objectives of the auditee, including constitutional institutions, departments,
trading entities, public entities, municipalities and municipal entities, and other institutions as
required by sections 4(1) and 4(3) of the Act.
A performance management guide for municipalities was developed in 2001 by the then
Department of Provincial and Local government, now under the Department of Cooperative
Governance. The guide was developed to assist councillors, managers, officials and local
government stakeholders in developing and implementing a performance management system
in terms of the requirements of legislation. The guide strives to establish common terminology
and ensure a level of consistency and uniformity in the application of concepts. The MFMA, 56
of 2003 has enhanced control over public expenditure and empowered public sector managers,
in particular section 121 (4)(d) which stipulates that the annual report of a municipal
department or an entity must include:
“An assessment by the entity’s accounting officer of the entity’s performance against any
measurable performance objectives set in terms the service delivery agreement or other
agreement between the entity and its parent municipality.”
Thus, it could be described that the Constitution, 1996 and various other pieces of legislation in
the sphere of local government oblige municipalities to perform public administration in an
effective and efficient way. However, the mere existence of a Constitution with a Bill of Rights
does not necessarily guarantee and imply that public officials will actually apply the
constitutionally entrenched fundamental rights or exercise public administration in the
constitutionally prescribed way (Van Heerden, 2009: 47).
The argument advanced above by van Heerden, is that public officials can only apply such rights
and exercise public administrative functions in terms of constitutional directives if they are
79
aware and more importantly conversant with the relevant provisions of the Constitution and
the Bill of Rights. However, success in the application of the law and policy implementation in
terms of achieving specific anticipated results and changes, are not always comprehensive in
the public sector.
The inability in some instances of public officials in a municipality, to apply the directives of the
Constitution as outlined, presents serious challenges to government and those it is expected to
serve, because the lack of sufficient knowledge of the Constitution, 1996 and its application as
well as lack of training, could be a veritable hindrance, that may contribute to failure on the
part of public officials, as they endeavour to comprehend their constitutional responsibilities
and accountabilities associated with the delivery of effective and efficient services to the
communities they serve. The outcomes of such a failure are devastating, and the results are
absence of and consequently poor service delivery, centralisation and a failure to achieve
measurable outcomes. In essence, the implementation of PME reform programme as intended
by government becomes ineffective and inefficient.
3.3.1. Measuring municipal performance
The important tool for transforming government is to use performance measurement. Osborne
& Plastrik (2000) argue that a public institution defines its products and services and develops
indicators to measure its output. It is argued that performance management is seen as an
administrative control mechanism to assign accountability for both the internal and external
stakeholders (Steward & Carpenter–Hubin, 2003: 56). Performance measurement is seen by
others as a feedback loop to improve institutional [i.e. municipality’s] performance and not just
as a mechanism of assessing praise or blame. It can be effectively used for all stakeholders
concerned to understand a municipality’s core business, in particular service delivery and its
commitment to achieving set developmental goals, mandates and objectives.
80
When performance is measured by a municipality as set out in legislation cf. par 3.3. Legislative
requirements for performance monitoring and evaluation – PME. It is important that agreed
principles of performance measurement be utilised in the process and systems. Various authors
(Rogers 1994; Walters 1995; Kloot & Martin 1998) indicate that there are seven key principles
that should be applied in the process of designing an effective performance management
system. They are:

clarity of purpose;

focus;

balance;

ownership;

scrutiny;

ongoing development;

continuous improvement.
From these seven principles, a municipality should be able to craft a system of performance
measurement for the employees and the institution itself. A PME system designed by a
municipality should at least consist of these seven principles of performance measurement for
it to yield positive outcomes. These outcomes are important for effective and efficient delivery
of basic services, but more so for other aspects of municipal administration and management
like budgeting; policy; risk and compliance; planning. Performance measurement should
express in quantifiable terms, how efficient a municipality is delivering on its constitutional
mandate and other legislative obligations. Ideally measures should be applied to the
municipality as a whole agreed upon by all stakeholders involved in municipal governance.
According to Van der Waldt et al. (2007: 118), there are three basic aspects of a municipal
service that may be measured. They are:

the inputs [financial, human and material] that are used to produce a service;
81

the outputs achieved [e.g. number of informal settlements that were upgraded and
provided with basic service] and

the outcomes achieved [decrease in poverty levels and increase in economic growth].
A combined result from all the variables above can be an indicator of how the municipality uses
its resources to deliver services effectively and efficiently to its constituencies. The outcomes
from such a measurement can to a considerable extent indicate the impact of the service
rendered and its quality. The quality of service is difficult to measure. Van der Waldt et al.
(2007: 118), argue that quality can be judged using compliance with national standards; check
whether good practices are used; consumer satisfaction surveys and the extent to which basic
services are provided. The important point from this discussion is that performance
measurement can enable politicians to demonstrate to their constituencies the impact of their
policies and provide a portfolio of evidence on service delivery for the communities they serve.
In the empirical study [chapter 6], provision of basic services in informal settlements by the
selected municipalities will be compared with national standards.
3.4. Explaining the concept of performance monitoring and evaluation [PME]
Historically, the ancient Egyptians regularly monitored their country’s outputs in grain and
livestock production more than 5000 years ago. In this sense, monitoring and evaluation are
certainly not new phenomena. However, traceable practical application of evaluation of
government programmes and projects in OECD [Organisation for Economic Co-operation and
Development] countries started in the 1960s. It has been used for different purposes, for
example, early evaluations in the 1960s and 1970s studied ways of improving social
programmes (Kusek & Rist, 2004: 11-15).
Later in the 1980s and 1990s, various governments used evaluation to conduct budgetary
management by examining ways to reduce expenditures on specific public programmes. Efforts
to develop PME systems have spread to developing countries and have been driven by the
desire to meet specific donor requirements in the least developed countries in Africa, Asia and
82
South America. Moreover, these developing countries adopted PME as a reform tool to attain
international development goals, or, in some cases, both external and internal social and
economic pressures. Modern governments, too, have engaged in some form of traditional
performance monitoring and evaluation over the past decades. They have sought to track over
time, their expenditures, revenues, employee levels, resources, programme and project
activities, goods and services produced (Kusek & Rist, 2004: 15) – South Africa formalised its
PME systems in 2009.
During its early stages, PME systems focused on what was termed “traditional implementationfocused PME systems” which were designed to address compliance and in particular specific
questions [tick-box type] the “did they do it” question. The tick-box type questions included:

Did they mobilise the needed inputs?

Did they undertake and complete the agreed activities?

Did they deliver the intended outputs [the products or services]?

So what is the impact of the service delivery programmes in communities?
The implementation approach of PME was focused on monitoring and assessing how well a
project, programme, or policy is being executed, and it often links the implementation to a
particular unit of responsibility. However, this approach does not provide policymakers,
managers, and stakeholders with an understanding of the success or failure of a specific
project, programme, or policy (Kusek & Rist, 2004: 15). In contemporary PME, the new focus is
on “results-based PME systems” that are designed to address the “so what” question. The new
tick-box type questions include:

So what about the fact that outputs have been generated - results?

So what that activities have taken place?

So what are the outputs from these activities that have been counted?
83
In essence, it can be argued that a results-based system provides feedback on the actual
outcomes and goals of government actions. The important issue of results and the examination
of outcomes and impacts – something Kusek & Rist (2004: 15) called the ‘“so what” question.
The authors argue that there has been an evolution in the field of PME involving a movement
away from traditional implementation based approaches toward new results-based
approaches. The latter will assist in answering the “so what” question. Thus, governments and
executive authority may successfully implement programmes or policies, but have they
produced the actual, intended results? Have governments and executive authority delivered on
promises made to their stakeholders [i.e. the citizenry] and what is the impact of programmes
against previous results?
It is inadequate to implement programmes and assume that successful implementation is
equivalent to actual improvements in the public sector. One must also examine outcomes and
impacts. The word outcome according to Thesaurus dictionary finds its origins from 1175–1225;
Middle English utcume. The noun means a final product or end result or consequence - a
conclusion reached through a process of logical thinking. Impact is a noun which means
influence or effect; according to the Thesaurus dictionary it finds its origin from 1775–85 [noun
and verb].
The introduction of a results-based PME system takes decision-makers one step further in
assessing whether and how goals are being achieved within a pre-determined period. These
systems assist in answering the all-important “so what” question, and respond to stakeholders’
[the citizenry] growing demands for results. It answers important questions like (Kusek & Rist,
2004: 16):

What are the goals of the organisation [i.e. municipality]?

Are they being achieved?

How can achievement be proven?
84
In essence, what these clarifications, definitions and explanations entail – is that PME is about
measuring the final results of government programmes and projects [i.e. municipality] - a
conclusion reached through a process of logical thinking. Moreover it is to check the influence
and effects these programmes and projects have on improving the living conditions of the
citizens. The final results, associated influence and effects they have on the citizens are the
important variables that are the essence of PME. These variables assist in shaping policy;
budgeting; planning; and the process of implementation of government policy objectives.
More often, governments such as municipalities are faced with various questions on the
implementation of reforms and other aspects that affect the citizenry and other stakeholders.
Some of the most pressing questions that are common include the following:

Have the policies, programmes, and projects led to the desired results and outcomes in
a municipal IDP and SDBIP?

How do municipal stakeholders know that their municipality is on the right direction in
achieving set objectives?

How do municipal stakeholders know if there are policy implementation impediments
and problems in the governance system, reform programmes of the municipality?

What is the municipality doing to introduce corrective functions to address the
identified impediments and problems timeously?

How do municipal stakeholders know if there is desirable progress and how is it
measured – what is the impact as compared to previous results?
Most of these questions are difficult to respond to qualitatively, but with regular monitoring of
service quality and programme results, acceptable answers can be provided. A key component
of informed public management and the identification of opportunities for improved publicsector performance have been the introduction of performance monitoring and evaluation
[PME] systems. Elected political office bearers and citizens are entitled to regular reports on the
performance of major public programmes. Not only information on programme costs, but on
other aspects of development. Politicians, senior administrators and the citizenry deserve to be
informed on regular intervals whether government objectives as set out in the budget are
85
achieved successfully and for them to receive information on the quality of service delivery and
on project and programme outcomes.
In their book Reinventing Government, Osborne & Gaebler (1992: 19-21) provide the following
six important facts that justify the need to implement PME in government, i.e.:

If you do not measure results, you cannot tell success from failure.

If you cannot see success, you cannot reward it.

If you cannot reward success, you are probably rewarding failure.

If you cannot see success, you cannot learn from it.

If you cannot recognise failure, you cannot correct it.

If you can demonstrate results, you can win public support.
It can be deduced from the justification provided by the authors Osborne & Gaebler, that
government and executive authority needs to measure output and impact of their programmes
for the benefit of citizens and stakeholder; but it is also important for them to measure for their
own assessment whether they are making progress or not.
3.4.1. Comparisons and measurements in performance monitoring and evaluation [PME]
Performance monitoring and evaluation [PME] systems should compare the performance of
different units and current performance with prior performance, or compare actual results to
targeted performance levels (Millar, Rhona, & Annie Millar, 1981. 1981, Carter, 1983; Neves,
Wolf, and Benton, 1986; Levitt and Joyce, 1987; U.S. Department of Labor, 1991). PME should
compare the results achieved in different geographic areas or in different population subgroups
(Hatry, Fountain, Jr., Sullivan, & Kremer, 1990). More advanced PME systems compare the
performance of units operating under similar conditions or use statistical analysis to check
client characteristics, community characteristics, or other factors that may affect programme
outcomes (Dickinson, West, Kogan, Drury, Franks, Schlichtmann, & Vencil, 1988; Goertz, 1989;
Hatry, Alexander, & Fountain, 1989; Meyer & Dominitz, 1991; Barnow, 1992).
86
Research has revealed that the development of appropriate PME systems is a difficult task
(Wholey & Hatry, H.P, 1992: 605). Useful PME depends on agreement between policy making
and operating levels on appropriate indicators for programme performance. Policy makers,
programme managers and other employees, and interest groups often have different goals for
the same programme. Most public services have multiple outcome and quality dimensions. An
appropriate performance monitoring system will require multiple programme performance
indicators. Public agencies should not expect that all service quality and outcome dimensions
can be covered. Measurement of selected aspects of programme performance may divert
attention from important but unmeasured activities, encourage "creaming" [serving those
clients for whom favourable outcomes are most likely], or tempt managers or employees to
manipulate performance data. These problems can be alleviated by proper identification of the
important quality and outcome dimensions and by monitoring programme performance for
different client groups and different categories of work complexities.
Performance monitoring and evaluation [PME] do not require sophisticated programme
evaluation techniques in all cases. Programme evaluation should prove to be easier and less
expensive, however, if a government department or an associated agency is already collecting
data on service quality and programme outcomes and if programme evaluations are available,
relevant information from them should be included in programme performance reports
(Wholey & Hatry, H.P, 1992: 606).
3.4.2 Impact Evaluation [IE] in performance monitoring and evaluation [PME]
Experts in the performance monitoring and evaluation [PME] field (Mackay, 1998:1) argue that
there are many reasons for the increasing efforts to strengthen governments’ PME systems.
Mackay (1998:1) raises the issue of fiscal pressure and ever-rising expectations from ordinary
citizens as the main issues that provide a continuing impetus for governments to provide
services and with higher standards of quality. These pressures are also reasons to find more
cost effective ways of operating so that governments provide more services at a lower cost [i.e.
value for money]. Countries in the developing world often emulate the richest countries; the
87
members of the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development [OECD] and in
specific instances, adopt the public sector management tools that these countries typically
employ, such as PME and performance budgeting (Mackay, 1998:1).
Civil society and parliaments are now exerting and require accountability from governments to
publicly report and explain their performances - as it has been observed in South Africa over
the past three to four years [e.g. Section 27 - Human Rights organisation promoting quality
education; Abahlali basemjondolo - the South African shack dwellers' movement]. Moreover,
international donors are being pressed to demonstrate the results of the aid spending for which
they are responsible to demonstrate the impact their donations have on countries that receive
these donations. This is classical Impact Evaluation [IE] in practice. They in turn are working to
persuade and support developing countries to strengthen their own PME systems.
Various countries in the developing world are now fully engaged in setting up PME systems - in
particular the members of the OECD, with the objective of adopting the public sector
management tools that have proved to be effective. For instance, countries such as South
Africa are implementing PME as a reform programme in a transformed political environment.
This discussion will be dealt with in the next chapter – which focuses on international
experience.
According to the World Bank Poverty Group on Impact Evaluation (White, 2006: 3) - Impact
Evaluation assesses the changes that can be attributed to a particular intervention, such as a
project, programme or policy, both the intended ones, as well as ideally the unintended ones.
In contrast to outcome monitoring, which examines whether targets have been achieved,
impact evaluation is structured to answer the question: how would outcomes such as
participants’ well-being have changed if the intervention had not been undertaken? This
involves counterfactual analysis, that is, “a comparison between what actually happened and
what would have happened in the absence of the intervention” (White, 2006: 3).
88
The current study adopts the International Initiative for Impact Evaluation [3ie] methods and
approaches to address the “evaluation gap” (White, 2006: 3). The methods and approaches
evaluate the lack of evidence to inform the decisions of developing country’s policy-makers in
the design and implementation of large-scale social and economic development programmes.
This is significant for the current study since South Africa and in particular urban informal
settlements [UIS] fall in the category of a developing country.
The study has adopted 3ie’s methods and approaches because 3ie uses high-quality impact
evaluations that measure the net change in outcomes amongst a particular group, or groups, of
people that can be attributed to a specific program using the best methodology available,
feasible and appropriate to the evaluation question(s) being investigated and in the specific
context. The empirical study will measure net change outcomes among residents of informal
settlements with regards to the provision of basic municipal services [water, electricity,
sanitation and waste collection/removal]. Moreover, 3ie’s methods and approaches were
adopted because the International Initiative for Impact Evaluation’s work is guided by a
commitment to five core principles:

rigorous analysis;

independence and objectivity;

flexibility in methodological approach, using qualitative and quantitative methods
where appropriate;

policy-relevance in selection of research topic and study design; and

developing country representation and involvement.
Impact Evaluation [IE], is one of the main objectives of PME in the South African National
Evaluation Policy Framework [NEPF]. IE has a specific focus on evidence-based policy-making; in
particular analysis of what works, where, why and for how much. It has received increasing
attention in policy-making bodies in recent years in both Western and developing country
89
contexts. In essence, when countries engage in PME, they are measuring the impact of
government programmes and projects - hence doing IE.
IE according to Briceño & Gaarder (2009:2) is the production and use of evidence on what
produce the anticipated results, where, why and for how much. Government agency and
institutions in South Africa that have been evaluated using IE by other donors contributing to
South Africa’s development needs - found correlation between programmes and positive
impact they have on changing people’s lives for the better (Briceño & Gaarder, 2009:22). The
programmes include:

the 2004 Social Assistance Act which introduced a number of transfer payments;
including old-age pensions, a disability grant, and a child support grant [CSG], which
is an unconditional cash transfer to poorer households with children;

the positive effects of pensions;

the child support grant [CSG] on poverty and child health and nutrition;

microfinance; and

the HIV/AIDS interventions.
The argument and logic followed as advised by Briceño & Gaarder (2009:34) is that IE has to be
immersed into broader PME systems with complementary performance monitoring and
evaluation instruments, process, operations, institutional and other types of evaluations. The
experience seems to be that gradual evolution from less to more sophisticated evaluation
instruments are important in assisting the development of a PME that paves the way for
rigorous impact evaluations.
In essence, PME should compare the performance of different public institutions in
government, in particular compare current performance with prior performance, or compare
actual results to targeted performance levels [i.e. in case of MDGs (specific reference to water,
electricity, sanitation and waste collection/removal); IDPs and SDBIPs in the South African
situation in the local sphere of government] – as set out by the controlling structure. In the
90
South African situation, the latter [controlling structure] is the Department of Performance
Monitoring and Evaluation in the Presidency.
This study in its quantitative component [which will be conducted through two sets of surveys]
will use IE as a measuring instrument on how metropolitan municipalities in Gauteng
performed in the provision and delivery of minimum basic services in selected [ie. 20 years or
older] informal settlement based on the United Nations [UN] MDGs. The IE will take shape in
comparing results of the empirical study with other statistical information from various sources,
but in particular information from government institutions that have conducted surveys or
studies in urban informal settlements [UIS]. The most important determinant will be statistical
information coming out of South African government’s own MDGs assessment and
performance in attaining the set targets.
3.5. Millennium Development Goals [MDGs] in context
The Millennium Development Goals [MDGs] originate from the Millennium Summit which was a
meeting among world leaders held at the United Nations headquarters in New York City [United
States of America - USA] from 6 September to 8 September 2000 (UN, 2000: a &b). The purpose
of the summit was to discuss the role of the United Nations at the turn of the 21st century.
According to a BBC news report, this meeting was the largest gathering of world leaders in
history as of the year 2000 (BBC: 2000). At this meeting, 189 world leaders representing
member states in the General Assembly ratified the United Nations Millennium Declaration,
which was adopted on 8 September 2000.
The Millennium Declaration has eight chapters and key objectives. The Declaration emphasised
the observance of international human rights law and international humanitarian law under the
Principles of United Nations Charter as well as the treaties on sustainable development (UN,
2000: c). The eight chapters are:
1. Values and principles;
91

Freedom

Equality

Solidarity

Tolerance

Respect for nature - "Shown in the management of all living species and natural
resources, in accordance with the precepts of sustainable development."

Shared responsibility
2. Peace, security and disarmament;
3. Development and poverty eradication;
4. Protecting our common environment;
5. Human Rights, Democracy and good governance;
6. Protecting the vulnerable;
7. Meeting the special needs of Africa; and
8. Strengthening the United Nations.
On 14 December 2000, a follow-up outcome of the resolution was passed by the General
Assembly to guide implementation of the Millennium Declaration. The implementation of the
Declaration was reviewed at the 2005 World Summit of leaders (UN, 2000: c) at the UN
headquarters in New York – USA, which was attended by leaders from 191 member states. The
2005 World Summit led to the Millennium Declaration of the Millennium Development Goals
(MDGs). The United Nations described it as “a once-in-a-generation opportunity to take bold
decisions in the areas of development, security, human rights and reform of the United
Nations” (UN, 2000: c).
The eight Millennium Development Goals [MDGs] to be achieved by 2015 are:
1. to halve the number of undernourished people;
2. to achieve universal primary education;
3. to promote gender equality and empower women;
4. to reduce child mortality;
92
5. to improve maternal health;
6. to combat HIV/AIDS, malaria, and other diseases;
7. to ensure environmental sustainability; and
8. to develop a global partnership for development.
In essence, the Millennium Development Goals [MDGs] derive from earlier development
targets, where world leaders adopted the United Nations Millennium Declaration. The approval
of the Millennium Declaration was the main outcome of the Millennium Summit. The
Declaration asserted that every individual has dignity and hence, the right to freedom, equality,
a basic standard of living that includes freedom from hunger and violence and encourages
tolerance and solidarity. The MDGs set concrete targets and indicators for poverty reduction in
order to achieve the rights set forth in the Declaration. For the purpose of this study, focus will
be limited to MDG 7 with specific focus on target 10 & 11. These goals address the key issue of
halving the number of undernourished people and ensuring environmental sustainability.
Targets 10 & 11 in summary focus on the following:
Target 10 - halve by 2015 the proportion of people without sustainable access to safe drinking
water:

Proportion of the population using improved drinking water sources, rural

Proportion of the population using improved drinking water sources, total

Proportion of the population using improved drinking water sources, urban

Proportion of the population using improved sanitation facilities, rural

Proportion of the population using improved sanitation facilities, total

Proportion of the population using improved sanitation facilities, urban
Target 11 - by 2020 to have achieved a significant improvement in the lives of at least 100
million slum dwellers [i.e. informal settlements]

Slum population as percentage of urban, percentage.

Slum population in urban areas.
93
These targets imply that governments must implement and set programmes that will ensure
that they achieve targets by 2015 as outlined in the declaration. The outcome document of the
2005 World Summit of leaders titled: “Resolution adopted by the General Assembly [without
reference to a Main Committee (A/60/L.1)] 60/1. 2005 World Summit Outcome - A/RES/60/1”
stipulate important areas relevant to the study (UN, 2005: 14). The relevant sections will now
be extracted and discussed. Section 56 of the report is in pursuance of our commitment to
achieve sustainable development, resolved:
(h) To assist developing countries’ efforts to prepare integrated water resources management
and water efficiency plans as part of their national development strategies and to provide
access to safe drinking water and basic sanitation in accordance with the Millennium
Declaration1 and the Johannesburg Plan of Implementation, including halving by 2015 the
proportion of people who are unable to reach or afford safe drinking water and who do not
have access to basic sanitation;
(m) To achieve significant improvement in the lives of at least 100 million slum-dwellers by
2020, recognising the urgent need for the provision of increased resources for affordable
housing and housing-related infrastructure, prioritising slum prevention and slum upgrading,
and to encourage support for the United Nations Habitat and Human Settlements Foundation
and its Slum Upgrading Facility.
This means that the South African government as a signatory to the Millennium Declaration
should put government programmes in place to address the UN resolution. According to
Statistics South Africa’s MDG country report 2013, South Africa has adhered to the consultation
requirements outlined in the compilation of the MDG report and continues to improve on this
front. In September 2010 the Cabinet directed Statistics South Africa [SSA] to institutionalise
participation in the MDG reporting processes. According to the South African government,
MDGs do not constitute a separate plan. Instead, they are embedded in the National
Development Plan [NDP] of South Africa, Provincial Growth and Development Plans and the
94
Integrated Development Plans [IDPs] of municipalities (SSA, 2013: 15). The 2013 MDG Report
process has been designed to include participation of Civil Society Organisations in all spheres
of the government structures. This includes provincial and local spheres structures.
3.5.1. South African government approach towards realisation of MDGs
The South African government approach towards realisation of MDGs should be understood in
the context of South Africa post 1994 – the democratic dispensation period. The Reconstruction
and Development Programme [RDP] was adopted as South Africa’s socio-economic policy
framework to address the socio-economic problems, challenges and backlogs emerging from
apartheid’s neglect. In essence RDP was a flagship programme that had an action plan focused
on delivery schedules for health, education and electrification in particular. The major challenge
was that whilst the problem and its genesis were well known - unfortunately its quantification
both in numbers and space remained unclear (SSA, 2013: 16). In 1998, at the launch of the
results of Census 1996 - former President Nelson Mandela stated the following on the RDP:
“But we do at last have results with which we can work, the numbers that count for the nation.
It will take time to absorb the full detail of this intricate picture of our complex society but the
broad outlines should act as the clarion-call to re-dedicate ourselves in every sector of the
society, to the historic mission of a generation charged with transforming South Africa’s society
in order to eradicate the poverty and imbalances that derive from our past.” (SSA, 2013: 16).
From the RDP, the South African government in 1998 after lessons learned from evidence
emanating out of official statistics, the government launched The Growth, Employment and
Redistribution [GEAR], as a Macro-Economic Strategy. GEAR had four objectives.

firstly, it aimed to achieve a competitive fast-growing economy which would create
sufficient jobs for all work seekers;

secondly, it focused on the redistribution of income and opportunities in favour of the
poor;
95

thirdly, it envisioned a society in which sound health, education and other services are
available to all; and

fourthly, it aimed achieving an environment in which homes are secure and places of
work are productive.
After GEAR, the South African government introduced the Accelerated and Shared Growth
Initiative for South Africa [ASGISA] to speed up employment creation with a target of halving
unemployment by 2014. ASGISA took note of the binding constraints in the South African
economy. Amongst these constraints were the challenge of inadequate skills base; the ability of
the state to lead; supply and value chain problems that stood in the path of accelerated growth.
In 2009, a New Growth Path [NGP] that focuses on the micro economy was introduced together
with a 2030 National Development Plan [NDP]. The NDP envisions the South African society in
2030 and what steps have to be undertaken through the NGP to achieve this vision as it was
adopted in August 2012. The current period is seen as a major alignment and integration of
previous policies, programmes and initiatives [i.e. RDP, GEAR and ASGISA] by government.
Given the legacy of centuries-old unequal development for various racial groups, the
development of the first integrated development plan coincides with the 2013 MDG report. The
diagnostic report for South Africa further emphasised the triple challenge of poverty,
unemployment, inequality. The alignment of the NDP and the NGP mark the resolve to speedup the process of attaining the MDGs (SSA, 2013: 17).
According to SSA’s 2013 MDGs country report, the policy and programme tools that are used to
address the development challenge should be understood as a process of managing and leading
what is termed the continuity of change. The national agenda implemented through RDP and
GEAR in the first fifteen years of democracy and through NDP and NGP constitutes this
continuity of change. The South African government adopted and changed different
development strategies over the 20 years of democratic rule to address in particular the triple
challenge of poverty, unemployment and inequality. It is therefore important to realise that
MDGs do not constitute a separate development agenda from the national effort. The MDGs
96
are integral part of that agenda (SSA, 2013: 17). Thus, MDGs are part of the South African
government development agenda, which is assessed by government through a Governmentwide Monitoring and Evaluation [GWM&E] policy framework that is coordinated by the
Department of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation [DPME] in the Presidency.
The approach and some of the objectives of the study have to do with assessing the Impact
Evaluation [IE] on the delivery of basic minimum services [i.e. electricity, water, sanitation and
waste collection/removal] in the three identified municipalities against set targets determined
in the Millennium Development Goals [MDGs] – in the South African context; and to discuss
practical considerations in institutionalising PME processes in municipalities and propose
recommendations with guidelines for an effective and efficient PME system in the local
government sphere in Gauteng, South Africa.
3.6. Benefits of a result-based performance monitoring and evaluation system
The Department of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation [DPME] indicate in the National
Evaluation Policy Framework [NEPF] that evaluations can be undertaken internally by public
institutions, or by an external agency. The Department’s view is that evaluations can be
analysed at different unit or plans, albeit an institution or a group of institutions, a policy
intervention or an expenditure programme or sub-programme. The National Evaluation Policy
Framework [NEPF, 2011] has been put together to inform, direct and guide evaluations
undertaken by the executive in the national, provincial and local spheres of government. It
intends to include evaluations conducted by independent oversight bodies such as the Public
Service Commission and Auditor-General, but also recognises spheres’ independence, as part of
their constitutional mandates [section 41]. Moreover, for the purposes of evaluation in the
South African public sector, no one evaluation methodology is favoured. NEPF acknowledges
that evaluation can use a wide range of research techniques and data sources, depending on
the evaluation field, the evaluation object and the evaluation questions.
97
However, evaluations should be systematic, structured and objective and must use scientific
techniques for data collection and reliable data sources. Evaluations must also be available for
use by policy-makers and results should not be ‘top-secret documents’ when findings are
unfavourable to officials or elected office bearers. In essence, NEPF clarifies the role of
evaluations in relation to other performance management instruments. It frames the
evaluation function in terms of its scope, institutionalisation, standards, process requirements,
skill requirements, governance, financing and oversight (NEPF, 2001: 3).
Measurement on its own cannot improve quality or performance. It needs to be part of a policy
that uses the results of measurement to assess and develop the level and type of quality
required by organisational values and objectives – similar to a municipal administration and
management processes. Performance measurements of quality in the delivery of services have
to contain clear benefits for all stakeholders concerned and in particular citizens’; the
municipality and its employees. In the study, a result-based performance monitoring and
evaluation system will be used to assess the rendering of specific services in specific
communities in selected metropolitan municipalities. According to Kusek & Rist, (2004: 21)
results-based PME systems are essential components of governance and are thus
fundamentally related to the political and power systems of government. It is important that
any form of reform programme such as PME in this instance, receives strong support from
political authority and relate strongly with the thinking of office bearers in government.
As it was discussed in chapter two of the study, the one core issue that distinguishes Public
Administration from other related disciplines is the political milieu within which its operational
activities are performed. The argument advanced, is that the political environment puts the
domain of the discipline of Public Administration and Management into a category of
exclusivity. Results-based PME systems provide critical information and empower policymakers
to make better-informed decisions from reliable information. At the same time, providing such
information may lessen or otherwise constrain the number of options available to politicians
and in the processes leave less room to amend policies. In democracies, information on project,
98
programme, and policy results are increasingly essential and is expected in the normal course of
government operations. It is assumed that such information can assist and guide policy-making
(Kusek & Rist, 2004: 21).
As part of a cycle of policy making, programme implementation, assessment and PME, including
regular reporting, can inform elected office bearers and citizens and keep them involved in
governance (Wholey & Hatry 1992: 604). Wholey & Hatry argue that PME systems can measure
the quality of services and results achieved in public programmes monitoring, is done at least
annually but in many cases, quarterly or even more frequently. They include, but add the more
typical measurements of programme costs and services delivered.
In more specific terms, PME of programmes and projects typically cover short-term and
medium-term outcomes of programme activities. PME usually does not attempt to estimate the
extent to which programmes provide measurable outcomes. In essence, PME systems compare
the performance of different units, current performance with prior performance, or in some
instances compare actual results to targeted performance levels (Wholey & Hatry 1992: 605).
A host of quantitative and qualitative methods have been developed for monitoring
programme performance. Advances in computers and software now allow timelier and less
expensive collection, analysis, and communication of information on the performance of public
sector institutions, its agencies, programmes and projects. PME does not require complicated
programme evaluation techniques in all instances. Programme evaluation should be easier and
less expensive. However, if an agency or public institution is already collecting data on service
quality and programme outcomes and if programme evaluations are available, relevant
information from them should be included in programme performance reports (Wholey &
Hatry 1992: 605).
A key concern raised about PME is that it does not indicate the extent to which the reported
outcomes are due to agency or public sector departmental efforts rather than to external
factors. PME components do not provide information on "causality" nor are they intended to.
99
Rather, knowing programme outcomes, regardless of the cause, is itself of considerable
importance. This is the case with business profit-and-loss statements and public financial
statements.
An analogy to the management of sports teams may be useful. Unless he or she knows the
score, how will the team manager know whether to make changes? As in the public sector, the
team manager needs to use PME information, knowledge and skills to decide what actions
should be taken. When a public official obtains from performance monitoring and evaluation
data that programme outcomes do not meet expectations, it should encourage the official to
examine the situation in more detail and determine what actions are required – in a way
conduct additional evaluation.
3.7. Evaluation and its benefit for a municipality
A definition adopted from the OECD will be used to describe evaluation. According to OECD,
evaluation is the systematic and objective assessment of an ongoing or completed project,
programme, or policy, including its design, implementation, and results. The aim is to
determine the relevance and fulfilment of objectives, development efficiency, effectiveness,
impact, and sustainability. An evaluation should provide information that is credible and useful,
enabling the incorporation of lessons learned into the decision-making process of both
recipients and donors.
Evaluation of government performance in programmes and projects can enhance the way it
operates but also provide benefits. According to the Department of Performance Monitoring
and Evaluation [DPME] - evaluation can be undertaken in governmental institutions for a
number of purposes (NEPF, 2001: 3). Four primary uses/purposes of evaluation and some of the
questions one may ask in these different uses/purposes could be:
100

Judge merit or worth of something: Was the programme successful, or is the proposed
policy or programme likely to be successful? Was it effective? Did the intended
beneficiaries receive measurable results from the intervention? Did it impact on their
lives or what is the likely impact of the policy/programme? Will the policy/programme
impact differentially on different sectors of the population,

Improving policy or programme performance [evaluation for learning]: this aims to
provide feedback to programme managers. Questions could be: was this the right
intervention for this objective; was it the right mix of outputs, what is the most effective
way to do X?

Evaluation for improving accountability: on what service is public funds spent? Is this
spending making a difference to the beneficiaries identified?

Evaluation for generating knowledge [for research]: increasing knowledge about what
works with regard to a public policy, programme, function or organisation, which allows
governments to compile an evidence base for future policy development?
The study will focus on all of the above questions combined and conduct Impact Evaluation [IE]
on how metropolitan municipalities provide minimum basic services in informal settlements
based on the MDGs targets and objectives. The aim will be to establish whether the services are
delivered as set out in the IDP [Integrated Development Plan] as put together by elected
politicians [i.e. ward councillor] and the SDBIP [Service Delivery Budget Implementation Plan] as
drafted by municipal managers and approved by council. The intention of the study is to
examine whether the GWM&E has had a positive effect/impact on municipal government and
administration – as a reform programme in a transformed local government system.
101
Table 3.1. Primary uses or purposes of evaluation studies [sourced and adapted from Patton,
1997, in Babbie and Mouton, 2007]
Uses or purposes
Examples of reasons or decisions for use
Judge merit or worth
Assessing impact
Quality control
Cost-benefit decisions
Deciding a programme’s future
Decisions on accreditation/licensing
Improve programmes
Assessing learning
Understanding causal links
Identifying strengths and weaknesses
Quality enhancement
Improving cost-effectiveness
Managing more effectively
Adapting a model locally
Generate knowledge
Generalisations about effectiveness
Extrapolating principles about what works
Building new theories and models
Informing policy
Improve accountability
Assessing compliance/audit
Improve transparency
Accountability
The main objective of government in the South African context, in introducing PME is on
improving performance. This also involves questions of judgement (NEPF, 2001: 4). Judgement
in evaluation must be measured against objectives or criteria (Rossi, Lipsey & Freeman, 2004:
70). The characteristics of effective evaluation are that it should be analytical and be based on
recognised research techniques. Evaluation should be systematic – it requires careful planning
102
and consistent use of the selected techniques. An evaluation should be reliable – in that the
findings of an evaluation should be reproducible by a different evaluator with access to the
same data and using the same methods of data analysis. An evaluation should be issue-oriented
– meaning that evaluation should be conducted to address important issues like relevance,
efficiency and effectiveness. An evaluation should be user-driven - this means that successful
evaluation should be designed and implemented in ways that provide useful information to
decision-makers, given the political circumstances, programme constraints and available
resource–benefits (EU, 1997). Some of the potential benefits which can be obtained include:

improved learning and its feedback into policy and implementation;

ensuring policy and management decisions are based on evidence;

better understanding on which programmes are cost-effective;

understanding and so better able to overcome institutional bottlenecks to improved
impact [adapting programmes];

better understanding and management of risks.
Ultimately, government intends that these should result in:

strengthening the culture of use of evidence to improve performance;

better policy and planning;

better resource allocation;

minimising negative unintended consequences of policy and the public being aware of
what government does by way of public accountability.
The deduction from this part of the chapter is that a municipal council can benefit from
conducting performance evaluations. Evaluation provides a platform to strengthen
administration and management through its information supply capability to assist in policy
implementation and planning, resource allocation, performance improvement and other
aspects that are critical for effective and efficient administration of a municipality. It can be
103
argued that the main benefit of PME to society is a reform programme to enhance public
accountability. It is clear from this section what the South African legislators intend achieving by
introducing PME as a reform programme in all spheres of government – especially in a
municipality.
3.8. Link between monitoring and evaluation
Performance monitoring and evaluation [PME] of programmes and projects have become part
of corporate governance. It is a common, but well entrenched effectively-managed and high
performing private enterprises. It is unfortunate that most reports on government performance
are still focused on resource expenditures and the quantity of services delivered. However,
there are complaints about the application of PME in South African government spheres
particularly the local sphere – municipalities’ failure to provide timely information on the
quality and outcomes of their major programmes and projects as it will be indicated in chapter
5 when discussing the Auditor Generals remarks on municipal performance in the past three
financial years.
It has been argued in the previous section cf. par 3.6 - that performance monitoring and
evaluation [PME] is a central reform tool to manage interventions, improve practice and ensure
accountability. Jones (2011: 3) argues that a PME system is widely recognised as being a crucial
element of managing and implementing projects, programmes and policies in both public and
private sector organisations. The production and use of PME information during and after an
intervention are considered as a central in systems for reporting and accountability, in
demonstrating performance, and/or for learning from experience and improving future work.
PME is an indispensable learning and management tool for improving current and future
programme planning, implementation and decision-making.
The Public Service Commission (PSC, 2008: 3) defines evaluation as the determination of merit
or shortcoming to make the judgement one needs. It is a standard of what is regarded as
104
meritorious to compare input with output. Evaluation is thus a process of comparison of results
to a standard. For instance, the statement “a high quality service has been delivered that met
the needs of clients and improved their circumstances” is an evaluation. The argument
advanced here, is that the evaluation will be significant and quantifiable if “quality”, “needs”
and “improvement in circumstances” have been quantified or measured.
In monitoring, the emphasis is on checking progress towards the achievement of an objective.
An effective monitoring system will provide and signal a warning, early on in the
implementation of a course of action that the end goal will be reached as planned. Monitoring
also involves a process of comparison because actual performance is compared with what was
planned or expected (PSC, 2008: 3). PME activities must, therefore, focus on making sense of
the available information and data. Sense-making is defined as a motivated, continuous effort
to understand connections [which can be among people, places, and events] in order to
anticipate their trajectories and act effectively (Klein, Moon & Hoffman, 2006:71).
The objective of performance monitoring and evaluation [PME] is based on investigating the
tangible products. In this instance, service delivery outcomes of e.g. water, sanitation,
electricity and waste collection in urban informal settlements that are produced by a
project/programme from a plan with specific targets [i.e. IDP and SDBIP]. In essence, it is
intended to judge quality, credibility, relevance, accessibility, and other factors that are associated with evidence that is unambiguous, which can be measured. Performance monitoring
and evaluation of identified programmes and projects as they relate to the provision of basic
municipal services especially in the urban informal settlements is the focus of the research.
105
Table 3.2. Link between monitoring and evaluation
Dimension
Monitoring
Evaluation
Purpose
To improve efficiency,
To improve effectiveness,
provide information for
impact, value for money,
reprogramming to improve
future programming
outcomes.
(planning), strategy and
policy-making
Frequency
A
regular
exercise
sometime
– Is based on specific project
periodic [Episodic]
depending on management
decision.
Function
To check progress [Tracking] To conduct an assessment of
and doing oversight.
performance on a particular
project or task.
Focus
Focus is on Inputs, outputs, Focus is on effectiveness,
processes and work-plans.
relevance,
impact,
cost-
effectiveness
Method
Routine review of reports,
Include Scientific inquiry,
registers, administrative
rigorous research design,
databases, field observations
complex and intensive
and related activities.
evaluation based on
evidence.
Sources of information
Surveillance system, field
Similar sources used for
observation reports,
monitoring, and in addition
progress reports, rapid
other platforms like
assessment, programmeme
population-based surveys
106
review meetings as a source
and special studies.
of information.
Cost implications
Spread across
Episodic depending on the
implementation period
project or task, often
focused at the midpoint and
end of implementation
period
3.9. Challenges and complexities of policy influence
Performance monitoring and evaluation [PME] systems are widely recognised as being crucial
elements of managing and implementing projects, programmes and policies in both public and
private sector organisations. More importantly, the production and use of PME information
during and after an intervention is generally seen as a central plank in systems for reporting and
accountability, in demonstrating performance, or for learning from experience and improving
future work. According to Jones (2011: 3) performance monitoring and evaluating policy
influencing service provision presents particular challenges and complexities. These challenges
include policy influencing and are not specific to one particular sector or approach to policy
influence. Although they have been well documented and described above, they provide a
useful starting point for considering approaches to the PME of policy influence. Jones (2011: 3)
identifies three challenges which will be discussed in sections 3.9.1. – 3.9.3.
3.9.1. The conceptual and technical challenges
In Jones’s (2011: 3) view, it can be difficult to determine the links between policy influencing
activities and outputs, and any change or stasis in policy. Policy change is highly complex and
does not necessarily proceed in a linear or rational fashion, with policy processes shaped by a
multitude of interacting forces and actors – in particular elected office bearers, variety of
stakeholders, managers in the public sector and more importantly the citizenry. This makes it
107
almost impossible to predict with confidence the likely consequences of activities on a specific
policy, and difficult to measure the full effect of actions even after the event.
Another important view as argued by Iverson (2003), is about a difficulty in establishing
causality, and is known as the ‘attribution problem’. This has a long history in the field of
evaluation. Methodologies such as experimental and quasi-experimental impact evaluation that
can function to analyse attribution in other circumstances, are unsuitable for policy influencing
work because it is difficult to establish a plausible counter-factual. Other authors such as Ekboir
argue that there are additional problems in measuring both inputs and outputs of policy influencing activities (Ekboir, 2003).
3.9.2. The nature of policy influence work
The nature of policy influencing work also presents further challenges to PME approaches.
Outright success in terms of achieving the specific changes that were sought is rare, with some
objectives modified along the way. There is an element of subjectivity in whether gains were
significant, consistent with the wider goals of an organisation or campaign, or co-opted. The
policy context is likely to change of its own accord, and influencing objectives may need to be
altered in reaction to this or to other external forces. This means that objectives formulated at
the outset may not be the best yardstick against which to judge its progress. Policy changes
tend to occur over long timeframes that may not be suitable to measurement in the usual
progression of projects and evaluation in government. In addition, most influencing work and
advocacy is effective when carried out in alliances, coalitions and networks, which present
difficulties in judging the specific contribution of one organisation to change even after some
kind of judgement about contribution or attribution has been made (Jones 2011: 3).
108
3.9.3. The practical problems that constrain the production and use of knowledge
Jones (2011: 3) argues that employees who are carrying out influencing work rarely have the
time or resources to conduct intensive PME. There tends to be further problems of PME
capacity at the individual and institutional level in many organisations that work in advocacy
and other influencing activities – especially those who would prefer to follow up on work done
by government for the citizenry. This can also result in objectives and goals that are not clearly
defined or communicated from the outset. Policy influencing involves political and sometimes
highly conflicting processes, leading to difficulties in determining how best to solicit or interpret
the accounts of different actors. According to Jones (2011: 3), influencing work is often unique,
rarely repeated or replicated and, even worse; there are incentives against the sharing of good
practice. Equally, policy-makers are unlikely to favour claims that their decisions can be
attributed to the influence of another actor.
3.9.4. The theory of change [ToC]
Challenges present serious difficulties for strategic decisions, for the adaptation of implementation, and for reporting what the money has been used for or in instances where managers must
be held accountable by government - i.e. for example in relation to municipal ward councillors
and managers who don’t deliver on the IDPs and SDBIPs. Jones (2011: 3) argues that there are
however, a number of frameworks and approaches to assist users overcome the conceptual
and technical difficulties. The vast majority of these involve, either explicitly or implicitly,
developing a theory of change [ToC]. This is referred to in various ways, such as a logical model,
programme theory or roadmap, but it is a model of how the policy influencing activities are
envisaged to result in the desired changes in policy or in people’s lives (Whelan, 2008).
It is stated that a ToC is an essential tool for the PME of policy influence (Jones, 2011: 3), not
only for improving policy influencing projects and enhancing decision-making, but also for
accountability and reporting to stakeholders external to the programme. Literature on planning
and PME in complex settings highlight the importance of PME to test and reflect on a project’s
109
ToC. This is for example a key principle of adaptive management, in which projects or
programmes are seen as experiments, examining hypotheses about problems and how they can
be addressed, with ongoing cycles of evaluation, assessment, and adjustment of change models
and activities. PME activities must, therefore, focus on making sense of the available
information. Sense-making is defined as “a motivated continuous effort to understand
connections [which can be among people, places, and events] in order to anticipate their
trajectories and act effectively” (Klein, Moon et al., 2006: 71). Evidence shows that this key
activity runs alongside action, rather than preceding it, for contexts and circumstances that are
complex, uncertain and ambiguous (Kurtz and Snowden, 2003 – quoted in Klein, Moon et al.,
2006: 71).
In complex situations, project and programme managers face ambiguity, with available
knowledge and information supporting several interpretations at the same time. This means
that teams need to question their models of change, their underlying assumptions and the
relevance of their goals. It is important to discuss the framing of an issue explicitly, and
question whether interpretations truly follow from available data, and what is missing or
uncertain. Once a ToC is completed, it lays out a number of dimensions and intermediate
outcomes against which the project’s influence can be measured. Providing a clear statement
of strategy and direction is a central element of accountability practices, and is even more
important for policy influencing, where objectives and strategies are key ingredients of success
(Jones, 2008: 4).
Evaluating strategy and direction, and analysing a project’s expectations for change becomes an
important part of evaluating projects. Evaluators often have to construct the ToC from the
assumptions and phenomena implicit in a project’s conception and implementation, if none has
already been constructed, but this is not ideal as implementing teams may moit potential
strategic benefits.
There are many challenges and complexities of policy influence work associated with
performance monitoring and evaluation [PME]. It has been argued that they can be overcome.
110
The most important aspect to mitigate risk and challenges in implementation of reforms similar
to PME, is to make sure that proper governance principles are in place and used by managers
and practitioners to advance policy implementation - in a way fast-track delivery of services in a
manner that ensures accountability, efficiency and effectiveness in how actions are conducted.
3.10. Contribution of PME in good governance of metropolitan municipalities
From a political perspective, governance refers to processes of regulation, co-ordination, and
control (Rhodes 1997 – quoted from Pierre, 1999: 377). Thus, for governance theorists,
analysing the process of co-ordination and regulation as such are the main concerns. The role of
government in the process of governance is perceived as an empirical question (Campbell,
Hollingsworth, and Lindberg 1991; Hollingsworth, Schmitter, and Streek 1994; Hyden 1992;
Kooiman 1993; Rhodes 1996, 1997 - quoted from Pierre, 1999: 376).
Because the discipline of Public Administration is an eclectic science, it overlaps and relates to
other scientific domains. According to authors in political science and urban affairs (Pierre,
1999: 377) - the inclusion of the concept of governance in the local sphere government has
several important consequences. Firstly, it assists bringing together regime theory, theories of
the local state, and urban political economy into a broader analytical framework. Secondly, the
governance system to urban politics highlights the wide range of constraints on municipalities’
ability to bring about change in the local community.
Pierre (1999: 377) argues that focusing strictly on governance entails risks of conceptual
oversimplification and reductionism. He argues that governance loosely defined, refers to any
public-private exchange that leads to seamless governance in both. The continuous exchange
between the public and private blurs the distinction between policy formulation and
implementation because much of the policy will obtain its final design as it is being
implemented (Pressman & Wildavsky 1973; Lipsky 1980 - quoted from Pierre, 1999: 378).
111
Governance is essential to illustrate if and how this framework offers better analytical than
contending systems to urban politics. In sum, theories of urban governance emphasise
outcomes over formal, political processes and public-private interaction over formal [legal]
policy implementation. Public-private interaction is considered necessary to manage the
functions of governing. However, because different configurations of the governance system
offer different actors’ participation and influence, one must also consider the economic,
political, and ideological framework within which these processes are embedded (Pierre, 1999:
377). These value systems constitute the institutions of urban governance – an important unit
of analysis for this study, which are the informal settlements in metropolitan municipalities.
In the previous chapter, a detailed discussion and debate on what is good governance has been
provided [cf. par ‘2.6.2. Good governance]. According to Kuye (2007: 560), the concept of good
governance is the main determinant of governance requirements in any modern state. Suk Kim;
Halligan; Cho; Oh & Eikenberry (2005: 647 - 648) argue that good governance, as well as
efficient and effective public administration, are necessary conditions to achieve sustainable
development. They argue that good governance is indispensable for building peaceful,
prosperous, and democratic societies and is marked by several major characteristics. These are
transparency,
participation,
consensus
orientation,
accountability,
responsiveness,
effectiveness and efficiency, equity and inclusiveness in accordance with the rule of law.
A key feature of the concept of PME has emerged according to Kusek & Rist (2004: xi) which
relates to good governance. PME can provide unique information results and the examination
of outcomes and impacts about the performance of government policies, programmes and
projects if implemented correctly. It can identify efficiency and effectivity and the reasons why.
PME also provides information about the performance of government; spheres [i.e. local
government - municipalities]; agencies; managers and employees - including information on the
performance of donors that support the work of government. Mackay (2007: 9) argues that the
value of PME does not originate from having such information available, rather the value comes
from using the information to improve government performance. Furthermore, Mackay (2007:
112
9) identifies four key areas of governance that derive a direct benefit from PME systems and
information they generate for management:

policy making especially budget, performance budgeting, and national planning;

policy development and policy analysis work and in programme development;

to manage activities at the sector, programme and at project levels including
government service delivery and the management of employees; and

to enhance transparency and support accountability relationships by revealing the
extent to which government has attained its desired objectives.
The current study in its quantitative section [chapter 6] will specifically focus on how to manage
activities at the sector, programme and at project levels including government service delivery
and the management of employees; and to enhance transparency and support accountability
relationships by revealing the extent to which government has attained its desired objectives.
It has been argued that PME is closely related to other aspects of public management, in
particular
issues
concerning
budgetary
tracking
systems
and
financial
reporting;
intergovernmental fiscal relations, including government decentralisation, and the extent to
which they encompass a focus on government performance. Other critical areas of importance
in good governance on accountability institutions such as national audit offices;
commercialisation and private sector [profit and nonprofit] delivery of public services;
clarification and public reporting of programme goals, objectives, and the strategies necessary
for achieving them; the setting of explicit customer service standards by service delivery
agencies, and monitoring and publicising the extent to which these are achieved (Mackay,
2007: 11).
A critical area is the public service reform that focuses on personnel performance,
management, and appraisal, including merit-based hiring, promotion, and dismissing—
recognising the links between individual performance and project or programme performance
and the quality of the public service’s policy advice and the extent to which this advice is
113
evidence based [using PME]; and an anticorruption effort. PME can also be used to identify the
“leakage” of government funds via, for example, public expenditure tracking surveys [PETS].
Another dimension is the involvement of community monitoring of the donor [or government]
projects, which can also be an effective way to curb corruption in the implementation of
projects. Concerning participation in civil society, PME provides a vehicle to magnify the voice
of civil society and to put additional pressure on government to achieve higher levels of
performance (Mackay, 2007: 11).
3.11. Concerns associated with PME outcomes
Performance monitoring and evaluation [PME] practitioners and managers may be concerned
that elected political office bearers [mostly from political parties], interest groups, and the
media may use service quality and programme outcome information to criticise policy results.
In a democracy with challenges of service delivery in the sphere of local government –
especially in South Africa where service delivery protests are regular - there might be concerns
that such information stands a good chance of being misused and those municipal PME
practitioners and managers might be blamed for any negative findings – moreover, information
can be used for party political debates [internally and externally].
This might indeed occur on occasion [inversely: managers may also be given inappropriate
recognition for positive results]. This seems less likely to occur since interest groups and the
media are much less likely to bring successes to the attention of the public. Possible misuse of
negative findings is an unavoidable risk of PME reporting – especially in South Africa where the
majority of the population living in informal settlements are unemployed, illiterate, mostly
uneducated and poor [i.e. empirical evidence provided in chapter 5 to follow]. However, this is
a problem that PME practitioners and managers and at times politicians encounter in executing
their duties. PME practitioners and managers should be ready to respond to elected office
bearers, interest groups, and the media about the performance of the programmes and
projects for which they are responsible. To alleviate the problem of risk of possible misuse of
114
negative findings, the reporting process should provide municipal PME practitioners and
managers the opportunity to provide explanatory information with the programme
performance data.
Reports to elected political office bearers and the media should present explanations for the
reported results and, when appropriate, indicate the actions [i.e. municipality] taking place or
plans to address performance challenges. PME practitioners and managers should use PME
reports to present information on resource constraints and other factors, such as poor service
delivery or economic conditions, which are likely to affect programme performance. This should
somewhat alleviate the concerns that PME practitioners and managers have concerning correct
performance reporting.
115
3.12. Conclusion
In this chapter it was argued that the policy framework for the Government-wide Monitoring
and Evaluation [GWM&E] through PME, can assist the public sector in three ways: [i] evaluating
its performance and identifying the factors which contribute to its service delivery outcomes [ii]
assist in providing an evidence base for public resource allocation decisions and [iii] identify
how challenges should be addressed and successes replicated in government. Constitutional
mandates and obligation – including associated legislative requirements [within the local
sphere of local government] for PME to be implemented in municipalities, were also discussed.
Focus in this chapter has been on the principles and essence of PME. The debate started with
explaining the term, in particular its historical foundation, and how it has evolved. This was
followed by a discussion on what performance monitoring and evaluation should measure in a
municipality. A results-based system that examines outcomes and impacts was also
extrapolated and discussed; followed by a view on the use of IE [Impact Evaluation] – this was
conjoined to a debate on the Millennium Development Goals and why they are important to
the South African development agenda. IE will be the preferred method of evaluation in the
empirical component of the study. A discussion on what evaluation is and in particular the link
between monitoring and evaluation featured extensively. The chapter also covered a discussion
on challenges and complexities of policy influence work associated with performance
monitoring and evaluation [PME].
An important debate on the concerns associated with outcomes, results and findings of PME
were discussed. The chapter revealed that performance monitoring and evaluation [PME] of
government in different spheres has become an important aspect of reform in modern public
management in the post-New Public Management [NPM] era. It has been argued that the study
of performance monitoring and evaluation in metropolitan municipalities is located within in
the discipline of Public Administration.
The chapter culminated in a conclusion that the essence of PME in the South African context is
to reflect on what government is doing [at a municipal sphere], what it is achieving against
116
what it has set out to achieve [i.e. IDP and SDBIP] – using South Africa’s’ own assessment report
on its progress in achieving the Millennium Development Goals. The important debate of the
assessment or a view on the level of impact or lack thereof - will be why deviations are
occurring or unexpected outcomes and outputs are a result. The chapter has indicated that the
principle and essence of PME is to provide a marked improvement in performance of the South
African public sector and contribute to the establishment of continuous improvement in
municipalities.
It is important to consider the aspect of international practice in PME and consider experiences
and examples that can enhance the PME reform programme of the South African government –
especially at a municipal level. Different countries have unique examples that the South African
government can learn from – especially countries with similar Gross Domestic Product [GDP]
and developmental challenges and other countries in the developed parts of the world. The
next chapter will discuss international experience as it relates to performance monitoring and
evaluation – in particular how countries have developed PME systems to improve service
delivery by their respective governments.
117
CHAPTER 4: PERFORMANCE MONITORING AND EVALUATION [PME] –
INTERNATIONAL EXPERIENCE
4.1. Introduction
In this chapter, a selection of international concepts of performance monitoring and evaluation
[PME] as it relates to the public sector will be discussed. Different countries’ experiences will be
examined as they pertain to PME. Lessons that can enhance and improve South Africa’s PME
system, as it relates to governance of the public sector and in particular metropolitan
municipalities will be identified, highlighted and given attention.
The United Kingdom [UK]; China; Australia; United States of America [USA], Colombia, Chile,
Mexico and selected African countries [Kenya, Niger, Rwanda and Uganda] have introduced
structured performance monitoring and evaluation [PME] systems in their public management
programmes and projects.
In Africa, the main challenge has been the absence of “adequate learning about PME”. The
notion of continuous learning, in which the results of PME are used, in the design of new
programmes or the redesign of existing ones, is poorly understood and rarely implemented.
Available performance information is not systematically incorporated into the policy-making
process. Thus, an analysis of various unique examples from different countries in various
continents is a necessary experiment to give context to the topic that is being investigated.
118
4.2.
Examples and experiences of performance monitoring and evaluation
[PME] in randomly selected countries
The first part of the discussion will focus on selection of developed countries [USA, UK and
Australia] including the Independent Evaluation Group [IEG] initiative of the World Bank. An
Asian experience of China in particular its PME system will also feature, including associated
successes and failures. The chapter will then deal with established PME systems in the
developing world [Chile, Colombia, Mexico]. Special reference to African countries will be
made.
There are a few unique examples from each of the selected countries that have been
mentioned above, and in the following sections of the chapter, each example will be discussed
briefly. Details will be codified in such a way that the extracted information adds value to the
study. Unique examples mean PME experiences that are specific to the circumstances in the
selected countries.
4.2.6. The United States of America [USA] experience – [Impact evaluations (IE), reporting on
results, quality and outcomes of projects and programmes. Programme Assessment
Rating Tool (PART)].
In the United States, programme evaluation is emerging as a separate social science and
management discipline. Since the early 1970s it has become standard practice in the United
States to monitor and evaluate most federal and state−financed projects. The results of these
evaluations are used extensively by both supporters and opponents of these programmes
(Chelimsky 1988; Rossi and Freeman 1993; Wholey 1979).
The discipline of Public Administration and related fields of study in the USA, have for about 22
years, called for formalisation of PME in government programmes and projects. The National
Academy of Public Administration strongly recommends that units of government at all levels
make a concerted effort to encourage agency heads and programme managers to monitor
119
programme quality and outcomes, as part of an overall system aimed at improving the
performance and credibility of major public programmes. On 8 November 1991, after a yearlong consultation process, the National Academy of Public Administration adopted a resolution
encouraging public agencies at all levels of government to develop procedures for monitoring
and reporting on the quality and outcomes of their programmes (Wholey & Hatry, 1992: 607).
The National Academy of Public Administration argued that PME should be an essential part of:
[i] programme administration and the budget process;
[ii] the process wherein public officials and programme managers implement performance
monitoring systems that can usefully be implemented within the present state of the art;
[iii] legislators, chief executives, and relevant professional groups should encourage agency
heads and key programme managers to undertake the following actions:
-
obtain agreement between policy-making and operating levels (and, where appropriate,
between levels of government) on appropriate indicators of programme cost, quantity
and quality of services, and important programme outcomes;
-
when feasible, involve citizens or their representatives in setting goals for
progress/outcomes and monitoring results;
-
regularly collect information on programme performance in terms of the agreed-on
performance indicators;
-
develop procedures for establishing realistic performance expectations that take into
account the influence of client characteristics, local conditions, and other factors
beyond the control of programme employees;
-
use information on programme performance, changes in programme performance, and
differences between actual and expected performance to improve programme
performance; and
-
regularly report to elected officials and the public on programme performance, changes
in programme performance, results achieved in different geographic areas, and
differences between actual and expected performance.
120
The public, the news media, and elected politicians were reminded that programme results can
be influenced both by programme activities and by client characteristics, local conditions and
other factors beyond the control of programme employees. Performance reports, therefore,
should include explanatory information on key factors likely to have affected programme
performance.
As experience was gained through PME and reporting and as performance trends became
clearer, chief executives, agency heads, and programme managers proposed realistic
performance targets in terms of programme goals and agreed-on programme quality and
outcome indicators. Subsequently, they monitored and reported on progress in achieving those
performance targets. After a while, results could be discerned and the National Academy of
Public Administration encouraged further broad experimentation, research, and development
of even more effective performance monitoring techniques for an increasingly complex public
service. As more experience was gained and the necessary resources and procedures became
available, PME and regular reporting extended to major programmes at all levels of
government.
The USA’s General Accounting Office [GAO] publishes more than one programme evaluation a
day, many of which greatly influence budgetary allocations and the formulation of new
programmes (Chelimsky 1987). The growing presence of evaluation specialists can be observed
in their published works, in professional organisations such as the American Evaluation
Association, which now has more than 2500 members, and in the increasing number of courses
on monitoring and evaluation [now offered in at least 46 universities in the USA].
Leading evaluation practitioners in the USA argue that satisfactory solutions have been found to
most of the basic problems of evaluation design and analysis, at least for countries such as the
United States. It is possible to produce methodologically sound and operationally useful
evaluations for a broad range of development programmes. Rossi and Wright (1984: 332), in a
review of the status of evaluation research, concluded that the evaluation research field is
beginning to reach a high level of intellectual accomplishment, that is, just as the best
evaluation research of the prosperous decades is being published. New developments in
121
techniques and methodology have appeared that promise to raise the overall quality not only
of evaluations but of many other areas of social research as well. Evaluation researchers have
now learned how to conduct field experiments successfully and how to analyse the resulting
complicated data sets. They have also started to provide solutions to some of the most serious
validity problems of non-experimental research.
A number of states and local governments have developed performance monitoring and
evaluation [PME] systems in programme areas such as economic development, elementary and
secondary education, higher education, hospital care, mass transportation, police and fire
services, public assistance, public health, road maintenance, and solid-waste collection. As an
example, federal level PME includes aid to families with dependent children and food stamp
programme quality control; monitoring of progress in child support enforcement; efforts to
measure progress toward the national goals for education; health care financing administration
monitoring of medicare patient outcomes; Department of Justice’s monitoring of reported
crime rates, crime clearance rates, and victimisation rates; Department of Labour monitoring of
performance in employment and training (Hatry, Fountain, Jr., Sullivan & Kremer, 1990).
PME has been used by many local and state agencies. Local governments such as those in
Charlotte, Dayton, New York City, Savannah, and Sunnyvale have been monitoring the quality
and outcomes of their local services for many years. Through such techniques as regular
surveys of business, local government, and travel customers, Minnesota's Department of Trade
and Economic Development has been monitoring the performance of its major programmes
since 1989 [i.e. export promotion, financial assistance to businesses, small business assistance,
and assistance to communities] and even longer for the performance of its tourism promotion
services (Wholey & Hatry, 1992: 606). Since 2002, the USA has created the Programme
Assessment Rating Tool [PART]. This programme was created to build on earlier efforts to
measure government performance (Mackay, 2007: 13). Almost all government programmes are
being rated, using the PART methodology, which focuses on four aspects of programme
performance:
122

The clarity of programme objectives and design;

Quality of the strategic planning and extent of focus on programme targets;

Effectiveness of programme management;

Actual programme results achieved. This last criterion accounts for 50 percent of the
PART rating for each programme.
All four criteria emphasise the need for factual evidence of programme performance. This is
apparently based on monitoring information and evaluation findings. The ratings are prepared
jointly by the Office of Management and Budget [OMB], which is the finance ministry in the
USA government, and by departments and agencies. However, OMB has the final say in
deciding the ratings (Mackay, 2007: 11).
During the 2005 financial year, it was estimated that 44% of programmes were rated as
effective or moderately effective; 24% were rated as results not demonstrated, because of
insufficient PME information. This was a significant decline from fiscal 2002, when 50% of
programmes were rated as results not demonstrated.
In the USA government, the Programme Assessment Rating Tool [PART] ratings are required to
be used by departments in their annual budget funding requests to the OMB. The requests
must highlight the PART ratings, the recommendations for improvements in programme
performance, and performance targets. OMB, in turn, uses the PART ratings as one input when
it prepares the administration’s funding requests to the Congress. Moreover, OMB uses the
PART ratings to agree or to impose performance improvement requirements on departments.
The USA General Accountability Office [GAO] has concluded that PART has assisted OMB to
analyse PME information on programme performance as part of its budget analysis work. It has
also stimulated departments’ interest in budget performance information. However, GAO
concludes that the Congress continues to take a traditional approach to its budget
deliberations, with relatively little emphasis on PME information (Mackay, 2007: 11).
123
According to Briceño & Gaarder (2009: 27) the National Science Foundation [NSF] in the USA
[which has an annual budget of just over US$6 billion] is the body responsible for funding
research with regard to Impact Evaluations [IE]. NSF’s emphasis is more focused on keeping the
USA on the leading edge of scientific development, but the broader impacts of the proposed
research are specifically included in the review process. For instance, the What Works Clearing
House [WCCH] is part of the Institute of Education Sciences of the USA’s Department of
Education. It was set up in 2002 to be a central source of scientific evidence for what is required
to prove successful implementation in education in the USA.
An important lesson from the USA with regard to their PME experience is that the government
has been using PME for more than 20 years as a tool to assess its performance in local
government and state departments. The USA government has used Impact evaluations [IE] as
an important PME tool for reporting on results, quality and outcomes of projects and
programmes. The government has, since 2002, designed a Programme Assessment Rating Tool
[PART] as a PME tool – this is a key feature of the USA PME.
4.2.2. The United Kingdom [UK] unique experience – [use of performance information from
the public sector agreements for internal planning and accountability].
The UK government created a system of performance targets in 1998. The system’s details are
contained in public sector agreements between the Treasury and each of the 18 main
government departments. The public sector agreements explain the department’s overall goal,
the priority objectives, and key performance targets. Performance targets in the UK
government range from 10 – 110 for the government as a whole. They are focused on the
priority areas of education, health, transport, and criminal justice. The targets are mainly
expressed in terms of the outcomes [rather than outputs] to be achieved. Twice a year,
departments report publicly on the number of evaluations, as an input to budget decision-
124
making. Spending priorities, expenditure ceilings, and the related performance targets are
established in a system of three-year spending reviews. The U.K. national audit office reports
that departments also use the performance information from the public sector agreements for
their internal planning and accountability; less use is made of this information for ongoing
management (Mackay, 2007: 12).
The Economic and Social Research Council [ESRC] in the UK has an annual budget of just over
US$320 million, funds academic research, but puts emphasis on policy relevance and user
engagement. ESRC is restricted to social sciences with councils for natural sciences and
medicine, EPSRC and MRC [medical research council] respectively. In the UK, ESRC has a PME
programme that the government calls engaging society. Engaging society is aimed at placing
the highest importance on the communication of research findings to policy-makers and
research users from government, business and finance, the public and voluntary sectors, and
more importantly the public (Briceño & Gaarder, 2009: 27).
An important lesson from the UK with regard to their PME experience - is that the UK
government has been using PME for more than 15 years as a tool to assess its performance in
18 government departments. The UK government has used performance information from the
public sector agreements for internal planning and accountability. This is the main feature of
the UK’s PME to assess projects and programmes in government.
4.2.3. The Australian experience – [evaluation planning called portfolio evaluation plans called
(PEPs)]
The Australian PME system is based on a 1988 diagnostic review of evaluation practices in
departments and for the overall level of evaluation activity in government, which largely
comprises a formal strategy for evaluations. The strategy itself was progressively developed
over several years (1987–1991). The strategy has three principal objectives:
125
-
to encourage programme managers to use evaluation to improve their programmes’
performance;
-
to aid the Cabinet’s decision making and prioritisation, particularly in the annual budget
process, when a large number of competing proposals are advocated by individual
ministers;
-
to strengthen accountability in a devolved environment by providing formal evidence of
programme managers’ oversight and management of programme resources.
All ministries are required to evaluate each of their programmes every three to five years
(Mackay, 1998: 12). Departments are required to prepare portfolio evaluation plans. These
plans detail the evaluations that are to be undertaken over the following three years and
indicate the programmes to be evaluated, the issues to be addressed in each evaluation, and
the evaluation methods to be used.
The centre-piece of the Australian strategy has been evaluation planning, which was done
through formal portfolio evaluation plans called [PEPs] over the past 25 years, which are
submitted annually to the minister for finance. PEPs list the government programmes that the
ministry intends to evaluate and the issues to be addressed in each evaluation. These PEPs are
prepared annually on a three-year term. They include major evaluations only, that is,
evaluations of programmes considered strategically important to the government: programmes
with large budgets; those of particular policy importance; problematic programmes; and pilot
programmes. The evaluations are conducted by the line ministry concerned and usually with
some involvement from the finance ministry.
One feature of Australia’s PME system is that a broad definition of evaluation is used.
Evaluation is defined as a form of disciplined inquiry: it includes rapid evaluations, formal policy
reviews, rigorous impact evaluations, and performance audits conducted by the national audit
office.
126
A lesson from the Australia’s PME system is that it is evaluation based, which is viewed as
providing the necessary in-depth, reliable information on the efficiency and effectiveness of
government programmes. Performance information is also understood to be important, but it
is viewed as an issue for line departments to manage. The most important feature of Australia’s
PME system is the significant use of evaluation findings to support the cabinet’s budget
decision making.
Evaluation findings influence not only the policy options put forward for the cabinet’s
consideration, but also the cabinet’s decisions. The Department of Finance’s budget officials are
surveyed, regarding the extent to which evaluation has influenced the cabinet’s decisions in the
budgets. The evidence is mixed, but it indicates that evaluation plays a substantive role. In
1994–95, evaluation was judged to have influenced the cabinet’s decision in 68% of the $2,846
billion worth of proposals considered [new policy proposals plus savings options].
4.2.4. The Asian experience
4.2.4.1.
China – [“feeling our way across the river” (policies under consideration must be
assessed ex ante without being able to test new policies in practice and obtain
realistic information about the potential effects)].
A discussion on China as one of the leading world economies [i.e. only second to the USA in the
world] is an important and critical requirement for this research. For instance in 1978, the
Chinese Communist Party’s 11th Congress deviated from its ideology-based view of policymaking in favour of a pragmatic approach, which Deng Xiaoping [former leader of the People’s
Republic of China] famously dubbed “feeling our way across the river.” At its core was the idea
that public action should be based on evaluations of experiences with different policies — the
intellectual approach of seeking truth from facts. A high value was put on demonstrable success
in actual policy experiments (Ravaillon, 2009).
127
The most important aspect of China’s developing and implementing economic reform has been
the learning authoritarian state – meaning that the Chinese have been doing experimentation
during implementation; which is contrary to the orthodox principle of policy-making in rule-oflaw systems. This principal advice that administrative implementation must come after
parliamentary legislation or executive regulation and must be based on formalised and
publicised general rules. According to Heilmann (2008: 3) the potential impact of the policies
under consideration must be assessed ex ante without being able to test new policies in
practice and obtain realistic information about the potential effects. Furthermore, Heilmann
(2008: 3) argues that the majority of major economic reform initiatives in post-Mao China were
prepared and tried out through pilot projects [also known as experimental points or model
projects] before they are to be universalised in national regulations, and offers state-owned
enterprise [SOE] restructuring and bankruptcy laws. Other areas of experimentation include the
household responsibility system, township and village enterprises, and special economic zones.
Chinese-style experimentation according to Briceño & Gaarder (2009:23) takes three distinct
forms:

regulations identified explicitly as experimental [i.e., provisional rules for trial
implementation];

“experimental points” [i.e., model demonstrations and pilot projects in specific policy
areas];

“experimental zones” [specially delineated local jurisdictions with broad discretionary
powers to undertake experimentation].
This proves that the Chinese are not really involved in orthodox PME systems, as in the USA or
UK examples. Instead, China carries out discretionary policy experimentation in advance of
legislation. These experimental methodologies are in a purist sense, what can be termed case
studies. Research coming from PME researchers, who conducted PME research in China
(Briceño & Gaarder, 2009: 24) - is that there is little formal, rigorous evaluation taking place in
China with regards to PME. They were able to establish the existence of completed or ongoing
128
evaluations in 17 projects and programmes - the demand for the evaluations has mainly
stemmed from donor institutions or has been initiated by the researchers themselves.
4.2.5. The Latin American experience
In Latin America, there are twenty countries that are currently working to strengthen their
government’s PME systems. The leading countries in development and entrenching continuous
PME system’s practice include Brazil, Chile, Colombia and Mexico. However, Brazil will not be
considered for this study due to limited published information from its government or
researchers in the field of PME.
It has been observed that the common set of economic and social pressures are perhaps more
important in Latin America, as it is the case in other developing continents. These are
continuing macroeconomic and budgetary constraints; dissatisfaction that growth in
government spending in the social sectors has not been matched by commensurate increases in
the quality or quantity of services provided; continuing pressures to improve and extend
government service delivery and income transfers; and the growing pressures for government
accountability and for social control that is, clearer accountability of governments to ordinary
citizens (Mackay, 2007: 17).
4.2.5.1.
Chilean experience – [Ministry of Finance [MoF] uses PME [performance monitoring
and evaluation] information to improve the performance of ministries and agencies,
through the six pillars or components. Evaluations are an integral part of the
programmes from inception].
The government of Chile has progressively developed its PME system over a number of years,
with most of the development having occurred since 1994. The system has been largely
129
designed, implemented, and managed by the Ministry of Finance [MoF], with the overall
objective of improving the quality of public spending.
According to Mackay (2007: 27) a unique and notable feature of Chile’s PME is the manner in
which the Ministry of Finance [MoF] uses PME information to improve the performance of
ministries and agencies. It undertakes this action in two ways. Firstly, the performance
indicators provide baselines of programme performance and the MoF agrees on performance
targets for the coming budget year with each public agency. The MoF monitors the extent to
which the targets are met. In 2003 for example, about three-quarters of these targets were
met.
Secondly, when the MoF considers the recommendations made by the evaluations it has
commissioned, it discusses them with the evaluated organisations and formally agrees on
changes to the programmes. In effect, the MoF imposes these agreements known as formal
commitments on the organisations concerned. It is unique for MoF to systematically impose
management changes on ministries and agencies. Chile’s MoF is able to do this because of its
influential role within the government (Mackay, 2007:27). The Chilean PME system consists of
six pillars or components:
o Ex ante cost benefit analysis of all investment projects - introduced in 1974. This work is
undertaken by the planning ministry.
o Performance indicators – initially piloted in 1994. The Ministry of Finance [MoF]
currently collects about 1,550 performance indicators, for all sectors in government.
o Comprehensive management reports – this system was first introduced in 1996. What
happens is that reports are generated and prepared annually by ministries and
agencies and report on their objectives, spending and performance.
o The evaluations of government programmes – this was also initiated in 1996. The
evaluations follow a standardised format, which includes rapid reviews, a log-frame
analysis of a programme, a desk review, and an analysis of existing data.
130
o Rigorous impact evaluations – the system was firstly introduced in 2001. This is a
scientifically based system where primary data is collected and analysed, usually based
on sophisticated statistical techniques.
o Comprehensive spending reviews – this current system was introduced in 2002. The
reviews analyse all programmes within a particular functional area and address issues
associated with inefficiency and duplication of programmes in departments in
particular and government in general.
This proves that Chile has a comprehensive PME system; an important lesson coming from the
Chilean experience is that evaluation needs to be an integral part of the programmes from
inception. Another critical lesson is the development of ex-post impact evaluations and the
move towards new programme evaluation.
4.2.5.2.
Colombian experience – [SINERGIA, the system’s main components is a performance
information data-base containing about 500 performance indicators; to track the
government’s performance against all of the 320 presidential goals].
The PME system in Colombia is called SINERGIA and it is managed by the Department of
National Planning [DNP]. One of the system’s main components is a performance information
data-base containing about 500 performance indicators, to track the government’s
performance against all of the 320 presidential goals (Mackay, 2007: 17). For each performance
indicator, the publicly available database records the following critical areas of performance
assessment:

objective;

the strategy to achieve the objective;

baseline performance;

annual targets

the amount spent by the government.
131
SINERGIA’s mandate and conceptual basis are broad and involve PME activities across all
sectors and government levels (Briceño & Gaarder, 2009: 14). In practice, the Directorate for
Evaluation of Public Policies [DEPP] acts as the technical secretariat of SINERGIA. It is a unit
established within the National Planning Department [NPD], a long-standing administrative
department with ministerial status that acts as the technical arm of the Presidency,
coordinating and guiding policy-making along with sector ministries and in charge of central
government’s investment budget.
In practice, DEPP’s main scope of action is related to its regular interaction with agencies and
ministries at the central level regarding monitoring of the system of goals and ongoing
evaluation of programmes, capacity building activities and dissemination of PME information
through seminars and training events. The normative framework also provides for different
units of the agencies and ministries to carry out regular PME activities, in particular planning or
budget units. In exceptional cases, some special evaluation units have been established
(Briceño & Gaarder, 2009:14).
The performance monitoring and evaluation [PME] systems in Colombia have a unique critical
feature. The President assesses ministers and the so called PME information in meetings with
municipalities. What takes place in practice is that performance assessments are conducted and
where performance targets are not met, the manager responsible for the target is required to
prepare a statement explaining underperformance. In turn, the Office of the President uses this
information in monthly management control meetings with each minister and in weekly town
hall meetings in municipalities. The department responsible is the National Planning
Department [DNP].
Performance monitoring and evaluation [PME] is undertaken through the department
[Evaluacion de Politicas Publicas]. There is a Director with the following four divisions [Results
Monitoring, Strategic Evaluations, Dissemination and Accountability and Performance for
Results]. An important lesson from the Colombian experience - the case of SINERGIA, is that
132
legal support from access to Public Information or Transparency Laws is an important asset to
support full public disclosure, especially in PME systems located within the executive.
4.2.5.3.
Mexican experience – [CONEVAL, social sector agencies are required by law to have
an annual evaluation programme agreed-upon. Broad legal mandate for PME].
In Mexico, the leading evaluation entity is the National Council for the Evaluation of Social
Development Policies [Consejo Nacional de Evaluación de la Política de Desarrollo Social –
CONEVAL]. This body was created in 2004 as part of the Social Development Law. There are
between 100 and 130 federal programmes under the mandate of CONEVAL [reported figures
differ by year], of which all are required to carry out logframe-type evaluations for which it
provides terms of reference and guidelines. In addition, CONEVAL directly oversees about 15
evaluations per year, which is an equivalent of 11% of the programmes under its mandate, of
which approximately 20% are Impact Evaluations [IE] (CONEVAL, 2008).
CONEVAL was established with a twofold mission:

to measure poverty [national, state and municipal level] and

to evaluate all social development policies and programmes at the federal level to
improve results and support accountability practice under methodological rigor.
Although the mandate of CONEVAL is formally limited to the social sector, it acts as the
standard setter and articulator of evaluation activities across government agencies (Briceño &
Gaarder, 2009: 8). Key factors of the PME system in Mexico are:

the social sector agencies are required by law to have an annual evaluation
programme agreed-upon with CONEVAL.
133

the Ministry of Finance [Secretaría de Hacienda y Crédito Público, SHCP], and the
public comptroller’s office [Secretaría de la Función Pública – SFP] as a prerequisite
for inclusion in the national budget gives the institution [CONEVAL] a powerful
mandate.

there are other institutions that perform monitoring and auditing activities at the
central level.
It could be deduced from the information gathered, that there are three areas that can be
identified where an institutionalisation gap remains in Mexico. The challenges and gaps in the
Mexican PME system include: the alignment of central evaluation efforts between these new
evaluation units and CONEVAL and the lack of evaluation at the sub-national government levels
including the relative absence of institutionalised evaluations [Impact Evaluation and other,
such as process evaluation] in the non-social sectors (Briceño & Gaarder, 2009: 8).
The important lesson of CONEVAL – is that it is important to have a unique and broad legal
mandate for PME in government, because the risk of having ambiguities in the legal or
regulatory mandates over the agency or unit in charge of the development of the PME system,
or the scope of sectors - is that competing initiatives may appear that undermine consolidation
and legitimacy before the agencies undertake PME activities. Thus, it could be argued that the
approach followed does not success in ensuring a comprehensive PME system in Mexico.
4.2.6. The African experience
As indicated earlier in chapter 3, [cf “3.4. Explaining the concept of performance monitoring
and evaluation – PME”], in Africa, substantial modern techniques and practice of performance
monitoring and evaluation [PME] achievements are rare in sub-Saharan Africa - only in a few
countries [Kenya, Niger, Uganda, Rwanda]. A low to medium effectiveness of PME systems can
be found. According to Schacter (2000: 5) there are three key areas that pose the biggest
challenge for PME to flourish in sub-Saharan Africa.
134
Firstly, there is an issue of insufficient supply. It is a result of too few people in most SubSaharan African countries capable of designing and implementing PME activities due to “brain
drain” and poor training results in the area.
Secondly, there is a challenge of the basic statistical and technical building blocks of PME
systems in most African countries. As argued by Kusek & Rist (2004: 76) efforts have been made
throughout the African region to create the basic statistical and technical building blocks of
PME systems. Among these building blocks are the core indicator surveys that have been
conducted in a number of African countries, including Ghana, Malawi, Mozambique, Nigeria,
and Lesotho. The Core Welfare Indicators Questionnaire [CWIQ] was created jointly by the
World Bank, the UNDP, and UNICEF to monitor development objectives through the use of
leading indicators in general, and social indicators in particular. Leading indicators are indicators
give advance warning of a future impact, whose emergence may be delayed or difficult to
measure.
Thirdly, there is a challenge of donor agencies in the driver’s seat. A lack of demand for PME in
the region means that much of the PME activity has occurred through donor-driven initiatives.
PME in these states on the African continent often address donors’ concerns for the
accountability of project inputs and outputs, rather than local concerns related to broader
development issues. The disproportionate element of donor initiative reduces local
commitment to, and ownership of PME efforts. According to Mackay (2007: 46) most African
countries are simply too poor to conduct evaluations and reviews [examples provided are
Tanzania and Uganda]; they rely instead on donors for such work. A difficulty is the heavy
burden placed on countries to meet the PME requirements of donors, in terms of inspection
missions, provision of performance information, harmonised donor evaluation criteria and
methods.
Valadez & Bamberger (1994: 20) argue that most development projects in African countries and
in other developing countries are financed by international aid groups. For instance, 192 were
completed under the auspices of the World Bank in 1985 based on its project completion
135
reports (World Bank 1987: xi). Close to 250 are completed every year under the U.S. Agency for
International Development [USAID] judging by its evaluation reports (OECD 1986). The available
evidence suggests that a significant proportion of development programmes in African
countries fail to fully achieve their objectives. Of the 192 completed by the World Bank in 1985,
approximately 20% had unsatisfactory or uncertain outcomes (World Bank 1987: 5).
Success rates have been even lower for complex projects in low−income countries which are in
need of major social and economic reform, notably in Africa. The success rate for such
countries is often less than 50% (World Bank 1987: 28). These figures do not fully reflect project
performance, however, because they usually refer to the project implementation stage, in
which infrastructure is constructed, equipment installed, and service delivery systems
established. Little is known about how well projects are able to sustain the delivery of services
over time, and even less about the extent to which projects are able to produce their intended
impacts.
The main argument advanced by PME practitioners and authors is that African countries
already possess PME systems, even though most of the systems were developed by donor and
aid organisations. Mackay (2007: 50) argue that the challenge these countries face are not
developing new PME systems, but rationalising and improving already existing systems. There
are problems with data quality and unharmonised donor requirements for PME. A situation of
too much data, not enough information – which is something that require trained practitioners
to unravel. Compounding these problems on the supply side, is that in most countries on the
African continent, there is weak government demand for PME information. Although it would
be unrealistic to expect most African countries to build comprehensive, reliable PME systems,
there are a number of important elements that they could undertake. They are listed below:

financial management information systems to support better financial tracking of
government spending;
136

public expenditure tracking surveys to identify leakage and to trace the effects of
corruption;

service delivery surveys of client satisfaction and perceptions of the quality of
government services;

rapid appraisals—for example, of problem projects or programmes;

national and sector statistical collections—especially relating to national priorities such
as the [Millennium Development Goals] MDGs;

sector ministries’ administrative data.
In a study on “The case for performance monitoring” Wholey & Hatry (1992: 605) explain the
notion of performance monitoring in detail as follows:

performance monitoring systems generally should compare the performance of
different units, compare current performance with prior performance, or compare
actual results to targeted performance levels;

performance monitoring systems generally should compare the results achieved in
different geographic areas or in different population subgroups; and

more advanced performance monitoring systems compare the performance of units
operating under similar conditions or use statistical analysis to control for client
characteristics, community characteristics, or other factors that may affect programme
outcomes.
Even though some African countries do not have the requisite skills and infrastructure
necessary to undertake PME as a necessary reform in their countries – current PME systems
developed by donors can be improved. The least that has been created as a PME system by
donor organisations can serve as a base or platform to build on moving forward.
137
Table 4.1. A summary of experiences from a selected group of countries in performance
monitoring and evaluations [PME]
Country
United
Feature or experience in PME Lessons for South Africa
States
America [USA]
of IE [Impact evaluations], reporting South Africa has already adapted
on results, quality and outcomes of some of this experience in its
projects and programmes
legislative and PME framework
[i.e. NEPF]
UK
Kingdom]
[United use of performance information South Africa has already adapted
from the public sector agreements some of this experience in its
for
internal
planning
and legislative and PME framework
accountability
[i.e. NEPF] and in the Green
paper on National Planning.
Australia
Evaluation planning
South Africa has already adapted
some of this experience in its
legislative and PME framework
[i.e. NEPF]
China
“feeling our way across the river” South Africa is way ahead of
[policies under consideration must China in terms of PME.
be assessed ex ante without being
able to test new policies in practice
and obtain realistic information
about the potential effects]
Chile
The way the Ministry of Finance South Africa can learn from the
[MoF] uses PME [performance Chilean experience, considering
monitoring
and
information
to
evaluation] its key priorities in the National
improve
the Development Plan [NDP] 2030.
performance of ministries and
138
agencies, through the six [6] pillars
or components - evaluation needs
to be an integral part of the
programmes since their inception.
SINERGIA,
Colombia
components
the
is
system’s
main The South African Department of
a performance DPME can learn in terms of how
information database containing to structure PME programmes,
about 500 performance indicators but more importantly on Public
to
track
the
government’s Information
or
Transparency
performance against all of the 320 Laws – which is an important
presidential goals – including the asset
to
back
full
public
Public Information or Transparency disclosure, especially in systems
Laws.
located within the executive.
CONEVAL, social sector agencies South Africa has already adapted
Mexico
are required by law to have an some of this experience in its
annual
evaluation
programme legislative and PME framework
agreed-upon - it is important to [i.e. NEPF] – in the main it refers
enjoy a unique and broad legal to issues of donor agencies and
mandate in PME
how they are accommodated in
the South African PME systems.
Sub-Saharan
countries
Niger,
Rwanda]
There are problems with data One recommendation is that
[Kenya, quality and unharmonised donor South
Uganda,
Africa
can
use
its
requirements for PME— a situation experience to support the Subof too much data, not enough Saharan countries in developing
information – which is something sustainable PME systems as a
that requires trained practitioners reform programme.
to unravel.
139
4.3.
Performance monitoring and evaluation [PME] and government reform at
an international level
A detailed debate and discussion in chapter 2 [cf “2.5 – Performance monitoring and evaluation
(PME) as a reform programme] of the study has been concluded. The argument advanced in
chapter 2 under the specified section is that:
Government interventions which are introduced to attain reform goals similar to performance
monitoring and evaluation [PME] are popularly known as New Public Management [NPM]
initiative. However, NPM is only the utilisation of a particular style of management to effect
these reform goals – as it has been the case with the introduction of PME in the South African
public administration environment. PME is applied within a reform framework where the
national reform goals are clear and senior politicians [i.e. the Presidency and the Minister of
Performance Monitoring and Evaluation] are leading the process. Public managers, who aspire
to introduce NPM initiatives supported by reform interventions [i.e. PME], could find it difficult
to implement it successfully if the head of state is not involved and a broad political-will to
support it is lacking.
Countries can use PME information to assess the performance of organisations and institutional
reform processes. Another important aspect is accountability, as PME contributes to the
accountability mechanisms, which hold managers and governments accountable for their
performance (Mackay, 1998: 8). Creating a PME system strengthens governance by improving
transparency, by strengthening accountability relationships, and by promoting a performance
culture within governments to support better policy-making, budget decision-making, and
management (Lahey, 2010: 3).
Schacter (2000: 7) argues that for PME interventions to have a reasonable chance of success,
the programme must pay careful attention to the quality of local leadership for reform; local
capacity to design and implement reform programmes and features of the local incentive and
140
accountability environment, particularly as they relate to the level of corruption in the public
sector and the quality of public service delivery; capacity-building needs of decentralised as well
as centralised forms of government and forces external to the public service that support
governance reform.
The observation is that governments in different spheres and in particular at a local sphere
where municipalities are located in conjunction with policy-makers are regularly experimenting
with service delivery options, sometimes without citizen’s informed consent on issues affecting
their lives [e.g. China’s experience above]. This experimentation is sometimes done without
factual evidence to check if whatever they are doing is effective, or whether it has substantive
adverse effects, and to what extent it could achieve a more efficient and effective means in
their quest of delivering basic services to the communities they serve. It is therefore important
to have carefully designed and implementable monitoring and evaluation practises, that have
the potential to improve the delivery of minimum basic services [i.e. electricity, sanitation,
water and waste collection] and enhance people’s welfare.
There are various reasons for the heightened and increasing effort to strengthen a country’s
government performance monitoring and evaluation [PME] system’s capability and capacity.
Reasons range from fiscal pressures to ever rising expectations, which originate from ordinary
citizens. All these important issues provide a continuing impetus for governments to provide
more services at higher standards of quality. Moreover, these pressures are reasons to find
more cost effective ways of operating, so that governments can provide more services with
fewer resources.
In the absence of adequate attention to service quality and programme outcomes, government
may become wasteful; ineffective; unresponsive and government credibility could sink lower.
Modern management theory refers to emphasis in the use of systematic mathematical
techniques in the system with analysing and understanding the inter-relationship of
management and workers in all aspects and practice including customer focus; market-driven
141
management; strategic planning; total quality management; value for money depend on
adequate and timely information on what public programmes are accomplishing are essential
elements to avoid wasteful expenditure in government (Wholey & Hatry, 1992:605).
In previous chapters [2 and 3] it was argued that building a performance monitoring and
evaluation [PME] system depends on political commitment and requires technical capability. In
this instance competent managers and officials in government in all spheres need to cooperate. Civil society groups and parliaments are exerting accountability pressure on
governments to publicly report and explain their performances. It is accepted practice in the
International donor community to demonstrate the results of the large volumes of aid spending
for which they are responsible. In turn, these donors are to persuading and supporting
developing countries to strengthen their own PME systems – as a reform programme and
intervention to improve their performance of governance.
4.4.
Three dimensions of success in PME
The successful institutionalisation of PME involves the creation of a sustainable, wellfunctioning PME system within a government, where good quality PME information is used
intensively – something that still needs to be entrenched in the South African government, in all
spheres (Mackay, 2007: 23). The three identified dimensions of success are:

Utilisation of PME information – to support government policy making, including
performance budgeting or national planning; for policy development and analysis and
programme development; for programme and project management; or for
accountability purposes.

Good quality PME information – where a system of performance indicators focus on
national development goals [as in the Ministry of Performance Monitoring and
Evaluation in South Africa]; National goals, outputs, service delivery, and processes.
142
Others focus on carrying out various types of evaluation, such as rapid reviews, rigorous
impact evaluations.

Sustainability – the argument is whether PME systems will survive a change in
administration or if government ministers or senior officials change. In cases where the
utilisation of PME information is firmly embedded that is, mainstreamed in core
government processes such as the budget cycle. It could be argued that they are
institutionalised and thus likely to be sustained over time. However the opposite also
applies where PME has only a limited number of key supporters or is used only in
limited access, or if it is largely funded by donors rather than by the government itself,
then sustainability would be seen as less likely.
It can be argued that international donor support has, given particular attention to poorer
countries. These are countries that prepare poverty-reduction strategies as part of debt relief
initiatives. Furthermore, these countries are engaged in rigorous development programmes to
achieve the Millennium Development Goals [MDGs]. Donors are starting to appreciate that
country PME systems can play a role in amplifying and boosting anticorruption efforts; assisting
to identify “leakages” in government funding, as well as some of the possible consequences of
corruption in the public service. PME can also expose government spending that is not reflected
in the physical quality of infrastructure or in the volume and quality of services provided. The
issue of credibility and legitimacy of a PME system becomes important.
143
4.5.
Credibility and legitimacy of performance monitoring and evaluation
[PME]
Experts in the field of PME, Briceño & Gaarder (2009: 5) argue that a successful institutionalised
performance monitoring and evaluation [PME] system may be applied differently in different
countries, contexts and cultural environments. Nevertheless there are the same trade-offs and
considerations to be made. With the main objective of monitoring and evaluating being the
performance of governmental programmes, the oversight body [Legislature and the
Department of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation – PME in the South African context]
should enjoy a high degree of independence, which ultimately translates into higher external
credibility. Furthermore, legitimacy of the PME effort can also be attained through the
establishment of competitive and transparent processes for the contracting of external PME
agencies.
The risk to credibility when the system is located under the executive [which is the case in
South Africa] can be mitigated with other provisions such as a commitment to public disclosure
through relevant legislation; in particular the Promotion to access to Information Act, 2 of 2000
[PAIA] and the Promotion of Administrative Justice Act, 3 of 2000 [PAJA].
The credibility issue in PME is important because, PME systems have as object of operation the
monitoring and evaluation of governmental programmes, plans, projects, or activities,
therefore one assumption is that subjectivity increases the closer the PME unit is to the object
of analysis [government and in this instance the local sphere of government – a municipality].
An oversight body should enjoy a high degree of independence to be able to make assessments
and fully disclose them, without any improper influence. Therefore, the implication is that
government systems should enjoy a higher degree of independence that ultimately translates
into higher external credibility. Presumably, the higher the degree of independence, the better
the reception is from internal and external stakeholders (Briceño & Gaarder, 2009: 28).
144
According to Valadez & Bamberger (1994: 22) when properly applied, information produced by
PME systems can be of direct use to policymakers, planners, and managers in at least four
ways. Firstly, it can assist a country to improve its method of identifying and selecting projects
and programmes by ensuring that these endeavours are consistent with national development
objectives, that they will have a good chance of succeeding, and that they are using the most
cost−effective strategy for achieving the intended objectives. Secondly, PME systems can
determine whether the project is being implemented efficiently, is responsive to the concerns
of the intended beneficiaries, and will have its potential problems detected and corrected as
quickly as possible. Thirdly, PME systems measure whether projects and programmes that are
under way are achieving their intended economic and social objectives, as well as contributing
to sectoral and national development objectives. Fourth, evaluation studies can be used to
assess the impact of projects on wider developmental objectives such as protecting the
environment and managing natural resources, alleviating poverty, and giving women full
economic, social, and political participation in all aspects of development.
4.6.
Independent Evaluation Group [IEG]
Since its creation in 1973, the World Bank’s Independent Evaluation Group [IEG], which was
formerly known as the Operations Evaluation Department has mainly supported the efforts of
governments, particularly in developing countries to strengthen their performance monitoring
and evaluation [PME] systems and capacities (Mackay, 2007: v). Many developed and
developing countries have accumulated substantive experience in building monitoring and
evaluation systems. As with any form of capacity building, there are a number of lessons about
what approach is most successful (Mackay, 2007: 2).
IEG has estimated that, by 2002, the World Bank was already assisting more than 30 countries
on the latter type of PME systems building. The number has increased substantially since that
time. The World Bank has a regional programme to support building PME systems in Latin
America. This includes the creation of a high-level community of practice for M&E system
managers and others. The Asian Development Bank created a similar community of practice,
145
and the African Development Bank has announced a similar community for Africa. In 2005, the
Inter-American Development Bank initiated a programme of support to assist countries in the
Latin American and Caribbean Region to build their PME systems; about 20 countries have
received grant support via this programme (Mackay, 2007: 18) – which is important for
developing countries’ development agenda.
The Independent Evaluation Group of the WB [World Bank] IEG has contributed by actively
promoting some assessments of the systems’ performance and diagnoses (Briceño & Gaarder,
2009: 32). Mexico [CONEVAL] recently commissioned an assessment of its general guidelines
for federal programmes evaluation from a World Bank team. In 2005, another team carried out
a comprehensive analysis of the Chilean public expenditure evaluation programme and IEG
published a diagnosis of Colombia [SINERGIA] in 2007.
The Latin American Centre for Development Administration [CLAD] has continuously studied
the systems since the late 1990s, and in 2006, engaged jointly with the WB in an ambitious
initiative to strengthen the region’s PME systems by studying and analysing 12 countries, with a
standard methodology and a comparative approach, which resulted in a series of individual
country studies and a 2008 comparative report. So far, this can be considered the major and
significant effort to assess the evolution of the IE [Impact Evaluation] systems at the regional
level (Briceño & Gaarder, 2009:32).
PME information is used for multiple purposes; for incorporating it into policy and budget
decision-making and national planning, improving policy analysis and policy development,
assisting in managerial activities such as programme management or institutional management,
enhancing transparency and accountability. Successful PME systems are different in different
contexts and environments (Briceño & Gaarder, 2007: 28). They argue that the development of
the PME system is not linear, it follows the learning by doing principle. The most crucial aspect
repeatedly raised by experts as a yardstick of PME success is the degree of utilisation of the
information produced by the PME system. This is a prerequisite for sustainability.
146
It can be argued that PME is a crucial requirement for managing and implementing projects,
programmes and policies in public organisations. The production and use of PME information
during and after an intervention can be regarded as central in PME systems; for reporting and
accountability in an organisation; in demonstrating performance and for learning from
experience and improving future executive actions.
4.7.
International performance monitoring and evaluation [PME] associations
4.8.1. Global
An important and developing trend influencing the focus on PME is the growth in the number
and membership of national, regional, and global evaluation associations. At the global level it
is the International Development Evaluation Association [IDEAS] and the International
Organisation for Cooperation in Evaluation [IOCE]. The latter Association comprises the heads
of regional and national evaluation associations.
4.8.2. Latin America
In Latin America there are regional associations promoting the formalisation and strengthening
of PME such as Preval and the new regional association ReLAC [Red de Seguimiento, Evaluación
Sistematización en América Latina Caribe—Latin America and Caribbean Evaluation Network].
According to the assessment of experts and practitioners in the PME field (Mackay, 2007: 19),
these associations reflect, in part, the growing interest in PME and the growing number of
individuals working in the field. As indicated above, such communities of practice have the
potential to influence the quality of PME and thus to facilitate the efforts of governments to
strengthen their PME systems and bring critical constituencies in PME together. The growth
alluded to in this argument has the potential to spread awareness and knowledge of PME
147
among all concerned and in particular government officials—and thus to increase demand for
it. Multilateral and bilateral donors, including the World Bank, have provided funding and other
support for a number of these evaluation associations (Mackay, 2007: 19).
4.8.3. Africa
In Africa, there are currently National Associations, and some of these [such as in Niger,
Rwanda, Kenya, and South Africa] have been particularly active in recent years – like the African
Evaluation Association [AfrEA] at a continental level. In South Africa is the South African
Monitoring and Evaluation Association – [SAMEA] is active. These associations have involved
close collaboration among academics, consultants, government officials, and donor officials,
the major conferences of regional and global evaluation associations. The main and constant
challenge is sustaining their level of activity. However, it depends on the commitment, presence
and energy of local champions [governments themselves] whether the efforts will be
successful.
148
4.9.
Conclusion
It has been argued that regular performance monitoring and evaluation [PME] of service quality
and programme results are key components of informed public management and the
identification of opportunities for improved public sector performance in selected countries.
Elected public representatives and citizens in all countries that were examined are aware of
their rights and the fact that they are entitled to regular reports on the performance of major
public programmes in their countries at all levels of government. Not only is information made
available on programme costs and the extent of the actions completed, but also information on
the quality of service delivery and on programme outcomes.
Building on the first three chapters [1, 2 and 3], it has been extrapolated that PME can support
good governance in several ways. However, it has been emphasised in this chapter that the
information produced by PME can be an important input for government decision-making and
prioritisation, particularly in the budget process – various examples from different countries
provide evidence in this regard. Furthermore, it has been argued that the PME system in
various countries can assist public managers to identify and measure the performance of ongoing activities and produce valuable information for performance of government activities at
the project or sector level. In terms of management, PME has been identified [including in
previous chapters - 2 and 3] as a management tool that promotes future learning and
improvement [results-based management].
The South African government has made commendable effort by establishing the Department
of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation [DPME]. The DPME has many features of other
countries’ performance monitoring and evaluation [PME] systems and structures, especially the
models in the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development [OECD] countries and
some South American countries like Chile, Colombia and Mexico. The IE [Impact evaluation]
approached adopted by DPME has proved to be a success in other OECD countries and South
149
Africa [DPME] has adopted the public sector management tools that these countries typically
employ, such as PME and in particular IE.
From the discussion, it is clear that a strong and stable PME system requires the existence of a
democratic system with an active and vocal citizenry; similar to the case in South Africa. There
is also a need for democratisation and political stability, which are both important enabling
factors concerning the institutionalisation of evaluation bodies with inbuilt independence. An
important observation from various countries is that the establishment of PME systems is a
lengthy process; many developing countries that were discussed are still building PME capacity
and structures. This is because democracy and reform requires extensive consultation and
engagement processes; information campaigns and sharing; legal and parliamentary steps –
which are all contrary to the experiment first approach that has been used extensively in China.
Another important lesson from the discussions, is that many developed and developing
countries that have accumulated consistent and substantial experience in building successful
PME systems are internationally linked to South Africa in various forums and United Nations
[UN] affiliated development and economic platforms - which gives South Africa some
international recognition and respect among its peers. The consistency of these lessons across
different countries and regions of the world is not surprising as it reflects international
experience with other types of public sector capacity building.
The experiences of the developed countries which were analysed [USA, UK and AUSTRALIA]
including [China] and more importantly developing countries [Chile, Colombia, Mexico] reveal
underlying delicate balances in the institutional design of a PME system. PME should not be
pursued as an end itself. Its value comes from usage.
It has been argued that PME is an effective platform internationally to provide vital information
about the performance of government policies, programmes, and projects. It can assist in
identifying what works and the reasons why. PME provides information about the performance
150
of a government, of individual ministries and agencies, and of managers and their subordinates
– similar to a situation in urban informal settlements [UIS] in a metropolitan municipality.
In the next chapter focus will shift from theory to practice. The chapter will deal with the issues
concerning performance monitoring and evaluation as it relates to governance of metropolitan
municipalities and how they measure their performance - in particular how these municipalities
conduct their result based performance and IE. Specific reference and focus will be on the
provision of minimum basic services in UIS. A detailed explanation of what a metropolitan
municipality in South Africa is will be necessary to give context. The state of local sphere [pre
and post democracy] and how UIS fit into the metropolitan system of government in South
Africa are critical discussions in the next chapter.
151
CHAPTER 5: EVOLUTION OF METROPOLITAN MUNICIPALITIES IN SOUTH AFRICA
5.1. Introduction and contextual overview: Population
Gauteng covers 1,4% of South Africa's land area; the Province contributes 34,8% to the national
economy and 10% to the GDP of the entire African continent. The Province contributes about
1/3 of the country’s total GDP. Gauteng is the powerhouse of South Africa and the heart of its
commercial business and industrial sectors (GCIS, 2010: 17).
The Province will essentially become one big city in the future when the two district
municipalities of Sedibeng [South] and the West Rand become metropolitan municipalities in
2016 – as anticipated. Currently it has three metropolitan municipalities of Ekurhuleni [East],
Johannesburg [Central] and Tshwane [North] and two district municipalities of Sedibeng [South]
and the West Rand [West]. About 97% of Gauteng’s population live in urban centres.
Statistically, the Province of Gauteng is the most densely populated in South Africa. Important
sectors contributing to Gauteng’s economy are finance, real estate, business services,
manufacturing and general government services. Gauteng is also the financial-services capital
of Africa. More than 70 foreign banks have their head offices in and around Johannesburg, as
do at least the same number of South African banks, stockbrokers and insurance companies
(GCIS, 2010: 17-18).
Recorded history and archeological studies of human origins in Southern Africa indicate that the
Khoikhoi people are the aboriginal South Africans. It is believed that these people have lived in
the region of Southern Africa for millennia (Raven-Hart 1967: 1). The rest of the South African
population traces their history to immigration. When the first Europeans sailed around the
Cape of Good Hope at the end of the 15th century they found herdsmen with cattle and sheep.
Bartholomeu Dias who first discovered the southern end of the continent: 'sighted land in a bay
which we called the Angra dos Vaqueiros, because of the many cows seen there, watched by
their herdsmen' (Raven-Hart 1967: 1).
According to Smith (1983:2) Dias described the problem of communication with these people
'since they had no language which could be understood, we could have no speech with them;
152
but rather they drove off their cattle inland, as if terrified at such a new matter, so that we
could learn no more of them than that they were blacks, with woolly hair like those of Guinea'.
This then was the first description of the Hottentots, or, as they called themselves, Khoikhoi
(Smith, 1983: 2).
Scientific research and archaeological evidence show that the Khoikhoi entered South Africa
from Botswana through two distinct routes – traveling west, skirting the Kalahari to the west
coast, then down to the Cape, and travelling south-east out into the Highveld and then
southwards to the south coast (Boonzaier, E. 1996: 16-17). Most of the Khoikhoi have largely
disappeared as a group, except for the largest group, the Namas.
The Khoisan people as they are known, who at various points have been referred to using the
derogatory terms ‘Bushmen’ and ‘Hottentots’, as well as Kung, Kxoe, Khoi Khoi, Ovahimba, San,
Vatua and !Xu, are an ethno-linguistic group that has traditionally been marginalised
throughout South African history. However, the biggest population group in South Africa
consists of the indigenous Africans. They constitute the majority of the people living in the
country – 79, 2% (SA- SSA Census 2011, 2011: 17).
The indigenous Africans are believed to be the descendants of immigrants from further north in
Africa, who entered South Africa about 1700 years ago. According to scientists, indigenous
Africans started to make their way south and eastwards in about 1000 BC, reaching the
present-day KwaZulu-Natal Province by 500 CE. Most of these people had an advanced Iron Age
culture, keeping domestic animals and also practicing agriculture, farming sorghum and other
crops - they lived in small settled villages, known today as rural areas in South Africa (Van
Niekerk, 2012: 1).
It is believed that Indigenous Africans arrived in South Africa in small batches rather than in one
big and cohesive in-migration. The Nguni peoples in particular (the Zulu, Xhosa, Swazi, and
Ndebele), preferred to live near the coast. Others, mainly the Sotho–Tswana peoples (Tswana,
Pedi, and Basotho), settled in the Highveld, moreover the Venda and Shangaan -Tsonga people,
made their homes in the north-eastern areas of South Africa.
153
The second biggest population of South Africans is the ‘White South Africans’ at 8,7% (SA- SSA
Census 2011, 2011: 17) - they are direct descendants of later European settlers, mainly from
Britain, France, Germany and the Netherlands. The other groupings include the Coloureds, who
are descended at least in most instances from all of these groups, as well as from slaves from
Madagascar, East Africa and the then East Indies (Van Niekerk, 2012: 1). The third largest group
of South Africans is the South African Indians and then the Chinese (SA- SSA Census 2011, 2011:
17); both are believed to be direct descendants of labourers who arrived in the nineteenth and
early twentieth centuries.
The official South African population according to Statistics South Africa [SSA] is 51 770 560
million people. The census results indicate that Gauteng Province accommodates 12,3 million
people - almost 24% of the entire population of the country (SA-SSA Census 2011, 2011: 14).
The major urban centres in Gauteng Province are the three metropolitan municipalities of
Ekurhuleni, Johannesburg and Tshwane – they carry the largest population of the Province.
Table 5.1. below provides a summary in terms of the actual official figures in each metropolitan
municipality.
Table 5.1. [The three metropolitan municipalities in Gauteng Province, South Africa]
Metropolitan
Population Size
Municipality [km²]
Percentage
Population
representation [%]
per km²
Ekurhuleni
3 178 470
30%
1 652,0
Johannesburg
4 434 827
42%
2 695,9
Tshwane
2 921 488
28%
460,4
TOTAL
10 534 785
100%
4 808,3
density
Statistics South Africa. Census 2011: Municipal Fact Sheet
The three metropolitan municipalities in Gauteng account for at least 85% [10,5 million] of the
Provinces’ population as shown in Table 5.1 above. The main economic and social activities of
the Province happen in and adjacent to these major urban centres - that is where most of
Gauteng population lives. Furthermore, the population density of the three metropolitan
154
municipalities is 4 808,3 [km²] - which is higher than the combined population density of 4
027,00 [km²] of the other five metropolitan municipalities on average in South Africa.
Figure 5.1. Population density in Gauteng Province [source: 2011 Quality of Life in the
Gauteng City-Region conducted]
It can be argued that a scientific study on performance monitoring and evaluation in the three
main urban centers is justified based on empirical evidence and trends [in the South African
context], suggesting that the main economic and social activities of the Province take place
adjacent to the major urban centres identified. Overall, the intention of the chapter is to
discuss the evolution of metropolitan municipalities from 1800 – 1994 [origins of urban areas]
and then major developments from 1994 – 2014 [20 years of democracy in South Africa].
5.2. Local government during colonialism and apartheid in South Africa - origins
and characteristics of urban areas [1800 -1994]
A discussion on local government before the new dispensation that started in 1994, will be
incomplete without some information and examples from researchers in city planning and
urban management. The discipline and domain of Public Administration has adapted to the fact
that it is an eclectic science, which means that it is not following one domain or system [e.g. as
in Philosophy, History, Medicine] but selecting and using what are considered the most relevant
155
components of all systems or domains. This character of the domain of Public Administration
gives it an opportunity to use various methods in other domains of study, similar to the
discussion that is going to follow in this chapter on the history of city planning and urban
management. The discussion will detail some Geographical and Historical [Historiography]
research combined – which conjoins with the debate and gives context in understanding how
municipalities were spatially planned, managed and developed from the 1800s until 1994.
Numerous case studies in urban management have been produced, but few have synthesised
the results or theorised on the generic characteristics (Maylam, 1995: 19). Much attention has
been given to the process of urban segregation, as authors have traced its origins and explained
the imperatives and mechanisms that govern the process. The more explored and well known
fact is that South Africa was under an official system of racial segregation and white minority
rule sanctioned by the National Party [NP] from 1948, known as the Apartheid system. The
system of Apartheid lasted for a period of 46 years, until South Africa held its first egalitarian
and inclusive elections in 1994, the same year that the ruling African National Congress [ANC]
came to power and started to dominate the politics of the country.
A colonial medieval origin documented by Christopher (1983: 145) investigated and traced
segregation in cities back to the early English colonisation of Wales and Ireland. It may
therefore be argued that the historical foundations of current Soweto were laid by Edward I in
his Welsh military foundations in the thirteenth century at Flint, Conway and Caernarvon. A
detailed search for recent origins of segregated cities are found in the Eastern Cape Province of
South Africa, in a town called Port Elizabeth [PE], renamed: Nelson Mandela Metropolitan
Municipality - as one of the principal cities where the foundations of Apartheid were laid
(Christopher, 1983: 145). Baines (1990: 74-75) argue that as early as 1834 the London
Missionary Society [LMS] established a formal black settlement on the western edge of Port
Elizabeth.
In the 1850s, the Port Elizabeth municipality created the Native Strangers' location where
Hottentots, Fingoes, Kaffirs and other Strangers visiting Port Elizabeth, may temporarily reside.
156
A colonial approach, which became dominant in most of the twentieth century; that black
people were essentially aliens in urban areas. Hundred years before the Group Areas Act, 41 of
1950, Port Elizabeth municipality tried to enforce urban apartheid, issuing regulations in 1855 requiring blacks to live in the Native Strangers' location if not housed by their employers or
owning their own property (Baines 1990:74-75).
The Fingoes, [meaning the Fengu - plural amaFengu] are a Bantu people, originally closely
related to the Zulu people, but often considered to have assimilated the Xhosa people whose
language they now speak. Historically, Fingoes achieved considerable renown for their military
ability in the frontier wars. Fingoes were previously known in English as the "Fingo" people, and
they gave their name to the district of Fingoland (Mfenguland), the South West portion of the
Transkei division, in the Cape Province; now called the Eastern Cape, post-1994.
According to Fox, Nel and Reintges (1991: 60-61), the town of East London [renamed: Buffalo
City Metropolitan Municipality], which is in the Eastern Cape of South Africa, is close in laying
claim to be a founder of urban segregation after Port Elizabeth. Racial segregation was
instituted in East London as early as 1849, when a government notice was issued requiring
Fingoes and other coloured natives to live in locations. In 1857 regulations were issued for the
control of Africans in the town's Native Village. Thus, East London has been described as being
by 1872 - a town with a clear legacy of enforced racial separation. Other Eastern Cape towns
include Cradock, Graaff-Reinet and Grahamstown (Fox, Nel and Reintges, 1991:60-61). Swanson
(1983) argues that in 1871 the Durban Town Council adopted a policy of creating separate
locations for Indians, which is the first concerted attempt at group area segregation in Durban
and one of the first in a major South African town.
With regard to inland areas, there is evidence of urban segregation principles which gained
official recognition in the former Transvaal and Orange Free State colony [Zuid Afrikaans
Republic - ZAR] in the last two decades of the nineteenth century. In the 1890s, Paul Kruger's
government [ZAR] set aside areas of land in Johannesburg for separate Malay and African
157
locations. In the same decade, town councils in the Orange Free State Province were
empowered to establish segregated locations (Parnell, 1991: 273).
In the late nineteenth-century, a movement towards segregation was emerging and coupled to
industrialisation and capitalist development. This view has been argued by Mabin, who
identified spatial forms at Kimberley during the 1880s and how they represented the most
important source of urban segregation in South Africa. Compounds and hostels were essentially
the first rigid form of residential segregation applied in the development of the South African
cities. Other townships were created in the wake of that experience (Mabin, 1986: 22).
Towards the 1900s, racial segregation intensified. More overtly segregationist measures or laws
were introduced; in particular the Natives Urban Areas Act, 21 of 1923 and the Group Areas
Act, 41 of 1950. The Natives Urban Areas Act, 21 of 1923 in brief, recommended and enabled
residential segregation, but did not compel it. However the Group Areas Act, 41 of 1950 had
devastating consequences for many communities through forced removals. This is because
segregation was already well advanced in most South African cities by the time the Act was
passed. This was compounded by institutionalising Apartheid in 1948 when the National Party
[NP] took over as the ruling party.
In essence, the Group Areas Act, 41 of 1950 was the starting point of expropriation of property
and the large-scale removal of non-white South Africans from their original communities to
new settlements (Robinson, 1992:4). This was done to create space for business development
in big cities like Johannesburg (Scott, 1992: 94). In agreement with authors in urban studies
(Maylam, 1995: 22; Robinson, 1992: 4 and Mabin, 1986: 22) the overall picture to emerge in the
paragraphs that follow explain urban segregation evolving over a long period of time in a rather
haphazard manner. The continuities before and after both the Natives Urban Areas Act, 21 of
1923 and the Group Areas Act, 41 of 1950 are more striking than the discontinuities.
158
There are various reasons why segregation was propagated during the periods mentioned in
the paragraphs above [1800s – 1950s]. The reasons were mainly political. However, authors
argue in Fox et al. (1991: 58) that there were other economic and military reasons associated.
As an example, segregation in East London according to Fox et al. (1991: 58) was at that time no
more than a colonial military outpost and the dictates of colonial defence shaped the spatial
organisation of the town. Later, the main reason was for capital to accumulate using land that
was occupied mainly by the non-white sections of the population.
A focused analysis of the unjustifiable urban segregation and the forced removals during
Apartheid, illustrates that when cities became industrialised and grew during the twentieth
century in South Africa, a parallel development of inner-city pockets of poor settlements were
taking shape. Today these inner-city pockets are called urban informal settlements [UIS] –
which is the unit of analysis and focus in this study. The development of urban UIS has been
tying up land, becoming anathema to local power holders. This means that urban segregation
and the forced removals that often accompanied the process, served capitalist interests [so
called ‘White privilege’] by making prime land for business activities available and other
associated activities – a preserve for the minority, which was done at the expense of the
majority of the citizens.
5.2.1. The sanitation syndrome
The situation for most Africans in urban areas during this period was almost unbearable.
According to Maylam (1995: 24) most case studies of urban segregation in South Africa refer to
the sanitation syndrome. First emphasised by Swanson, it explains urban segregation in terms
of moral panic and racial hysteria, as whites increasingly came to associate the black urban
presence with squalor, disease and crime. For a while, in the late 1970s and early 1980s, the
sanitation syndrome was dismissed by Marxists as a superficial, idealist explanation. But more
recent research (Maylam, 1995: 24) has given due acknowledgement to Swanson's line of
analysis.
159
Maylam, (1995: 24) argues that there is indeed sufficient evidence to link a strong connection
between perceived threats to white health and safety and on the other, the drive to urban
segregation. Especially conspicuous, is the causal link between epidemics and urban removals.
The spread of bubonic plague in South Africa from 1901 to 1904 was followed by white
ratepayers’ demands for greater racial segregation. The plague first hit Cape Town in 1901. Its
popular name, the Black Death, was to have unfortunate connotations in South Africa, as the
plague came to be associated rather with the black urban presence than with the rats that
carried it. Within a few weeks of the outbreak, some six to seven thousand Africans were
removed from central Cape Town to temporary accommodation at a place called Ndabeni.
It was a similar situation in Port Elizabeth, where the onset of the plague in 1901 prompted the
local authority to demolish inner-city locations and build a segregated township that came to
be known as New Brighton. The plague's arrival in Durban in 1902 aroused white hysteria,
seeming to confirm the image of Africans as a public health menace. Calls came for a
segregated location and a general cleaning up of the town. In Johannesburg the outbreak of
plague was used by the local authorities to justify the removal of people from the inner-city
Coolie Location to the new township of Klipspruit – located in Soweto (Maylam, 1995: 24).
From the above arguments and from the discussion on the origins of city life - it is clear that
during the apartheid era, most South Africans were passive citizens in their own country. They
could not question the power of the state and most importantly, they were recipients of
government policy activities rather than participants in governance. As an example, researchers
(Maylam, 1995: 19) on City Planning and Urban Management argue that a growing number of
historical case studies show that the institutions and structures of local power effectively
excluded Africans from local government. The case studies indicate that Africans were denied
the municipal franchise and they were unjustifiably subjected to co-operative institutions. First
the advisory boards from early in the 19th century, created the then urban Bantu councils [UBCs
160
- known as useless boys clubs] from the 1960s, followed by the community councils and the
black local authorities in the 1980s (Maylam, 1995: 24).
Before 1994 [during Apartheid], South Africa had 1100 municipalities – almost all these
municipalities and local authorities were under the white minority rule, except in a few
instances in the former TBVC states [Transkei; Bophuthatswana, Venda and Ciskei]. However,
TBVC states municipalities were ineffective, inefficient and under resourced – they were
controlled by their respective ‘National Governments’. Municipal boundaries were to a large
extent segregated and services were mainly aggregated in white minority areas. The Table
[5.2.]
below
is
a
summary
of
legislative
interventions made
by
the
National
Party [NP] government at various points during apartheid to manage and control the so called
black local authorities [municipalities].
161
Table 5.2. Legislative provisions for urban Blacks during apartheid
Legislation
1. Black urban areas Act, 21 of 1923
Function
Establishment of Black advisor boards [BAB] to advise
the white local authorities on how to manage black
townships.
2. Black urban areas consolidation Act, 25 Establishment of Black advisor boards to consolidate
of 1945 [this was to repeal the 1923 and advise further [same as Act 21 of 1923] the white
Act]
3. Urban blacks councils Act, 79 of 1961
local authorities on how to manage black townships.
White local authorities used this Act to assign and
devolve some powers of a local authority to a black
administration.
4. Black Affairs administration Act, 45 of Changing
1971
of
Black
advisory
boards
[BAB]
to
Developments boards [DB] in 14 regions. The authority
of black councils was taken from white local
authorities; there was continuation of urban black
councils for urban areas.
5. Community Councils Act, 125 of 1977 Administration boards could establish community
[this repealed the Urban blacks councils councils in the urban areas.
Act, 79 of 1961]
6. Black local authorities Act, 102 of 1982
Black local authorities could be established as an
equivalent of a white local authority for black urban
areas.
7. Black communities development Act, 4 Development boards [DB] abolished in terms of the
of 1984 [amendment of Black affairs Abolition of Development bodies Act, 75 of 1986.
administration Act, 45 of 1971]
Personnel and functions were then transferred to the
provincial administrations.
162
5.3. Local government sphere during the post-apartheid era in South Africa
[1994 – 2014] – major developments
Former Constitutions of South Africa and the current Constitution of 1996 - distinguished
between the three divisions of authority and made provision for institutions in each regard
(Rautenbach and Malherbe, 1994:60–61). Particular reference is made to the period between
1910 and 1994, where a similar characteristic regarding the division of the state’s authority
existed in the different constitutional systems of South Africa. For instance, the 1993
Constitution had a division of authority in Sections 37, 75 and 96 and the current 1996
Constitution makes provision for a similar division of authority in terms of Sections 43, 85 and
165. Table [5.3] below provides a condensed summary in this regard.
Table 5.3. State authority in terms of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa
Section
Section 43
Authority
Legislative
Institution
Parliament
authority
Section 85
Executive authority
Cabinet
Section 165
Judicial authority
Courts
Section 43 of the Constitution of 1996 provides that legislative authority of the national,
provincial and local spheres of government be vested in:
i.
Parliament - i.e. the National Assembly [NA] and the National Council of Provinces
[NCOP];
ii.
nine provincial legislatures; and
iii.
municipal councils.
163
According to the Constitution, 1996 - the local sphere of government is given status by section
151 (1). The section indicates that the local sphere of government consists of municipalities,
which must be established for the whole of the territory of the Republic. It is also noted in
section 151 (1) that the executive and legislative authority of a municipality is vested in its
municipal councils. In terms of Section 155(6)(a), the nine provincial legislatures have an
obligation to monitor and support the local government in their respective Provinces.
Moreover, in terms of Section 155(7), the legislatures have legislative authority to oversee the
effective performance of municipalities in respect of those competencies.
Mathekga & Buccus (2006: 13) argue that local government has been created with the
intentions to positively give effect to democracy and to bring about social and economic
delivery at the local legislative authority. The legislative framework of the local sphere of
government system in South Africa is clearly articulated. The objective has been to introduce
the new era, post 1994 [democratic dispensation]. The aim of the legislative framework is not
only to improve service delivery, but also to rebuild communities whose livelihoods have been
to a large extent fundamentally damaged and destroyed by the apartheid system.
The Constitution [Chapter 7], states that it is the object of local government to encourage the
involvement of communities and community organisations in the matter of local government.
According to Mogale (2005: 136) this requires a co-operative approach, an effective partnership
where municipal councils provide strong leadership for their areas and their communities. The
institution of local government, as stated by the Constitution, should enhance opportunities for
participation by placing more power and resources at a closer and more easily influenced
sphere of government.
The local government system in South Africa has been conceptually crafted post-apartheid not
only to play a developmental role, but also to respond to the demands of citizenry. A
municipality in the democratic dispensation has a constitutional mandate to provide
democratic and accountable government for communities excluded from the political sphere
during the apartheid era. Legislative measures were adopted to set up the necessary
164
institutional framework as a means to extend democracy to formerly disempowered
communities (Mathekga & Buccus, 2006: 13). The following section will provide clarity and
explain events leading up to the [post-apartheid] democratic legislative environment in local
government sphere.
5.3.1. The post-apartheid legislation in local government
The first post-apartheid legislation to be introduced at the local level was the Local Government
Transition Act [LGTA], 209 of 1993. The LGTA provided an overarching framework for the
transformation of local government in preparation for ushering in a new democratic
dispensation for South Africa. LGTA outlined a three phase transition for local government.
Table 5.3.1. The three phase transition of local government from 1993 - 1998
Phase I [1993]
Phase II [1993-1997]
In brief, the first phase of The
second
phase,
Phase III [1998-]
the Records are not clear in terms of
LGTA the pre-interim phase [a interim phase [1993 - 1997], defining this phase since LGTA did not
period up until 1993], was was mainly characterised as explicitly define the third and final
defined as the period lasting the period between the date phase [1998 -], however, judging from
from the publication of the of elections of transitional developments that happened post this
LGTA to the date of elections councils until the legislation phase, it is envisaged as a period of
for transitional councils.
and implementation of final change during which municipalities or
arrangements
for
government.
local municipal
structures
established
and
were
restructured
rein
accordance with the final legislative
arrangements.
165
It was necessary to give background on the three phases above, because the LGTA was largely
developed within these phases - in particular the interim phase. From the LGTA in 1993 to the
Constitution, 1996 - local government was conceived as the local sphere of government with
the constitutional mandate to carry out a number of developmental duties.
In 1998 a White Paper on Local Government was introduced to establish the basis for a new
developmental local government system which is committed to working with citizens, groups
and communities to create sustainable human settlements which provide for a decent quality
of life and meet the social, economic and material needs of communities in a holistic way.
The introduction of the White Paper culminated in finalisation of the Local Government:
Municipal Demarcations Act [MDA], 27 of 1998. The MDA makes provision for “the redemarcation of municipal boundaries and establishment of the Municipal Demarcations Board
[MDB] that is tasked with demarcating municipal boundaries in accordance with a set of factors
in the Act. Implementation of the Act was important because it led to the reduction of South
African municipalities from 843 to 278 municipalities.
After the demarcation process, a new law was introduced in the local sphere of government,
the Local Government: Municipal Structures Act, 117 of 1998. The latter Act provides for the
establishment of municipalities in accordance with the requirements relating to categories and
types – the outcome was three categories of municipalities. The Act sets criteria for
determining the category of municipality to be established in an area, for defining the types of
municipality within each category and for an appropriate division of functions and powers
among categories of municipality. Municipalities in South Africa are categorised into A, B and C
categories. Metropolitan municipalities [as category A] are an area of research in this study.
The Municipal Structures Act, 117 of 1998 laid a foundation for the introduction of Local
Government: Municipal Systems Act, 32 of 2000. The Act provides for the core principles,
mechanisms, and processes that are necessary to enable municipalities to move progressively
166
towards the social and economic upliftment of local communities, and ensure universal access
to essential services that are affordable to all. The Act, notably, provides for means to bring
about service delivery.
In the process, important guidelines for operation of ward committees were introduced in 2005
as Section 22 of the Local Government: Municipal Systems Act, 2000. This Section 22 of the Act,
was included to provide for unified and simplified guidelines to ward committee members,
ward councillors, for metropolitan and local municipalities on the establishment and operation
of ward committees.
After the introduction of the Local Government: Municipal Structures Act, 117 of 1998; Local
Government: Municipal Systems Act, 2000 and ward committees - it was necessary to introduce
legislation that would allow for a seamless flow of work in local government. The Local
Government: Municipal Finance Management Act, 56 of 2003 was then introduced. This Act is
aimed at securing sound and sustainable management of the financial affairs of municipalities
and other institutions in the local sphere of government; to establish treasury norms and
standards for the local sphere of government; and to provide for matters connected therewith.
There are two other additional measures that were introduced in 2004 and in 2007 to
strengthen the local sphere of government in South Africa. In 2004, the Local Government:
Municipal Property Rates Act, 6 of 2004 was introduced. The Act regulates the power of a
municipality to impose rates on property; to exclude certain properties from rating in the
national interest; to make provision for municipalities to implement a transparent and fair
system of exemptions, reductions and rebates through their rating policies, to make provision
for fair and equitable valuation methods of properties; to make provision for an objections and
appeals process; to amend the Local Government: Municipal Systems Act, 2000 so as to make
further provision for the serving of documents by municipalities; to amend or repeal certain
legislation; and to provide for matters connected therewith.
167
The summary of the legislative framework post-apartheid will not be complete if there is no
mention of the National Policy Framework for Public Participation, 2007. The document was
introduced to provide a policy framework for public participation in South Africa. This builds on
the commitment of the democratic government to deepen democracy, which is embedded in
the Constitution, and above all in the concept of local government, as comprising the
community as part of the municipality.
In sum, the phases of transition between 1993-1998 brought about a transformed local
government sphere in South Africa. The introduction of new legislation and policy framework
was a precursor to the establishment of a new dispensation in local government beyond 2000.
The changes in legislation in the local sphere resulted in categorisation of a municipality [A, B or
C] and the establishment of metropolitan municipalities [i.e. category A] which are a subject for
discussion in the study.
5.4. Constitutional obligations of a metropolitan municipality
The Constitution, 1996 in section 151 (1), indicates that the local sphere of government consists
of municipalities, which must be established for the whole of the territory of the Republic. The
executive and legislative authority of a municipality is vested in its municipal council and a
municipality has the right to govern, on its own initiative, the local government affairs of its
community, subject to national and provincial legislation, as provided for in the Constitution.
The national or a provincial government may not compromise or impede a municipality's ability
or right to exercise its powers or perform its functions. An important aspect to note in this
section of the chapter is what is termed the objects of local government in the Constitution.
Section 152 indicates that the objects of local government are:
a. to provide democratic and accountable government for local communities;
b. to ensure the provision of services to communities in a sustainable manner;
c. to promote social and economic development;
d. to promote a safe and healthy environment; and
168
e. to encourage the involvement of communities and community organisations in the
matters of local government.
As indicated in Chapter 1 of the Thesis, the interpretation is that a municipality must strive,
within its financial and administrative capacity, to achieve the objects set out in section 152 (1).
Other descriptions of local government find expression within the spirit of the Constitution,
according to Koma (2010: 113). Local government could be described as public organisations
authorised to manage and govern the affairs of a given territory or area of jurisdiction. It refers
to a sphere of government, and not an individual municipality. All the individual municipalities
in South Africa make up the collective sphere, known as local government (Roux, 2005: 64).
Section 152, Part B of Schedule 5 of the Constitution [exclusive provincial competence],
identifies the following services that fall within the ambit of the sphere of local government and
its constituent municipalities. These are water, electricity, town and city planning, road and
storm water, waste collection, emergency services, for example, fire-fighting, licenses, fresh
produce market, parks and recreation, security, libraries, town and city planning, and economic
planning. For purposes of this study, minimum basic services means: water, sanitation,
electricity, waste management and which their provision in urban informal settlements [UIS] in
metropolitan municipalities is the subject of this study.
Metropolitan municipalities represent the large densely populated and urbanised regions that
encompass multiple cities in South Africa. Chapter 7, of the South African Constitution - section
155 (1), defines “category A” municipality as a municipality that has exclusive municipal
executive and legislative authority in its area. The Municipal Structures Act [MSA], 117 of 1998
defines this category of municipality as conurbations or in common terminology ‘centres of
economic activity’, areas ‘for which integrated development planning is desirable’, and areas
with ‘strong interdependent social and economic linkages’. In essence “category A”
municipalities are different from “categories B and C” respectively.
169
Part 2, 8 (a-h) of the MSA defines different types of category A municipalities:
(a) a municipality with a collective executive system;
(b) a municipality with a collective executive system combined with a sub-council participatory
system;
(c) a municipality with a collective executive system combined with a ward participatory
system;
(d) a municipality with a collective executive system combined with both a 40 sub-council and a
ward participatory system;
(e) a municipality with a mayoral executive system and a municipality with a mayoral executive
system combined with a sub-council participatory system;
(g) a municipality with a mayoral executive system combined with a ward 45 participatory
system; and
(h) a municipality with a mayoral executive system combined with both a sub-council and a
ward participatory system.
According to the Statistics South Africa [SSA] census report of 2011, the geographical frame of
municipalities consisted of 262 local municipalities in 2001. This total has been reduced to 234
local municipalities in the 2011 report. The difference of 28 municipalities is explained as
follows: 25 District Management Areas [DMAs] were incorporated into the existing Provinces;
the City of Tshwane incorporated a further two municipalities [Nokeng Tsa Taemane and
Kungwini] and a new municipality Kagisano Molopo was established by merging Kagisano and
Molopo. In total, 107 municipalities decreased in geographical area while 155 municipalities
had an increase in geographical area according to the SSA census report of 2011.
170
Table 5.4. The three categories of municipalities
Municipal category
Where are they found?
Structure of municipality
Metropolitan municipalities
Metropolitan municipalities exist in
These municipalities are
[Category A]
South Africa and they are eight. They
divided into wards. 50% of the
have more than 500 000 voters each. A
councillors are elected
metropolitan municipality co-ordinates
through a proportional
the delivery of services to the whole
representation ballot, where
area. Metropolitan municipalities are
voters vote for a party. The
Johannesburg, Cape Town, Ethekwini
other 50% are elected as ward
[Durban], Tshwane [Pretoria], Nelson
councillors by the electorate in
Mandela [Port Elizabeth], Ekhuruleni
each ward.
[East Rand], Buffalo City [East London],
Mangaung [Bloemfontein].
Local municipalities
Areas that fall outside the eight
In local municipalities, 50% of
[Category B]
metropolitan municipal areas are
the councillors are elected
divided into local municipalities. There
through a proportional
are a total of 226 of these local
representation ballot, where
municipalities and each municipality is
voters vote for a party and the
divided into wards. The residents in each
other 50% are elected as ward
ward are represented by a ward
Councillors by the electorate
Councillor.
in each ward.
Only people who live in low population
areas, like game parks, are not
demarcated under local municipalities.
The areas in which they live are called
district management areas (DMA) and
are demarcated directly under
171
Provinces.
District municipalities
District municipalities consist of a
The district council is made up
[Category C]
number of local municipalities that are
of two types of councillors:
demarcated into one district. There are
usually between 3 - 6 local municipalities
i.
Elected councillors they are elected for the
that are demarcated into a district
district council on a
council and there are 44 district
proportional
municipalities in South Africa.
representation ballot
Some district municipalities also include
by all voters in the
nature reserves and the areas where few
area. (40% of the
people live - district management areas.
district councillors)
They have since been incorporated into
Provinces since they are not a Category
ii.
Councillors who
B municipality. The district municipality
represent local
has to co-ordinate development and
municipalities in the
delivery in the whole district. It plays a
area - they are local
stronger role in areas where local
councillors assigned by
municipalities lack capacity to deliver. It
their council to
has its own employees.
represent it on the
district council. (60% of
the district councillors)
While metropolitan municipalities are responsible for all local services, local municipalities
share these responsibilities with district municipalities in certain instances. This is especially the
case in very rural areas, where district municipalities will have more responsibility for
development and service delivery – which pose challenges and complexities. Chapter 5 of the
MSA, which deals with the functions and powers of municipalities, the division of those powers
and functions between district and local municipalities and then the adjustment of the division
172
of functions and powers. Section 83 of the MSA clearly provides that all municipalities have the
functions and powers assigned to them in terms of section 156 and 229 of the Constitution.
Moreover, section 84 of the MSA [as amended] divides the functions and powers referred to in
section 83 between district and local municipalities. Sub-section (1) of Section 84 contains a list
of the functions and powers allocated to district municipalities and sub-section (2) allocates all
the section 83 (1) functions and powers to local municipalities, excluding those functions and
powers vested in district municipalities in terms of Section 84 (1).
The inclusion of Metsweding district into the City of Tshwane in 2011, has resulted in more
responsibilities for the City for development and service delivery. It is also recorded that the
adjacent local municipalities of Madibeng and Moretele [i.e. under Bojanala district] depends
on the City of Tshwane for some of their basic services - bulk water supply. Thembisile Hani
Municipality which is situated on the northeastern side of the City of Tshwane also has some
dependencies on the City – especially in terms of water and human settlements, as most of its
residents are employed in the City. The dependency of neighbouring semi-rural municipalities
on the City of Tshwane makes it a special case for consideration during delimitation of wards
and boundaries.
5.4.1. The challenges of demarcation of municipal boundaries
Municipalities are demarcated through an Act of Parliament, the Local Government: Municipal
Demarcation Act, 27 of 1998 – the South African Demarcation Board is established by this Act.
The Board provides criteria and procedures for the determination of municipal boundaries and
for matters connected thereto. The Act deals with Board's role and functions pertaining to the
demarcation of municipal boundaries and empowers the Board to assess the capacity of
municipalities, and to delimit wards for local government elections.
The demarcation process is a three step procedure governed by the Constitution, Local
Government: Municipal Demarcation [MD] Act, 27 of 1998 and the Local Government:
Municipal Structures Act [MSA], 27 of 1998. Firstly, the Constitution establishes the need for an
173
independent demarcation authority and states that national legislation should define criteria
and procedures by which this authority will determine new boundaries [this legislation is the
Municipal Demarcation Act]; it sets out the obligations of municipal councils and calls for
legislation to determine when an area should have a single Category A municipality or when it
should have both Category B and C municipalities [this legislation is the Municipal Structures
Act, 1998].
Secondly, the Municipal Demarcation Act defines the independent authority referred to in the
Constitution as the Municipal Demarcation Board. It then sets out the procedures for
establishing the Board and gives it its major powers and functions by defining the composition
of the Board and how its members will be selected. Furthermore, the Municipal Demarcation
Act maps out key operating procedures of the Board, such as what committees it can establish
and how it can delegate some of its powers and more importantly it defines the demarcation
criteria envisaged in the Constitution, setting out the 'objectives of demarcation' and the
'factors to be taken into account when demarcating'. This includes the procedures the Board
must follow in deciding on boundaries and how it must consult municipalities and communities
in this process, by making it clear who will decide when new boundaries take effect, and how.
This must be in line with provisions of Chapter 4 of the Municipal Systems Act, 32 of 2002 and
the Municipal Structures Act, 117 of 1998.
Thirdly, the Municipal Structures Act, 1998; defines criteria for when an area should have a
Category A municipality by outlining who will make the decision, and how. MSA, provides that
all non-metropolitan areas must have both Category B and C municipalities. It also sets
procedures for deciding when an area will have no Category B municipality and will therefore
be a District Management Area. Moreover, the Act defines the powers and functions of
municipalities which have to be taken into account in the demarcation process and explains the
role of the Municipal Demarcation Board and the Independent Electoral Commission in
delimiting wards, and criteria for this process.
174
Besides the Demarcation Board, there are other important role players and stakeholders. They
include - the President of the Republic; the South African Local Government Association
[SALGA]; the MEC for Local Government in each Province; the national Minister responsible for
local government - currently the Minister of Co-oporative Governance and Traditional Affairs;
the Independent Electoral Commission [IEC]; each individual municipality and more importantly
the communities in each municipality.
Even though there is a comprehensive legislative regime in South Africa to outline the
demarcation process, government has faced a number of challenges from various communities
that have been protesting about the demarcation and associated delimitation processes. There
are case studies since 1995 after the first local government elections and in the current study
only specific examples related to the topic will be made. Mathoho (2013: 1) argues that there
are different kinds of protests that occur in South Africa. Those who are careless in categorising
these protests end up mixing them in one pot and call them service delivery protests. In reality
these protests vary from one protest to another, they include service delivery; challenges of
ethnicity and tribalism; political and demarcation protests while some are a mixture.
Furthermore, communities get divided by the boundary issue and end up fighting for limited
resources. While the Municipal Demarcation Board [MDB] and demarcation protesters have
reasons for their actions, the question is, who has a final say between the MDB and citizens in
the final decisions on demarcation (Mathoho, 2013: 1).
The democratic government inherited some of the challenges, in terms of demarcation of nonracial municiplaities from the apartheid system, where citizens had limited rights in terms of
how their areas are demarcated. As a result, the Demarcation Board is left to feel the brunt of
citizen’s frustrations. The Board’s main tak, has been the restructuring of colonial planning and
to balance the scarce resources which started centuries ago. Progress has however been made,
for instance in 2000 there were 17 cross provincial boundary municipalities and about 30 local
municipalities that remained under dispute after the introduction of new municipal boundaries.
A number of these disputes have now been settled (Mathoho, 2013: 1). There are however two
175
cases of relevance that occurred while the current study was under way – they are
Metsimaholo Local Municipality and Thulamele and Makhado municipalities.
Firstly, residents of Zamdela in Metsimaholo local municipality in the Free State Province
embarked on a violent protest to reject the merger with the neighbouring and ailing
municipality, Ngwathe Local Municipality. The residents’ arguments were that they didn’t want
to be amalgamated with the neighbouring municipality as they believed the municipality was
poor and accused of maladministration. Residents said “Ngwathe municipality currently owes
Eskom R116 million. The merger will mean that we will inherit that debt, which means our
municipality will collapse. Service delivery in Ngwathe is very poor” (Mathoho, 2013: 1). In this
case of Zamdela, the Demarcation Board is accused by residents of not listening to their
objection to the proposed merger. It was clear from the actions of Zamdela residents that they
did not want to share the resources of their municipality with other neighbouring municipal
residents who are also in the same poverty deck.
Mathoho (2013: 1) argues that the majority of local municipalities are currently finding it
difficult to meet their constitutional obligations. As per sections 24 and 25 of the Municipal
Demarcation Act, 1998, the decision taken by the Municipal Demarcation Board was correct.
The move to merge the two municipalities would assist the struggling Ngwathe municipality
although it would be at the expense of the better performing neighbouring Metsimaholo
municipality. It was also going to assist another municipality’s residents who are in dire poverty
and in a poor state of service delivery of the ailing municipality by sharing better resources of
the better performing municipality (Mathoho, 2013: 1). Of course the better performing
municipality has better internal control systems which might be of benefit to the neighbouring
municipality.
Secondly, the Thulamele and Makhado local municipalities’ issue concerned various challenges,
but may be ascribed to an ethnic dispute between Venda and Tsonga tribes in Limpopo
Province, who are contesting for allocation of municipal resources and demarcation based on
tribal lines (Mathoho, 2013: 1).
176
In instances of Metsimaholo, Thulamele and Makhado local municipalities the main issue has
been about allocation of municipal resources. This means that the terrain of local government
in South Africa, in particular as it relates to issues of demarcation, has more to do with
appropriation of resources. Even though resources are important when considering the
demarcation issues another important issue is management and control of municipalities. One
of the recent incorporations and mergers that have been undertaken before 2011 election was
with the City of Tshwane and the erstwhile municipal district of Metsweding. This has been a
special case that has never happened before when considering a classic metropolitan
municipality and its boundaries.
5.4.2. The municipal boundaries of the City of Tshwane
City of Tshwane [CoT] is one of South Africa’s eight metropolitan municipalities, with large
densely urbanised regions that encompass multiple towns and constitute a metropolis. CoT’s
major urban areas include Pretoria, Centurion, Akasia, Soshanguve, Mabopane, Atteridgeville,
Ga-Rankuwa, Winterveld, Hammanskraal, Temba, Pienaarsrivier, Crocodile River and
Mamelodi. The CoT was established on 5 December 2000 through the integration of various
municipalities and councils that had previously served greater Pretoria and surrounding areas.
On 28 May 2008, a proclamation through the Government Gazette which was effected by the
Member of Executive Committee responsible for Local Government and Housing in the
Province; issued a section 12 notice after the Municipal Demarcation Board had re-determined
the municipal boundaries.
The section 12 notice effectively disestablished the municipality and incorporated the
municipality [Metsweding District Municipality, including Dinokeng tsa Taemane (Cullinan) and
Kungwini (Bronkhorstspruit) into the areas of City of Tshwane] under a newly established City
of Tshwane Metropolitan Council, effective from the local government election (18 May
2011).This incorporation resulted in the CoT becoming the largest urban municipality in South
Africa and the third-largest municipality in the world after New York and Tokyo in landmass in
square kilometres.
177
This incorporation resulted in the new City of Tshwane in May 2011 after the local government
elections. With the 2011 Census placing the population size at 2 921 488, the city’s 6 368
square kilometres take up over a third [1/3] of the Province of Gauteng, stretching almost 121
kilometres from west to east and 108 kilometres from north to south – this includes vast areas
of rural agricultural land combined into a metropolitan municipality. By any standard this is
really a Large City in the South African, African and global context. This is not the norm in how
metropolitan municipality boundaries are defined in South Africa. This means that in terms of
border demarcation the City of Tshwane is something even beyond a metropolitan
municipality.
The Constitution, 1996 in section 155.1 (a), defines "Category A" municipalities and in the Local
Government: Municipal Structures Act, 117 of 1998 it is indicated that a Category A municipality
is to be used for conurbations, "centre[s] of economic activity", areas "for which integrated
development planning is desirable", and areas with "strong interdependent social and
economic linkages". To a considerable extent, the incorporation of Metsweding into the City of
Tshwane changes that definition - because most of the incorporated areas are primarily rural,
where the local government was divided into a district municipalities [i.e. Metsweding] and two
local municipalities [Dinokeng tsa Taemane (Cullinan) and Kungwini (Bronkhorstspruit)] – with
some areas of the district being moderately dependent on social and economic linkages. It can
be argued that the reconfigured City of Tshwane since May 2011, it’s a “special category A
municipality” outside the norm.
There have been discussions at various ANC Gauteng discussion meetings and in GPG [Gauteng
Provincial Government] about a move towards a metropolitan system of government
throughout Gauteng Province, also known as the Gauteng Global City Region Strategy – a
process of building Gauteng as a globally competitive city region. The incorporation of the
erstwhile Metsweding District Municipality, including Dinokeng tsa Taemane [Cullinan] and
Kungwini [Bronkhorstspruit] into the area of the City of Tshwane, was in line with the Gauteng
Global City Region Strategy to reduce the number of municipalities in Gauteng by the year
2016.
178
In the preface of a discussion document titled: ‘Gauteng 2055: A discussion document on the
long term development plan for the Gauteng City-Region’ (GPG, 2011), the Premier of Gauteng
[2009-2014] states that the discussion document serves as the foundation for a stakeholder
engagement process initiated by the Gauteng Planning Commission [GPC], as it sets its sights on
the establishment of a long-term plan for the Gauteng City Region [‘the GCR’]. The Gauteng
City-Region Observatory [GCRO] defines the GCR as “an integrated cluster of cities, towns and
urban nodes that together make up the economic heartland of South Africa” (GCRO, 2011). It
stretches across various jurisdictions beyond the boundaries of Gauteng Province, and
represents a space with significant potential. Furthermore, the Premier argues that if GPG
wants to harness this potential so that the GCR can contribute to South Africa what the most
successful global city-regions and economies of the world have contributed to their respective
nations – there is a need for a common vision and strategy, clear leadership, and ongoing
collaboration and co-operation. Her view is that as GPG plans, it must ensure alignment with
the National Planning Commission’s long-term National Development Plan, ‘Vision 2030’.
The issue that must be considered and investigated is whether GPG and national government
through the Department of Cooperative Governance [CoG&TA] have prepared for transition
from 12 municipalities [as it is the case now] to a seamless Gauteng Global City Region which is
expected to have five regions of Ekhuruleni; Johannesburg; Sedibeng; Tshwane and Westrand –
how is this going to improve the living conditions of people in urban informal settlements [UIS]?
The incorporation of the erstwhile Metsweding District Municipality, including Dinokeng tsa
Taemane [Cullinan] and Kungwini [Bronkhorstspruit] into the boundaries of City of Tshwane
came at a cost 300 million according to the ‘Tshwane Update’ [Tshwane municipal newspaper http://www.tshwane.gov.za/Residents/Tshwane%20Update/Tshwane%20Update%20edition%2
01.pdf – dated 6-17 June 2011] and complications with regards to various aspects of cities
administration processes [i.e. adjustment of rates and taxes; human resources; size of the new
city] which are matters that must be considered when planning for a seamless transition into
the Gauteng Global City Region. The incorporation also increased the number of urban informal
179
settlements in the new City of Tshwane – specific details on the increased number will be
discussed in the empirical study in chapter 6.
The two discussions in 5.4.1 and 5.4.2 are connected. From the experience of Metsimaholo,
Thulamele and Makhado local municipalities, it is clear that demarcation in South Africa poses
multiple challenges such as community objections to demarcation processes and the service
demands of new municipalities that emerge from the process of delimitation of wards. At the
same time there are also challenges [i.e. in the case of Tshwane] that result from new approach
to municipal resource allocation in the future [Gauteng Global City Region Strategy].
Unfortunately, objections and demands directed at the MDB in the two cases mentioned were
accompanied and characterised by violent protest. As people get used to violence as a means of
registering dissatisfaction with the final demarcation decisions and not an end in itself, new
mechanisms to resolve this challenge will have to be considered. However, these demarcation
protests indicate that the government and the Demarcation Board in particular need to
approach the issue of demarcations and associated delimitations differently.
All the demarcation challenges indicated, require a knowledgeable and strong public service in
the sphere of local government with requisite skills and training; to conduct proper
performance monitoring and evaluation [PME]; to assess impact [Impact Evaluations] and
consider outputs, outcomes and results. In this way, municipalities will have a more effective
planning and budgeting cycle and use PME information for effective and efficient delivery of
services to communities they serve.
The significance of border demarcation can change and have an impact on the financial,
administrative and other functions of the municipality. The incorporation of Metsweding into
the City of Tshwane has come at a cost and increased the number of urban informal
settlements from 59 to 98. This change has a direct impact on the revenue sources and
administration, but it also adds on the challenges of formalisation of urban informal
settlements that the municipality had before incorporation of the local municipalities in 2011.
180
5.5. State of local government in South Africa
According to a report by the South African Department of Cooperative Governance [CoG] titled
“State of local government in South Africa” (2009: 4), there are a number of service delivery
and governance challenges that have been identified in municipalities over a number of years.
These service delivery challenges remain at the forefront of government’s developmental
challenges. The latter relates to backlog challenges in housing; water provision and sanitation;
poor communication and accountability relationships with communities; problems with the
political administrative interface; corruption and fraud; poor financial management [e.g.
resulting negative audit opinions by the Auditor-General]; violent service delivery protests;
weak civil society formations; intra and inter-political party issues negatively affecting
governance and delivery; and insufficient municipal capacity due to lack of scarce skills.
The report by CoG argues that some municipal administrations are relatively stable and wellresourced, whilst others face major infrastructure backlogs; the negative impacts of
demographic change and prevailing apartheid-based socio-economic legacies. In another study
on the same issue of lack of capacity in South African municipalities, Kanyane (2006: 116) notes
that weak leadership in strategic management including corporate governance; shortage of
skills to implement financial management; legislation; mismatch of skills within municipalities;
political considerations in appointments of senior managers without the required qualification;
had weakened the performance of municipalities. The Auditor-General South Africa [AGSA] in
the ‘General report on the audit outcomes of local government, 2011-12’ (SA – AGSA, 2011&12:
99-100) highlighted the issue of competencies of key officials, he stated:
The complexities in local government, the challenges experienced and the high expectations of
the public demand that key personnel at municipalities have the skills, experience and capacity
to assume and fulfil their responsibilities and exercise their functions and powers. The reforms in
financial and performance management have also resulted in a higher level of competency
181
requirements than in the past for municipal managers, CFOs, senior managers, SCM officials
and other financial officials.
The poor audit outcomes, failures in service delivery and the high demand for consultants and
support from national and provincial governments are indicative of an environment where the
persons appointed in these posts do not have the required competencies. The root cause of this
is two pronged – staff who do not have the required competencies are appointed in key
positions, while current employees do not keep up with the changing local government
environment through ongoing training and development.
It can be deduced from the AGSAs report that there are capacity challenges in municipalities
which poses other hindrances for full implementation of performance monitoring and
evaluation [PME] systems in municipalities. Schacter (2000: 7) argues that for PME
interventions to have a reasonable chance of success, the concern institution [i.e. municipality]
must pay careful attention to:

the quality of local leadership for reform;

local capacity to design and implement reform programmes;

features of the local incentive and accountability environment, particularly as they
relate to the level of corruption in the public sector and the quality of public service
delivery;

capacity-building needs of decentralised as well as centralised forms of governance; and

forces external to the public service that support governance reform.
The issue of capacity building for instance needs even more attention in South Africa and in
particular within the local sphere of government. It is clear that there is a chronic shortage of
requisite skills in municipalities that are required to improve efficiency and effective service
delivery. The solution to curb skills shortage in municipalities must be a responsibility that
should be carried out by political and administrative leaders respectively. This means that the
182
skills and knowledge acquisition should be the main priority of municipalities in their pursuit to
attain the municipality’s strategic vision, mission and objectives.
The political and administrative components of the municipality have the requisite skills,
competences and knowledge that befit the imperatives of a developmental system of local
government (Maserumule 2008: 441). From evidence provided in the preceding paragraphs,
there are challenges in municipalities and most of them are associated with poor performance
of administrators - but more importantly that there are no processes and procedures to check
and manage performance. This is where performance monitoring and evaluation [PME] fits into
municipal administration and governance processes.
In a developmental country like South Africa, the government is increasingly being called upon
to demonstrate results and prove that there is progress in human development. For example,
the African Peer Review Mechanism [APRM] was created as an instrument to monitor and
evaluate the political, economic and corporate governance of African states. The concept of
establishing an African monitoring mechanism came as a response to governance challenges
and problems that the continent has experienced since independence and the subsequent poor
economic performance (Kuye & Mukumunana, 2005: 590).
It is expected of governments in all spheres [National, Provincial and Local] to demonstrate that
they are making meaningful and tangible differences to the lives of their people and that value
for money is accounted for, in how government function is undertaken. In his 2004 State of the
Nation address, the former President Thabo Mbeki, emphasised the importance of monitoring,
evaluation and reporting in government (Thabo Mbeki, 2004: 1):
The government is also in the process of refining our system of Monitoring and Evaluation, to
improve the performance of our system of governance and the quality of our outputs, providing
an early warning system and a mechanism to respond speedily to problems, as they arise.
183
Among other things, this will necessitate an improvement of our statistical and information
base and enhancing the capacity of the Policy Co-ordination and Advisory Services unit.
The former President’s statement expresses government’s commitment to carry out an
obligation arising from the People’s Contract [which was the main theme in the ANC’s election
manifesto for the 2004 National and Provincial elections]. Since then there has been an
increased focus on performance monitoring and evaluation [PME] in South Africa – as argued in
Chapters [1, 2, 3 and 4] of this study.
The South African government recognises that citizens are no longer solely interested in the
administration of laws, but also in the quality of services that are rendered and in particular the
delivery of effective and efficient minimum basic services. Government decided to introduce
measures to respond to this call by setting up a dedicated Department of Performance
Monitoring and Evaluation [DPME] in the Presidency with a Minister. This action was to a large
extent an attempt by government to ensure that tangible results are achieved, that it takes full
ownership in the way that it monitors, evaluates and reports on its policies, projects and
programmes. More importantly, government is committed to improve outcomes, like the
performance of metropolitan municipalities in the provision of minimum basic services. So if
desired results have to be achieved, then municipal officials must receive training and be
upskilled. The Auditor General makes this point when he stated that:
The implementation of the municipal regulations on minimum competency levels and the
amendments to the Municipal Systems Act, 2000 (Act No. 32 of 2000) (MSA) present an
opportunity to improve the situation. The regulations define the minimum competency levels of
accounting officers, CFOs, senior managers, SCM officials and other financial officials, taking
into account the differences in size and scope of the municipalities. It provides for a phasing-in
period for staff currently in those positions to obtain the minimum competency level through
academic studies and experience and by addressing any gaps in competencies through training
and development. The phasing-in period ended on 1 January 2013 and, as per the regulations,
184
the affected positions may not continue to be filled by persons who do not meet the minimum
competency levels. This has impact on the continued employment of the affected officials.
In this study, the focus will be on performance monitoring and evaluation of the delivery of
minimum basic services [water, sanitation, electricity and waste collection] and special focus
will be attached to targeted performance levels [i.e. Impact Evaluation – IE] against the
municipal Integrated Development Plan [IDP] and Service Delivery and Budget Implementation
Plan [SDBIP] – which according to national government, integrates the Millennium
Development Goals [MDGs]. Special focus will be on how the IDP and SDBIP have been
translated into programmes and projects [inputs, outputs and outcomes] that have a direct
impact on changing people’s lives in informal settlements in the three identified metropolitan
municipalities in Gauteng, South Africa.
The lack of capacity in particular among municipalities has been elaborated and exposed. It has
also been argued in this section, that the South African government has now been engaged
with the issue of performance monitoring and evaluation. It must be established whether the
systems of performance monitoring and evaluation will assist in exposing shortcomings,
properly assess impact of municipal programmes and project and contribute to finding
solutions to the effective and efficient delivery of basic services in municipalities. The question
that arises is whether communities are part of providing solutions - do they participate? A
discussion on public participation will give focus to the current study.
5.6. Community participation in local government
The roles of national, provincial and local spheres of government, in accordance with the
Constitution, 1996 provides that municipalities encourage the involvement of communities and
community organisations in local government - Section 151 (1) (e). Furthermore, according to
Section 152 of the Constitution, the objects of local government are to encourage the
involvement of community organisations in the matters of local government.
185
Basic values and principles governing public administration in South Africa, stipulate that
people’s needs should be responded to, and the public must be encouraged to participate in
policy-making as indicated in Section 195 (e). The Municipal Structures Act [MSA], 117 of 1998,
provides that Category A municipalities [which are the subject of the study and a unit of
analysis] with sub-council or ward participatory systems - annually report on the involvement of
communities and community organisations in the affairs of the municipality. The MSA defines
the legal nature of a municipality as including the local community within the municipal area,
working in partnership with the municipality’s political and administrative structures to provide
for community participation. The assumption made here is that public participation can
contribute to making municipalities’ projects and programmes more acceptable to communities
when they are part of decision-making.
Kuye (2007: 599) argues that a sound development strategy aimed at promoting economic
development, democracy and social justice must be fully cognisant of human resource
development. Development is about people, their physical health, moral integrity, and
intellectual awareness. Through education, citizens become aware of their environment and
the social and economic options available to them. In a liberal democratic regime, for example,
the state rules on behalf of the citizens.
Below is a summary of the Constitution, Acts, regulations and policies relevant to public
participation in South Africa:

The Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996 [Section 151(1)(e); Section 152
and Section 195 (e)].

White Paper on Local Government 1998

Local government: Municipal Structures Act, 117 of 1998 [section 72]

Local government: Municipal Systems Act, 32 of 2000 [section 16, 17, 18 and 42]

Local government: Municipal Finance Management Act, 56 of 2003 [section 120]

Local government: Municipal Property Rates Act, 6 of 2004 [section 14, 22, 50, 51, 53
and 54]

Guidelines for Operation of Ward Committees, 2005
186

National Policy Framework for Public Participation, 2007.
The laws and other official documents mentioned above are directed towards regulating service
delivery in municipalities. This implies that community participation is at the core of effective
and efficient functioning of the local sphere of government – the effective and efficient delivery
of minimum basic services. From this, it can also be deduced that community participation is at
the core of municipal governance.
Public participation in municipal processes is imperative for the promotion of institutional
democracy. The main platform for public participation in the local sphere of government is the
Integrated Development Plan [IDP] process. Furthermore, the 1998 White Paper on local
government [Section B, page 33] indicates that the objectives of community participation are
embedded in the following principles:

to ensure political leaders remain accountable and work within their mandate;

to allow citizens [as individuals or interest groups] to make continuous input into local
politics;

to allow service consumers to make inputs on the way services are delivered; and

to afford organised civil society the opportunity to enter into partnerships and contracts
with local government in order to mobilise additional resources.
The residents, especially those in urban informal settlements, are not aware about such
provisions and the opportunities given to them by legislation – since most urban informal
settlements are not regularly attended to, by either a ward or PR [proportional representative]
councillor. It is rather difficult for residents in informal settlements to participate meaningfully
in determining how they are governed. In some instances, the urban informal settlement
residents are not provided with information by the public representatives [ward or PR
councillors] or the ward or PR councillor may not even be trained in the legislation on public
participation.
The intention of introducing proportional representation system through PR councillors to
participate in the governance process of municipalities is to allow parties that are relatively
187
popular, but not strong enough to win ward seats, and take active part in local government.
This inclusive approach contributes to stability in communities, as all parties with a support
base are involved in governing of the municipality.
In bigger parties like the ANC or the DA, the PR councillor is allocated to a ward and provides
support to the ward councillor in matters that relate to the ward or the ward committee, for
instance – the PR councillor can:
-
handle queries and complaints in consultation with the ward councillor;
-
assist in public meetings or public participation programmes;
-
attend ward committee meetings, constituency meetings and special meetings;
-
assist with resolving disputes and making referrals;
-
assist with the implementation of projects;
-
support the ward councillor, but does not replace the ward councillor;
-
the ward councillor can delegate the PR councillor to Chair meetings in his/her absence.
In essence, the PR councillor can have a critical role in the IDP implementation within a ward in
conjunction with the ward councillor and ward committee. Another important role of the PR
councillor is to become the leader in public participation programmes [this proposition will
become one of the recommendation of the study in the last chapter]. The PR councillor can
ensure that the community is informed and engaged in matters that pertain to governance in
the ward – if the proposal is considered and properly implemented – it might be the panacea
for the ills associated with the governance of public participation.
Görgens and Van Donk (2011: 13) argue that the challenges associated with the quality and
type of participation varies. Their contention is that participation in local development efforts
tends to be fraught with co-option and co-operation between locally-organised groups focused
on protecting and improving their role in the city, while a wider processes such as Integrated
Development Plan – IDP, by and large remain detached, obscure processes to ordinary citizens
which are dominated by party-political interests and processes.
188
Drawing on experiences from participatory processes of decision-making and budgeting in
other countries like Kerala in India, Porto Alegre in Brazil - Heller (2008: 168) argues that when
offered genuine opportunities for participation, local actors will get involved. Participation is
not a function of variables such as human capital and social capital which can only be
accumulated slowly over time. It is a function of much more malleable factors, such as
institutional design, openings in the opportunity structure, alliances and new incentives. When
poor people do not participate, it is not because they do not have the skills or the
determination, but because the obstacles to participation are too high. There are transaction
costs to participation and careful design and political action can contribute in changing these
costs.
Even under such comprehensive and progressive legislative frameworks in South Africa that put
public participation at the core of municipal governance and a key stakeholder in the work
done by local government in delivering minimum basic services, there are still a number of
challenges. In an article called “It is your right to participate in how you are governed” in Afesiscorplan [Afesis-corplan is a core member of the Good Governance Learning Network (GGLN), an
initiative to bring together civil society organisations involved in the field of local governance in
South Africa]. It is argued that the aim is for the organisations to network and share information
towards the goal of strengthening participatory democratic local governance].
Mgwebi (2009: 1) argues that limited access to information among communities leads to a
widening of the communication gap that exists between communities and a municipality; lack
of public participation; failure of the municipalities to follow the policy relating to public
participation in municipal decision-making processes as they are not compelled to do so; failure
of full protection of people’s civil rights; people not accepting or agreeing with local
government development initiatives; and the end result is the creation of service
delivery/development backlogs.
Politics play a role in widening the gap that exists between communities and municipalities (as
argued in chapter 1 - the problem statement). This makes the work of councillors and other
public representatives difficult in communities and result in contestations between party
189
members, different political parties and more so, between the community and the municipality
itself.
South Africa's municipalities are a contested terrain, and in order to understand the politics,
one must understand the territory in which it plays itself out – this is according to Anton Harber
(Isandla, 2011: 1), [Caxton Professor of Journalism and Media Studies and director of the
journalism programme at the University of the Witwatersrand and author of Diepsloot – when
giving his opening address at a round table hosted by Isandla Institute]. It is however important
to mention, that contestation in and of itself doesn’t need to be an issue of concern. In actual
fact not all contestation is disruptive (some contestation can assist in enforcing discipline and
accountability) while other forms of contestation can be desruptive and ultimately contribute
to the demise of a municipality’s ability to perform optimally. Unfortunately this kind of
contestation is prevalent among municipalities in South Africa and is counterproductive for
local government effectiveness and efficiency.
It is tempting to blame someone for the current challenges in the sphere of local government
and it is also tempting to indicate that the new democratic government inherited all challenges
indicated indirectly from the former apartheid government. Some may even argue that the
dilemmas and predicaments besieging municipalities are a result of close to 50 years of
apartheid and colonialism in South Africa that continued to affect the form and shape of local
government to date. However, the current challenges that plague the local sphere of
government go beyond the inherited problems of apartheid and separate development, to
reiterate what is a known fact does not change the situation. The current epoch and dynamics
of national politics in South Africa has direct bearing on the local sphere of government and has
more to do with the skills and capacity of the current leaders than finding excuses. The issues
and challenges include and limited to patronage politics, failures in local political leadership and
party political factionalism.
190
5.6.1. Hindrances to public participation – the problem of patronage politics
An observer could notice that divisions within and between political parties overflow into
municipalities, rendering some of them dysfunctional CoG report (State of Local Government in
South Africa, 2009: 10). To compound the challenge, there are issues of factionalism in leading
political parties found in municipalities, patronage politics and corruption; maladministration;
political interference and to some considerable extent a conflation of the ruling party and the
state – as it was argued in the CoG report (State of Local Government in South Africa, 2009: 10).
Unfortunately these problems cumulatively contribute to the erosion of democratic,
accountable and effective local government in some municipalities, while concurrently
hindering delivery and provision of minimum basic services.
Since this study is located in the local government sphere and in particular metropolitan
municipalities, reference will be made to examples that are associated and relevant to the
study. The former Minister for Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs [CoGTA], Sicelo
Shiceka, admitted that, “Many of our municipalities are in a state of paralysis and dysfunction”.
He conceded that local government was perceived to be incompetent, disorganised and
“riddled with corruption and maladministration” (Patel, 2011: 1).
In the report on the round table called “Local politics and factionalism: Local government as a
site of contestation” – the Isandla Institute (2011:2) argues that the absence of strong and
resilient local government institutions means that these institutions are unable to manage
contestation effectively. These manifestations also serve to erode the trust between
communities, the elected leaders and the local institutions - municipalities.
It must be mentioned that when service delivery is hindered the community is negatively
affected and bears the brunt. Research and assessments conducted by the Department of
Cooperative Governance [CoG] revealed that party political factionalism and polarisation of
interests and the subsequent creation of new political alliances and elites, have contributed to
the progressive deterioration of municipal functionality (SA - CoG, 2009: 10). In the same report
(SA - CoG, 2009: 44), CoG concedes in its national municipal assessment, that more than three
191
million households out of about 13 million were receiving below a basic level of service and 600
452 households need to be served with sanitation facilities per year until 2014 to eradicate the
existing backlog. The empirical study in Chapter 6 will indicate that sanitation is still a challenge
and the problem of bucket system and pit latrine toilets is still prevalent especially in urban
informal settlements.
The Institute for Security Studies [ISS] notes that the primary reason, it would appear, is
dissatisfaction with the delivery of basic municipal services such as running water, electricity
and toilets, especially in informal settlements. Unemployment [officially at +/- 25,4%], high
levels of poverty, poor infrastructure, and the lack of houses add to the growing dissatisfaction
in these and other poor communities (Burger, 2009: 1).
The CoG report notes a key and fundamental concern which has the potential to erode all that
a democratic dispensation has brought to the South African body politic, is that there are
officials and public representatives in municipalities for whom public service is not a concern,
but accruing wealth at the expense of poor communities is their priority (SA - CoG, 2009: 30).
The report attributes this to a lack of values, principles and ethics. National Treasury attributes
failures in municipal performance directly to failures in local political leadership (SA - National
Treasury, 2011: 24).
Evidence on the problems of municipalities were exposed and extrapolated by CoG report (SA CoG, 2009:4-10) and CoG reveals that local government is in distress. The report highlights the
following as the causal reasons for distress in municipalities: tensions between the political and
administrative interface; poor ability of many councillors to deal with the demands of local
government; insufficient separation of powers between political parties and municipal councils;
lack of clear separation between the legislative and executive; inadequate accountability
measures and support systems and resources for local democracy; poor compliance with the
legislative and regulatory frameworks for municipalities. It can be deduced from the CoG report
that the state of municipalities in South Africa is a challenge.
192
The discussion on the state of local government in South Africa has raised concerns and
exposed challenges in South African municipalities. In particular their administration,
community participation and the problems associated are hampering delivery of services to
communities. It is important to mention that public participation in municipal processes is
imperative for the promotion of democracy. Municipalities should engage communities to
involve them in decision-making, especially when it is attributed to issues of how they manage
and control programmes and projects. In essence, communities need to be part of how a
municipality is governed and appropriate resources meant for development with due skill and
care. Communities and public officials need to conduct performance and monitoring and
evaluation of municipalities to stay informed – measure outputs, outcomes and results.
An important consideration is that not all communities in metropolitan municipalities get an
opportunity to participate in formal process as outlined in the debate and discussions on public
participation, due to their spatial configuration as informal settlements. It is important to
commence a discussion on UIS in metropolitan municipalities – to understand how they are
organised and function – including their complexities and challenges.
5.7. Urban informal settlements [UIS] in metropolitan municipalities
Geographic and historic accounts of how the majority of Black Africans [including Coloureds
and Indians] were displaced and forced into townships have been presented in the first sections
of this chapter. Those decisions that were taken in the early 1950s towards the 1980s - of
entrenching separate development in South Africa, are still influencing the South African
government today, as argued in the opening sections of this chapter [cf 5.2. Local government
during colonialism and apartheid in South Africa - origins and characteristics of urban areas,
1800-1994].
In essence, the Group Areas Act, 41 of 1950 was the starting point of expropriation of property
and the large-scale removal of non-white South Africans [Indians in Durban] from their
193
communities to new settlements (Robinson, 1992: 4). This was done to create space for
business development in big cities like Johannesburg (Scott, 1992: 94). In agreement with
authors in urban studies (Maylam, 1995: 22), the overall picture that emerged shows that
urban segregation evolved over a long period of time in a rather haphazard way. The
continuities after both the Natives Urban Areas Act, 21 of 1923 and the Group Areas Act, 41 of
1950 led to a situation of unplanned settlements for black Africans and spatial planning
segregation – which resulted in township establishments as they are known today.
The history of UIS points to gradual word-of-mouth processes that arise directly out of a
desperate need for accommodation. In actual fact, the formation of an informal settlement is
very sporadic (Huchzermeyer, 2009: 62). Internationally, the biggest informal settlements in the
world are found in South Africa [Khayelitsha], Pakistan [Orangi township], Brazil [favelas of Rio
de Janeiro] and in Kenya ‘Kibera slums’ [Forest or Jungle] of Nairobi. Conditions in almost all
informal settlements are unacceptable in a contemporary state. Most of its residents lack
access to minimum basic services [water, sanitation, electricity and waste collection]. South
Africa’s Khayelitsha in Cape Town is the biggest informal settlement in Africa followed by
Kenya’s ‘Kibera slums’ in Nairobi; while Pakistan’s Orangi Township is the largest in Asia and
Brazil’s favelas of Rio de Janeiro is the biggest in South America respectively.
City planning and urban studies experts have been investigating the development of urban
informal settlement (Huchzermeyer, 2009:62). Their studies reveal that UIS generally develop
on unused land, mostly on the outskirts of a city – in most instances informal settlements are
found in places like former buffer strips, undeveloped land between formal township
developments, on the edges of new townships, on land allocated for public or commercial
facilities that show no signs of being developed for its original purpose, and on unutilised and
unprotected natural land, often not immediately suitable for development or occupation
(Huchzermeyer, 2009:62). According to government records dating back to 2009, 71% of South
Africa’s population live in cities and the population of eight [i.e. after 2011 municipal elections
and the inclusion of Mangaung and Buffalo Cities as the new metropolitan municipalities]
194
metropolitan municipalities reportedly grew by 2,9% per annum on average over the period
1996-2007 compared with the national average of 1,8% (CoG, 2009: 17).
The Housing Development Agency [HDA], which is a national development agency established
by an Act of Parliament [Act 23 of 2008] under the Department of Human Settlements [DHS]
has a mandate to release suitable land for the creation of sustainable human settlements. The
HDA developed a GIS or geographic information system tool called LaPsis [Land and Property
Information System]. LaPsis is a land and property spatial informal system accessible online that
helps users to reference their own information with up to date human settlement sector
information (HDA, 2012: 13]. LaPsis provides users with access to the following layers:

Housing / human settlement projects;

Informal settlements;

Cadastre [erven, farms, conservation areas, wards];

Gauteng Biodiversity Plan [restricted];

South Africa’s Agriculture potential;

Geology;

1:50 000 and the 1:250 000 topographical map; and

Satellite imagery.
HDA indicated that LaPsis has been designed for those who are not experts in GIS to easily
query data and create maps. It provides useful functions which include erf level data such as
property info, owner, extent and satellite image - which can be viewed in relation to points of
interest nearby; state-owned land can be referenced in a municipality and an identified
property can be confirmed as state-owned; property verification [i.e. Property can be viewed
on a map, deeds information (i.e. ownership) can be confirmed, and a satellite image will
confirm what is on the property]; X and Y coordinates [point data] from an excel spreadsheet
can be added; polygons can be captured and saved to user’s favourites; immediate and real
time access to maps; own data can be captured and uploaded; data analysis and customisation
according to needs. These functions are critical in properly identifying UIS.
195
5.7.1. Definition of an informal settlement [IS]
The definition of what the term informal settlements means in the context of this study must
be clarified. Information from relevant sources and review of associated published reports in
municipalities indicate that informal settlements [urban and rural] have different meanings to
different municipalities in South Africa and this includes definitions provided by Statistics South
Africa [SSA] and the Department of Human Settlements [DHS]. Below is a table that summarises
all the definitions that could be found in this regard.
Table 5.7. Different definitions of informal settlements in South African municipalities
Municipality
Definition
Nelson Mandela Bay Metropolitan
“An informal settlement refers to one or more
Municipality
shacks constructed on land with or without
the consent of the owner of the land or the
person in charge of the land. In some
settlements no formal layouts have been
approved whilst in others there are formal
sites. Services are communal in nature.”
Buffalo City Metropolitan Municipality
“Areas where groups of housing units have
been constructed on land that the occupants
have no legal claim to, or occupy illegally;
Unplanned settlements and areas where
housing is not in compliance with current
planning and building regulations
(unauthorised housing).” (Buffalo City
Metropolitan Municipality Draft Integrated
Development Plan 2012/13).
Mangaung Metropolitan Municipality
“Informal settlements refer to areas that are
196
not formally planned but nevertheless are
occupied illegally by the dwellers.” (Mangaung
Metropolitan Integrated Development Plan,
Review 2013/14).
City of Johannesburg Metropolitan
No formal definition, however the following
Municipality
working definition is used: An informal
settlement comprises “An impoverished group
of households who have illegally or without
authority taken occupation of a parcel of land
(with the land owned by the Council in the
majority of cases) and who have created a
shanty town of impoverished illegal residential
structures built mostly from scrap material
without provision made for essential services
and which may or may not have a layout that
is more or less formal in nature.” (John
Maytham, Project Manager: Informal
Settlement Formalisation Unit, Development
Planning and Urban Management).
City of Tshwane Metropolitan Municipality
“Informal settlement means one shack or
more constructed on land, with or without the
consent of the owner of the land or the
person in charge of the land.”
“Shack means any temporary shelter, building,
hut, tent, dwelling or similar structure which
does not comply with the provisions of the
National Building Regulations and Building
Standards Act, 1977 (Act 103 of 1977), the
regulations promulgated under that Act and
197
the Municipality’s Building Control By-laws
and which is primarily used for residential
purposes.” (City of Tshwane Metropolitan
Municipality, By-laws Relating to the
Management and Control of Informal
Settlements, Definitions).
Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality
“As a basic characteristic, the occupation of
the land is unauthorised. In addition, the use
of the land may be unauthorised, and in most
cases the construction standards do not
comply with building regulations.” (Study into
supporting informal settlements, Main Report,
28 August 2004 Prepared for Department of
Housing, Pretoria by the University of the
Witwatersrand Research Team).
City of Cape Town Metropolitan Municipality
The City of Cape Town defines an informal
settlement in accordance with Statistics South
Africa.
eThekwini Metropolitan Municipality
“Structures which are made of rudimentary
materials (wood, cardboard, metal sheets,
mud, etc.) without any building plans
approved, often on land that has been illegally
occupied. Services are very basic or not
available at all.” (Faizal Seedat, Senior
Manager: Housing Unit - Durban].
KwaZulu-Natal Province
KwaZulu-Natal defines an informal settlement
in accordance with the 2009 National Housing
Code’s Informal Settlement Upgrading
Programme.
198
Mookgophong Local Municipality
“Dense settlements comprising communities
housed in self-constructed shelters under
conditions of informal tenure.” (IDP 2011/12).
Thabazimbi Local Municipality
“Unplanned settlements where informal
housing (i.e. structures not in compliance with
building regulations) is constructed on land
that occupants have no legal claim to (at least
initially), and on which few, if any, services
exist.” (Housing Strategy 2010).
Polokwane Local Municipality
“Dense proliferation of small, make-shift
shelters built from diverse material and
informally located on land that is not
proclaimed, often characterised by high crime,
degradation of the local ecosystem and severe
social and health problems.” (IDP).
Modimolle Local Municipality
Informal settlements are 100% tin houses.”
(IDP 2011/12).
Statistics South Africa [SSA]
“An unplanned settlement on land which has
not been surveyed or proclaimed as
residential, consisting mainly of informal
dwellings (shacks).”
Definition of an informal dwelling :“A
makeshift structure not approved by a local
authority and not intended as a permanent
dwelling”.
The three municipalities that are units of analysis in the current study also provide different
definitions for an informal settlement. For the purpose of this study – the definition used by the
HDA will be used. According to HDA, an informal settlement is defined as a group of non199
permanent structures not on a formally registered residential property (HDA, 2012:14). The
2009 National Housing Code’s Informal Settlement Upgrading Programme identifies informal
settlements on the basis of the following characteristics (HDA, 2013: 45):
• Illegality and informality;
• Inappropriate locations;
• Restricted public and private sector investment;
• Poverty and vulnerability; and
• Social stress
The Department of Human Settlements [DHS] commissioned the development of two atlases,
namely, the Human Settlements Investment Potential Atlas [compiled by the CSIR – Council for
Scientific and Innovation Research] and the Informal Settlements Atlas [compiled by AfriGIS].
The 2008/2009 ‘Informal Settlements Atlas’ featured 45 municipalities. In 2010 the Department
extended the atlas to incorporate a total of 70 municipalities. The 2009/2010 Informal
Settlement Atlas indicates there are 2628 informal settlement polygons in the country in the 70
municipalities (HDA, 2012:12).
In South Africa, most urban informal settlements are found in metropolitan areas in Gauteng
Province. The Department of Cooperative Governance [CoG] indicates that the informal
households found in major metropolitan municipalities account for almost half [49%] of all
informal housing in the country. This is where the biggest increases have been over the last 10
years. Furthermore, it is mentioned that significant areas of informal housing are also found
close to important secondary towns, especially those in municipalities close to Gauteng’s
metropolitan areas, which makes the Province and the surrounding municipalities the largest
UIS in the country (CoG, 2009:26).
According to Misselhorn (2008: 5) any analysis of the current situation in UIS should be
premised on an appreciation of why they exist and what functionality they afford to those who
200
reside in them. Whilst UIS are all different, one recurring factor in their formation is that they
typically provide an initial point of access into the urban environment for incoming migrants, or
for those moving from other parts of the city. More importantly, they afford such access at a
low financial cost and the barriers to entry are low - relative to other options such as being
allocated a site in a subsidised housing project. The nature of this access can be further
explained as follows:

access to employment and other economic/livelihood opportunities [which are access
to social facilities (e.g. education and health care];

access to the political system [access to ward councillors and the space to vote and
lobby];

access to the legal system [or improved access to it]; and

potential access to housing and infrastructure [e.g. through waiting lists for housing
projects or through rudimentary/illegal services and connections available].
Informal settlements serve a critical function as ‘holding places’ where people can access the
urban environment at low financial cost and piece together various livelihood strategies there.
Some might remain permanently and even ultimately gain access to formal housing, whilst
others might reside temporarily for specific purposes which, once fulfilled, result in them
moving elsewhere in the city or returning to where they initially came from (Misselhorn, 2008:
5). Urban informal settlements [UIS] remain a major challenge for Gauteng municipalities to
manage because of the in-migration of people into the Province. GPG [Gauteng Provincial
government] plan is either to upgrade those which are suitable or to relocate people that can
be allocated stands and be provided with basic services. In 2011, in the “Statement by Gauteng
Premier, Ms Nomvula Mokonyane, during the presentation of Local Government Performance
Review 2006 – 2011”, the Premier reiterated this intention stating that:
Informal settlements remain a major challenge for municipalities to manage due to in-migration
of people to the Province. The plan is either to upgrade those which are suitable or to relocate.
201
By August 2008, a total of 85 informal settlements had already been formalised and 36 were
eradicated by 2009 (Mokonyane, 2011:1).
The reason people move close to these urban centres can be reduced to economic opportunity,
access to minimum basic services and better living conditions. This is because, urban areas
produce 88% of South Africa’s economic activity (CoG, 2009:17) and, in 2009, between 53% and
56% of the working age population in the major metropolitan municipalities were employed –
compared with only 29% in the former Bantustans [areas which were found mainly in the rural
areas of South Africa during apartheid, designated for Africans]. Former Bantustans included
Bophuthatswana, Venda, Qwaqwa, Kwandebele, Kwazulu and Gazankulu. The other 47% are in
the commercial farming areas (SACN, 2011:24).
The South African Cities Network [SANC], makes a very salient point as the main reason many
people in-migrate to metropolitan municipalities. They indicate that jobs in urban centres are
generally of a better quality. About 80% of workers in the metropolitan municipalities are
engaged in formal employment, as compared to only about 55% in the former Bantustans, and
earnings tend to be higher in the metropolitan municipalities than in rural areas, suggesting
that their economies are more productive (SACN, 2011:25). The argument by SANC is similar to
the observation made by Municipal IQ in an article called “Understanding why service delivery
protests take place and who is to blame”. Allan and Heese (2011: 1) argue that:
Urbanisation, essentially the influx of poor migrants to cities, is prompted by the search for jobs,
and therefore is most pronounced in areas of economic growth. But this results in an irony –
although service delivery protests are commonly perceived as an indication of a failure of local
government, Municipal IQ has found a strong link between municipal productivity (a measure of
local government success) and service delivery protests – those in search of jobs move to
successful cities where they perceive there to be economic opportunity. Unfortunately, most
migrants find themselves unemployed, living in one of the many hundreds of informal
202
settlements on the periphery of these large metros, effectively marginalised from both access to
economic opportunity, as well as housing and services.
It is obvious from the above paragraph, the reason why many migrant workers stay in urban
informal settlements. Coming close to urban centres brings with it the need for accommodation
and because of unaffordable housing and other inhibiting factors, people and mostly poor
Africans from rural areas move to informal settlements. Huchzermeyer (2009: 63) argues that in
contrast to formally planned and established neighbourhoods which represent a wide range of
market interests, informal settlements in South Africa’s cities portray primarily a human face.
This is actually a reflection on poverty in rural South Africa, and the main reason why poor black
Africans in majority in-migrate to cities for a better life. Huchzermeyer (2009: 63) argues, that:
informal settlements represent universal human needs: community, individual and cultural
expression, shelter and home-making, access to a livelihood and access to schooling. Unlike
formal property owners, the residents of these settlements play no active part in the socioeconomic processes that deepen inequality: they are excluded from the formal process of land
subdivision and land-use control, and from the distorted land market it underpins and which is
so much adorned and guarded by all who play their economic cards in this lucrative game.
This means that most residents in UIS are excluded from the mainstream economy and land
occupation. The movement and organisations that represent people in informal settlements are
mostly human rights groups and NGOs. Huchzermeyer (2006: 62) argues that informal
settlements are largely organised by voluntary, mostly non-party political civil society
organisations that endeavour to make a positive contribution to urban development [civic
organisations like the Landless People’s Movement, the Federation of the Urban Poor]. Far
from promoting informal settlements, these civil society organisations are lobbying for
recognition of the existing situation and a solution that best responds to the residents’ needs.
The activism of civil society movements might be a result of many factors, but more glaring are
issues of poverty, social inequality and spatial segregation in major cities. Saule Júnior (2008:
56) argues that:
203
The Right to the City arises as a response to the panorama of social inequality, considering the
duality experienced in the same city: the city of the rich and the city of the poor; the legal city
and the illegal city, as well as the exclusion of the majority of the city’s inhabitants determined
by the logic of spatial segregation; by the commodity city; by the mercantilisation of urban soil
and real-estate appraisal; by the private appropriation of public investments in housing, in
public transportation, in urban equipment, and in public services in general.
In the period between 1996 and 2007, citizens of the metropolitan municipalities have had
limited access to services [including access to water, electricity and sanitation] than the
national average; the same metropolitan areas are also featured when it comes to
metropolitan/local municipalities listed for the biggest backlogs in terms of water, sanitation,
electricity and waste management. (SA - CoG, 2009:11). The statistics show that even though
there is increasing access, there is both the growing need for access to services as a result of
population growth in cities [in-migration]. Coupled to that, is the increasing backlog in the
provision of minimum basic services – especially in informal settlements – which will be a unit
of analysis in this study. The underlying factors could be found midway between provision of
effective and efficient minimum basic services and the way in which municipalities respond to
the residents’ needs. This will be tested during the empirical study in the next chapter.
According to research from Municipal IQ’s Hotspots Monitor, there is clear evidence that most
protests in recent years occur in urban informal settlements that are found in the largest
metropolitan municipalities (Allan & Heese, 2011: 2). Cities which experience the highest
population growth rates of all municipalities in South Africa such as Cape Town, Ekurhuleni,
Johannesburg and Tshwane have experienced an increase in service delivery protests in the
past three years. An important issue to mention is that there is a strong statistical link between
high levels of migration and service delivery protests (Allan & Heese, 2011: 2).
It can be deduced from information provided by Municipal IQ, that in South Africa, there are
people and groups protesting against the growth of inequality, marginalisation, discrimination
204
and a lack of public participation in decision-making, especially in the functioning of cities – and
in most instances these people are found in informal settlements.
People are not only protesting against extreme poverty and underdevelopment, they are
demanding effective and efficient delivery of minimum basic services [water, sanitation,
electricity and waste collection] as the minimum basic human needs that can alter the way they
live before they can even attend to higher issues that obstruct the amelioration of their
conditions of squalor and abject poverty which part of the quantitative research study in the
next Chapter 6 will attempt to understand and clarify. It is clear from the foregoing discussion
that the struggle for liveable neighbourhoods has yet to be effectively connected to the
demand for liveable cities.
5.8. Protest action in metropolitan municipalities in Gauteng Province
As politicians and officials continue in their factional battles [i.e. as indicated in the 2009 GoC
report] in municipalities, peoples’ needs which include the delivery of effective and efficient
minimum basic services are further pushed to the margins. This leaves the public with no
option but to react. The quickest and easiest way for despondent and disgruntled people to
respond is through protest action, which is a term that has now become popularly known in
South Africa as “service delivery protest”.
According to Roux (2005: 3) the so called service delivery protests started in 2004 in a South
African township called Harrismith in the Free State Province. After that, protests grew and
became popular. By June 2005 protests took place in 21 local communities – today there are
almost weekly occurrences in the various Provinces. In short, the so called service delivery
protests in South Africa are really nothing more than people expressing their dissatisfaction
with the way in which municipalities are moving at a slow-pace to render minimum basic
services such as water, sanitation, electricity and waste management.
205
In a report titled ‘Community Protests in South Africa: Trends, Analysis and Explanations’;
Karamoko, J & Jain, H (2011: 4-5) which will be analysed and used in this section as the main
reference together with its parallel companion work from Municipal IQ – details of community
protests are comprehensively discussed. The authors argue that the frequency of community
protests occurring across South Africa increased substantially over the course of three years
before reversing the trend, and falling dramatically from June 2010 till the middle of 2011. The
authors measured frequency of protests per month and below is the summary of their findings:
Table 5.8. [a] Frequency of protests per month [summary of findings by Karamoko & Jain
(2011: 4-5)
Year
Percentage protests per month [pp/m]
2007
8.73% pp/m
2008
9.83% pp/m
2009
17.75% pp/m
2010
11.08% pp/m
2011
8.80% pp/m
Average TOTAL
11.2% pp/m
206
Figure 5.8. [a] Average number of protests per month between Feb 2007- Aug 2012 [Adapted
from De Visser & Powell (2012) Service Delivery Protest Barometer 2007-2012 Cape Town:
Multi-level Government Initiative, Community Law Centre.]
Figure 5.8. [b] Average number of protests per month by season and by year [Adapted from
Karamoko & Jain, 2011: 9]
207
Figure 5.8. [c] Average number of protests per month by season and by year [De Visser &
Powell (2012) Service Delivery Protest Barometer 2007-2012 Cape Town: Multi-level
Government Initiative, Community Law Centre.]
The results and findings of the work done by De Visser & Powell and Karamoko & Jain indicate
that although protest actions takes place throughout the year, there are some months [i.e.
seasons] where there are more protests than in others – especially during winter. Municipal IQ
also came to the same conclusion in the research on protest action in municipalities. Figures
5.8. [a, b and c] above, show the findings.
The argument advanced is that there are several [potentially mutually reinforcing] explanations
for the greater unrest in winter months. Firstly, the increased and greater need for electricity
and power during the colder winter months make residents more likely to protest about
electricity shortages and may be at least a contributing factor to the increased levels of protest
during this season, which occur regularly in South Africa. Secondly, the damage caused by
winter storms and subsequent instances of flooding in some areas of South Africa [i.e. Cape
Town] may contribute to community unrest. Thirdly, the winter weather may amplify concerns
residents have about the absence of adequate housing. Fourthly, the South African Local
Government Research Centre has found that during the winter, heavy rainfall in some areas
wash pollution from urban areas, significantly undermining the quality of coastal water
208
(Karamoko & Jain, 2011: 9-10). In 2013, South Africa experienced decline in major service
delivery protest. However, Gauteng Province is leading in term of the overall percentage of
protests action in South African Provinces.
Figure 5.8. [d] Major service delivery protests, by year (2004 – 31st October 2013) [Adapted
from Municipal IQ Municipal Productivity and Hotspots Monitor]
Figure 5.8. [e] Service delivery protests by province (January - October) 2013 [Adapted from
Municipal IQ Municipal Productivity and Hotspots Monitor]
209
5.8.1 The phenomenon of violent protest
An important aspect of protest action in South Africa has been the prevalance of violent
protest. Violent protests have been defined by Karamoko & Jain (2011: 9-10); as those protests
where some of the participants have engaged in physical acts that either cause immediate harm
to some person, or are substantially likely to result in such harm. During the period that protest
action intensified in South Africa, there were various indications of violent protests. These
include but are not limited to:

the intentional injuring of the police or law enforcement agencies;

attacks on foreigners;

attacks on government officials,

the burning down of ward councillors houses, libraries, municipal buildings and other
structures that belong to the state;

the looting of shops belonging to foreign nationals;

throwing of rocks at passing motorists;

burning of tyers and placing of barricades to blockade roads; and

other similar acts have been included as a violent protest.
Municipal IQ makes this point in their article titled ‘Communities can make a difference with
protest action’ - 10 Apr 2013, Business Day. Municipal IQ argue that valuable public
infrastructure is often destroyed in violent protest action and in dysfunctional municipalities.
The opportunity cost is likely to be very high with a number of priorities having to be forfeited
preceding the replacement of a library or community centre [those are the frequent targets of
protests]. Moreover, the main issue raised is that violent protests create divisions in
communities. According to Municipal IQ, Xenophobia can surface, overlaid with criminality and
the looting of local ‘spaza shops’. Despite the need to recognise the legitimacy of protest action
as a democratic necessity in South Africa the increasingly violent nature of protests has become
a real concern — violence was evident in more than 75% of protests recorded by Municipal IQ
210
in 2013 (Municipal IQ, 2013: 10 April). A more detailed research on frequency of violent protest
revealed the following information:
Table 5.8.1 [a] Frequency of violent protest by year between 2007 - 2011
Year
Percentage protests per annum
2007
41.66% p/a
2008
38.13% p/a
2009
44.16% p/a
2010
55.64% p/a
2011
59.09% p/a
Average TOTAL
47.73% p/a
The regularity with which protests become violent [Table 5.8.1. [a] 47.73% - almost half of all
recorded protest action] can be as insightful an indicator of discontent as the frequency of
protests. A counter argument has also emerged from other institutions, for instance the
University of Johannesburg’s Centre for Sociological Research has argued that heavy-handed,
violent interventions by police officers often incite violence at community protests (Karamoko
& Jain, 2011: 11).
211
Figure 5.8.1 The annual growth rate of violent protests [Adapted from De Visser & Powell
(2012) Service Delivery Protest Barometer 2007-2012 Cape Town: Multi-level Government
Initiative, Community Law Centre.]
The University of Johannesburg’s Centre for Sociological Research noted in July and August
2009, that peaceful protests held in townships in the Gauteng and Mpumalanga Provinces were
met with police randomly opening fire at protesters and, in certain instances, firing at
assembled groups of people who were not involved in the protests at all (Karamoko & Jain,
2011: 11). From Fig 5.8.1 above, it can be argued that violent protest is growing exponentially.
Gauteng Province has been leading protest action across the country. Below is a summary of
findings from authors between 2007 and 2011.
212
5.8.2. Gauteng specific protest action
Table 5.8.2 [a] Gauteng Province protest action by year between 2007 – 2011 [Adapted from
Karamoko & Jain, 2011: 18-23].
Year
Percentage protests per annum out of the
National total
2007
29.00% p/a [Highest in the country]
2008
35.00% p/a [Highest in the country]
2009
29.00% p/a [Highest in the country]
2010
40.00% p/a [Highest in the country]
2011
14.00% p/a [3rd highest in the country]
Average TOTAL
29.40% p/a
Figure 5.8.2 [a] Protest action by Province [Adapted from Karamoko & Jain, 2011: 24].
213
Figure 5.8.2 [b] Protest action by Province [Adapted from De Visser & Powell (2012) Service
Delivery Protest Barometer 2007-2012 Cape Town: Multi-level Government Initiative,
Community Law Centre.]
According to computed numbers in Table 5.8.2 [a]; including information adapted from figures
5.8.2 [a] and 5.8.2 [b] above – it is clear that Gauteng Province accounts for almost 30% of
protest action in South Africa. Until the first half of the year 2011 when a sharp decrease
started to become apparent, the Province was the predominant site of community protests in
the country. De Visser & Powell (2012) indicate that Gauteng yielded the highest protest
activity from 2007-2011 but then dropped significantly in 2012. As of August 2012, the Western
Cape is the Province with the highest number of protests.
This in a way helps explain the phenomenon of community unrest. Municipal IQ has suggested
that Gauteng’s striking contribution to the number of community protests nationwide
demonstrates that the protests are largely an urban phenomenon, resulting from the relative
deprivation that members of a community experience when compared to their more affluent
neighbours.
214
Figure 5.8.2 [c] Gauteng protest action by district municipality [Adapted from Karamoko &
Jain, 2011: 25].
Information from figure 5.8.2 [c] is significant for the current study. The number of protests
occurring in the City of Johannesburg metropolitan municipality is immediately apparent. This is
followed by the City of Tshwane, another major metropolitan municipality. Tshwane, although
not having the same population as Johannesburg, has its own instances of protest than its less
urban counterparts in the Province. Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality is fourth after a
category B district municipality of Sedibeng, which is not a metropolitan municipality.
Protest action might be a result from other factors. However, figures depicted in 5.8.2 [c]
indicate that large population densities in metropolitan municipalities create opportunities for
protest. The necessity of population density for meaningful displays of unrest assist in
explaining and to further substantiate the claim that metropolitan areas have a greater
tendency toward community protests. Municipal IQ in an article titled ‘Protests in Eastern Cape
echo those in Gauteng’ - 12 Dec 2013, Business Day argues that:
215
Marginalised urban communities shack-dwellers and backyard residents display the sort of
desperate frustration seen not only in other South African metros but also in inner cities such as
those in Sweden or France. These are communities with a sense that the system has failed them
and the ballot box is either ineffective or impractical. This picture of disaffection speaks to
inequality in access to services (resulting in service delivery protests) as well as access to income
and employment……. protests take place in municipalities where the average resident has good
access to services and economic activity but due to the structural inadequacies of our economy
for those who fall between the cracks life is extremely hard and protest activity ferments. Hence
Gauteng and the Western Cape have top performers on the index coinciding with high levels of
protest activity — a paradox explained by inequality and marginalisation.
Thus, Municipal IQ explains that residents in urban informal settlements [i.e. those who fall
between the cracks life is extremely hard and protest activity ferments] are the people who
display desperate frustration in metropolitan municipalities. These are the people who feel that
the system has failed them and are the ones experiencing inequality in access to basic
municipal services. Municipal IQ argues that a large part of the problem sparking protests has
been very poor communication between representatives of metropolitan municipalities and
communities, which is essentially the task of the ward councillors and local officials. Moreover,
urban informal settlements [UIS] contain neither the number of registered voters nor the local
branch lobbying strength of more formalised areas, but also because the fluidity of UIS is such
that they do not necessarily present themselves as organized communities with representative
leaders. Observation made by Municipal IQ is that communities from urban informal
settlements in local governance and planning processes requires far more work than in other
more formal areas of metropolitan municipalities.
The Gauteng City-Region Observatory [GCRO] in its 2011 Quality of Life Survey [QoLS] found
that dissatisfaction is increasing among Gauteng residents from a national sphere, provincial
sphere and more so in the local sphere of government – details are shown in Figure 5.8.2 [d]
below.
216
Figure 5.8.2 [d] Satisfaction (or not) with government [Source, GCRO QoLS 2011]
5.8.3. Issues raised/complaints by protesters
It is important to a considerable extent to consider the issues that are raised by protesters
during a protest action. Figure 5.8.3 [a] below illustrates the issues raised or complaints lodged.
The information in the chart is based on the 604 documented community protests that took
place in South Africa between the beginning of February 2007 and May 2011.
217
Figure 5.8.3 [a] Protesters complaints [Adapted from Karamoko & Jain, 2011: 31].
Karamoko & Jain (2011: 30) argue that the vast majority of the categories featured in the chart
are not mutually exclusive, that is, a protester demanding the provision of adequate water,
housing and electricity [which in their considered view is one of the most common
combinations of grievances expressed], would be documented as expressing all three of those
concerns. However, certain categories are mutually exclusive and not-dependent, as is
indicated by the phrase ‘by itself’. For instance, the category “Poor Service Delivery Generally
[by itself]” refers to those instances where protesters cite poor service delivery as the
motivation for a protest, yet do not cite grievances [such as the need for adequate housing]
more specifically. Similarly, the category “Corruption [by itself]” covers those instances where
protesters cite corruption or nepotism on the part of government officials yet fail to mention
other concerns with specificity. The main issues or complaints can be tabled as follows:
218
Table 5.8.3 [a] Protesters complaints [Adapted from Karamoko & Jain, 2011: 18-23].
Protest issues/complaints
Percentage
Housing
21.23%
Inaccessibility to clean water
10.62%
Electricity
10.81%
Inadequate Sanitation
8.83%
Combined TOTAL
51.49%
The four dominant issues/complaints cited by protesters account for almost 52% of all issues
raised during a protest action in South African municipalities as indicated in Table 5.8.3 [a]
above. This is significant for the current study because the focus of the study is on the effective
and efficient delivery of minimum basic services in urban informal settlements in the identified
metropolitan municipalities of Gauteng Province. The flagged issues will again be discussed at
in more detail during an analysis of empirical study results in chapter 6. The intention will be to
compare what comes out of the questionnaire administered among the three municipal
managers and the one that was used for survey interviews with community members in urban
informal settlements. The comparisons will give context to the study and ensure that the
outcomes are generalised.
The arguments presented in the previous paragraphs indicate that there are numerous protest
actions in South African municipalities and although the numbers are decreasing – the fact that
it can happen eight times a month on average and be violent [half the time]. This is an
indication that residents are becoming increasingly unhappy with the delivery of services.
Isandla Institute (2011: 14) argues that what is required in South Africa is to have a strong and
vigilant community members, who must become involved to realise the vision of a people must
govern (Isandla Institute, 2011: 14). The so called service delivery protests have been a wake-up
call of some sort; it has brought attention to the acute and lack in the delivery of minimum
219
basic services. These new phenomena of public expression has also indicated and highlighted a
plethora of weaknesses in municipalities. These include issues [which were noted by GoC in its
2009 report and AGSA in the 2011-12 audit opinion] like:

weak leadership in councils,

lack of accountability and transparency in the way municipalities are
governed and managed,

poorly capacitated administrative systems in councils, and

a blurring of boundaries between political and administrative structures
[the political and administrative dichotomy].
The issue that pertains to loss of confidence was noted by CoG, when stating that citizen
confidence and trust in the system have been publicly evidenced in the spate of community
protests, which may be seen as a symptom of the alienation of citizens from local government
(SA - CoG, 2009: 11). In an article “Rebellions of the poor, by the poor, for the poor”, Khadija
Patel reports that in 2009 and 2010 there were more than treble the number of public service
protests or service delivery protests than in any year since 2004. Instead of being mitigated by a
maturing democracy, these protests have become more frequent. Patel goes further and
indicates that:
people may not be taking to the streets to chant, “Liberty, Freedom, Bread” as the Tunisians or
Egyptians did, but under the guise of service delivery protests the country is already witnessing a
rebellion of the poor (Patel, 2011: 1). The assertion made by Patel has very serious implications
for the stability of local government. Burger (2009: 1) argues that although service delivery
protests in South Africa are just symptoms of socio-political instability, it would be fair to
conclude that if this situation is allowed to continue over a prolonged period, it has the
potential to spread and develop into a fully-fledged revolt (Burger, 2009: 1).
220
It can be deduced from the discussions that South Africa has a legislative framework to regulate
public participation in the local sphere of government, but citizens still consider themselves
excluded from the local government processes. As Heller (2008: 168) stated:
“When poor people do not participate, it is not because they don't have the skills or the
determination, but because the obstacles to participation are too high”.
Participation of residents in governance of municipalities is important for stability and
economic growth. The spate of violent protest that has erupted in Gauteng’s municipalities and
especially in the metropolitan municipalities is a risk that should be mitigated through dialogue,
public participation, effective and efficient delivery of minimum basic services – especially in
areas where they are needed like in the urban informal settlements.
5.9. Role of performance monitoring and evaluation [PME] in metropolitan
municipalities
South Africa has shown progress in performance monitoring and evaluation [PME] systems. As
discussed in chapter 2, South Africa has adopted a Government Wide Monitoring and
Evaluation [GWM&E] system as a policy framework for the implementation of performance
monitoring and evaluation [PME]. Unlike other countries that were examined in chapter 4, the
South African PME system is not centralised – instead the system is decentralised from
national, provincial and local spheres of government [i.e. municipality]. The framework
identifies three data domains:

programme performance information;

social, economic and demographic statistical data; and

evaluation.
221
The South African Treasury [Ministry of Finance] is the lead institution for PME since 2007 after
issuing the policy Framework for Programme Performance Information [FPPI]. The GWM&E has
placed emphasis on monitoring, which to a considerable extent is seen as a pre-condition for
effective evaluation. The current study will place more focus on IE [Impact evaluation]. The
GWM&E framework emphasises the development of performance indicators which capture the
underlying programme logic of a government agency’s activities; hence the framework is
making it compulsory for public agencies and institutions to explicitly lay out the theory
underlying their interventions. In other words, a municipality is expected to have a PME system
which must explain its theoretical and practical approaches including its intervention strategy.
The Department of Performance Monitoring, Evaluation [DPME]’s objective is to improve
performance, and in the process reflect on the results government is achieving, against what it
had set out to achieve, and why deviations are occurring, or unexpected results occurring [the
essence of PME] – operationalise IE [Impact Evaluation] into government. Moreover, the DPME
produced a document titled “National Evaluation Policy Framework” [NEPF]. The Minister of
DPME in his preamble of the NEPF stated the following, about NEPF:

to set out the basis for a government-wide evaluation system to be applied across the
public sector, but initially focusing on our priority areas;

to provide a marked step-up in performance of the public sector; and

to contribute to the establishment of a culture of continuous improvement.
The main objective of the NEPF is to improve the effectiveness and impact of government, by
reflecting on its positive results and revising its programmes and policies accordingly. The other
more practical use of NEPF according to the DPME, is to provide a common terminology and
minimum standards, and promotes the utilisation of evaluation findings to improve
performance. NEPF targets the public sector, evaluators outside the public sector, and training
institutions which must ensure that people have the requisite skills and competences in this
regard (NEPF, 2011: iii).
222
In essence, the NEPF focuses on evaluation of public policies, sector and cross-sectoral plans,
programmes and projects of government. According to the framework there are essentially six
specific types of evaluations, which take place at different stages – prior to an evaluation,
during implementation, and after implementation. They are diagnosis; synthesis; design;
evaluation; implementation evaluation; and impact evaluation. In legal terms and by law, the
Constitution of 1996, the Public Finance Management Act, 1 of 1999, the Public Service Act, 103
of 1994 and the Municipal Finance Management Act, 2003 (MFMA) provide a legal basis for the
executive to manage the performance of public policies, programmes and institutions
efficiently.
According to the NEPF (2011: 23), a national evaluation agenda with a three year and annual
national evaluation plan should have been developed by DPME starting with 2012/13, including
large, strategic and innovative programmes and policies suggested by departments.
Furthermore, offices of the Premiers’ in the nine Provinces were also required to draw up
evaluation plans in Provinces. The need for plans, as outlined in the NEPF (2011: 23) is to inform
the evaluation community inside and outside of government including departments. This
agenda set, must then lay broad parameters that would be implemented via the annual
evaluation plan. The evaluation plan will specify from a national, provincial and municipal
perspective what needs to be done. As argued in the NEPF (2011: 23) departments and other
public institutions including municipalities, have a responsibility to incorporate evaluation into
their management functions as a way to continuously improve their performance. They need
to:

ensure there is an evaluation budget in all programmes and a plan over 3-5 years for
which evaluations will be undertaken, and the form of evaluation;

national Treasury needs to ensure that there are additional budgets to support
evaluation, e.g. In Offices of the Premier and DPME;
223

ensure there are specific structures within the organisation entrusted with the
evaluation role, and with the required skills. This could be a PME Unit, a research unit,
or a policy unit; and

ensure that the results of evaluations are used to inform planning and budget decisions,
as well as general decision-making processes. Thus the results of evaluations must be
discussed in management forums and used to guide decision-making.
5.9.1 National evaluation policy framework and involvement of the donor community
There is extensive involvement and a role played by local and international donor agencies and
organisations in South Africa – especially their roles as they relate to socio-economic
development agenda in the national, provincial and local spheres of government. For this
reason, the South African government developed a PME system which is globally competitive.
The development of national policy frameworks [National Evaluation Policy Framework – NEPF
of 2011] in South Africa, the PME system vis-à-vis donor funding environment has been
enhanced. For instance, the South African government, through its newly created Department
of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation [DPME] designed systems to make sure that it takes
responsibility for performance monitoring evaluating of donor funds – in essence the South
African governments’ PME policies and processes pay attention to long standing concerns of
donors and aid partners regarding the assurance that allocated funds have been used
appropriately and for intended purposes (NEPF, 2011: 24).
The South African government has eliminated the previous need of having to often institute a
donor funder’s own parallel systems [which is prevalent in most African countries and other
developed countries], which put a major strain on governments capacity. The intention by the
South African government is that their evaluation framework [National Evaluation Policy
Framework] must also be used by donors working with government partners, to build on and
strengthen their existing programme planning and evaluations processes – and not have a
parallel process. The 2011 South African National Evaluation Policy Framework (NEPF, 2011: 25)
224
has now incorporated the Paris Declaration and Accra Agenda for Action to commit partners to
the fundamental principles for making aid more effective.

ownership: developing countries set their own strategies for poverty reduction,
improve their institutions and tackle corruption;

alignment: donor countries align behind these objectives and use local systems;

harmonisation: donor countries coordinate, simplify procedures and share
information to avoid duplication;

delivering results: developing countries and donors shift focus to development
results and results get measured. Aid is focused on real and measurable impact on
development;

mutual accountability: donors and partners are accountable for development
results; and

capacity development - to build the ability of countries to manage their own future.
Inclusive partnerships - all partners - including donors in the OECD Development
Assistance Committee and developing countries, as well as other donors,
foundations and civil society - participate fully.
The incorporation of the Paris Declaration and Accra Agenda for Action is an indication that
South Africa is committed to accountability and transparency in its government. This
commitment also indicate willingness from the South African government to continue in
strengthening the African peer review mechanism adopted by the African Union – on how
member states conduct their governance processes – transparency and openness. This factor is
important for effective and efficient PME.
225
5.9.2. The character of the South African PME system
The situation in Africa is somewhat disappointing as it was discussed in Chapter 4. An
International Monetary Fund [IMF] report by Ul Haque & Aziz (1999: 85) found that there is a
severe shortage of the local human capacity needed to design, manage, and implement public
programmes and this is widely recognised as a key constraint to improved governance in SubSaharan Africa. Africa is also lagging behind in terms of evaluation or other sophisticated skills
needed for good governance (Mackay, 2006: 6). Hence, for a country like South Africa which is
advancing a developmental agenda, there is no shortcut. It has to ensure that government
programmes are properly planned, monitored and evaluated - especially at the receiving end of
delivery, which are the municipalities in the South African environment.
The South African PME system has some characteristics similar to those of the selected
examples and experiences from other countries discussed in chapter 4. Because of its late
introduction of PME systems, South Africa has an added advantage to learn from various
international experiences as they pertain to PME - especially from developing countries like
those in Latin America, which exhibit some of the similarities with South Africa when
considering inequalities, population densities in urban areas and the overall economic outlook.
Chapter 3 has extensively discussed the principles and essence of PME. In this chapter, the
debate will be on the contribution of PME as a tool for reform in metropolitan municipalities to
assist in dealing with problems encountered by the local sphere of government. It will not be
necessary to repeat the debate on the principles and essence of PME - the critical factor is to
evaluate the issues raised in previous chapters which directly connect to municipalities. They
are:

results based PME;

impact evaluations [IE];
226

PME as a tool for good governance in the public sector [i.e. metropolitan municipalities];
and

accountable local government.
To provide evidence of progress against developmental mandates, long-term strategies and
promised outcomes, government in all spheres [i.e. a municipality] have to institutionalise
performance monitoring and evaluation systems [PME] that will provide credible, continuous
information on the progress and deviation in attaining development outcomes (Rabie, 2011: 2)
– in essence conduct an Impact Evaluation [IE].
An important aspect that needs examination is the issue of continuous impact evaluation,
which is considered to be one avenue for improving the performance of a government. In terms
of various aspects and variables from quality, quantity and the targeting of the goods and
services which a state produces - evaluation specialists argue that performance monitoring and
evaluation [PME] has a strong advocacy dimension, they imply that PME systems have intrinsic
merit (Mackay, 2006: 6). Kusek and Rist (2004: 16) warn that without measured evidence of the
outcomes, one cannot know for sure whether the policy, programme or project is indeed
producing the envisioned outcomes and associated goals. The argument advanced is that
results-based monitoring and evaluation is a powerful public management tool that can be used
to assist policy-makers and decision-makers track progress and demonstrate the impact of a
given project, programme, or policy.
There are benefits of performance monitoring and evaluation [PME] for research, policy
development and implementation in the public sector. Davies (2008: 3) argues that evidencebased policy assists government to make well informed decisions about policies, programmes
and projects by putting the best available evidence from research at the heart of policy
development and implementation. It is argued that evidence-based policy accurately
determines not only what works, but what works at what cost and with what outcomes (Segone
227
2008: 34-35). Moreover, evidence-based management identifies the interventions that are
successful in satisfying client needs and attaining policy goals (Boaz & Nutley 2003: 226).
There are two critical anticipated outcomes of the study, firstly is to use Impact Evaluation [IE]
to assess and measure the impact of government programmes. Secondly, to make
recommendations that will be used by government in the local sphere to address higher-level
issues and ultimately, to integrate programme effectiveness information into decision-making
processes - in particular expenditure management, resource allocation decisions and tracking of
project implementation in a metropolitan municipality. The issue of capacity building for
instance needs even more attention in South Africa and in particular within the local sphere of
government in a municipal as extensively discussed in the previous sections of the chapter. It
has been indicated in this section that PME has a critical role to play in a municipality and for
the purpose of this study, a metropolitan municipality.
228
5.10. Conclusion
The chapter illustrated that an interdisciplinary study of governance and public management in
the local government sphere requires a contextual understanding of the evolution, origins of
cities and how they were spatially planned – which is a task that must source knowledge from
various disciplines and domains of studies like Geography, History and Urban Management.
This proves that the discipline and domain of Public Administration is an eclectic science. A
discussion and debate on the local sphere of government before [1800 – 1994] and after [1994
to 2014] was necessary to trace origins, give context and outline the process towards
establishment of metropolitan municipalities.
The discussion and debate produced a critical argument: that the scientific study of
performance monitoring and evaluation [PME] in the three main urban centres [the three
metropolitan municipalities in Gauteng Province of Ekurhuleni; Johannesburg and Tshwane] is
justified based on empirical evidence and trends [in the South African context]. This suggests
that the main economic and social activities of Gauteng Province take place in the major urban
centres identified and that is where most of the Gauteng population lives [see: 5.1. Contextual
overview: Population of metropolitan municipalities in Gauteng Province, South Africa].
A brief explanation of the constitutional obligations of a metropolitan municipality were
outlined – including the important issue of boundary demarcations and associated complexities
which led to the current debate about the reconfiguration of the boundaries in the City of
Tshwane. The reconfiguration is the first step towards the envisaged Global City Region in
Gauteng – as proposed by GPG [Gauteng Provincial Government]. The discussion in the corpus
of the chapter focused on the important issue of the state of local government. The issue of
lack of capacity, in particular among municipalities, has been elaborated on and explored. What
remains is to establish whether a quantitative empirical study of performance monitoring and
evaluation [PME] will assist in providing recommendations and solutions [Chapter 6].
The critical discussions that pertain to public participation, UIS and service delivery protests
were discussed; including a discussion on the state of local government. These debates opened
229
an opportunity for further extrapolations and emphasis that were already made in the previous
chapters [1, 2, 3 and 4] about the astute value of performance monitoring and evaluation [PME]
as a reform programme and a tool for metropolitan municipalities. The challenges identified in
this chapter were not referring to regulations or the legislative framework. Instead, it was
argued that political problems and other activities by those elected to the public office [Public
representatives and appointed as officials] to be the stewards of delivery of effective and
efficient services to the public - are sometimes failing in their task. Perhaps this is because no
one is enforcing performance monitoring and evaluations [PME] to the levels where it becomes
synonymous with good governance.
South Africa is facing challenges concerning PME. The issue of capacity building, as an example,
needs even more attention in South Africa and in particular within the local sphere of
government. There is a shortage of requisite skills, specifically in a municipality, which is
required to improve efficiency and ensure effective service delivery. As argued, the lack of skills
results in poor delivery of basic services and this contributes to protest action, which becomes
violent.
Political parties need to make a critical assessment of their practices, especially in a developing
democracy similar to the South African political terrain. Parties in the South African government
need to devise means of professionalising themselves. This noble action can only be achieved
by bringing integrity and ethics to the forefront, for the benefit of state institutions and citizens.
Performance monitoring and evaluation [PME] is no panacea, nor is it an end in itself. It is one
important step to assist public managers to improve public programmes and to be accountable
to elected officials and citizens – it is also instrumental in the exercise of good governance.
230
CHAPTER 6: EMPIRICAL QUANTITATIVE STUDY AND ANALYSIS OF RESULTS
6.1.
Introduction
The five foregoing chapters focused on the qualitative component of the study. There is a need
to investigate the practical considerations in institutionalising performance monitoring and
evaluation [PME] processes in municipalities. This can only be done if a quantitative empirical
research study is conducted. The quantitative study will assist in the process of bridging the gap
between theory and practice, which is critical for the success of research.
South Africa has initiated a performance monitoring and evaluation [PME] reform agenda in its
government institutions and organs of state, more so in the local sphere of government – a
relevant and related legislative framework has been discussed. From the discussions, in the
preceding five chapters [1, 2, 3, 4 and 5] - there is a clear and unambiguous need to conduct a
practical interdisciplinary study of governance and public management with special focus on
performance monitoring and evaluation in municipalities. The quantitative study’s intention is
to provide answers to the problem statement and research questions.
In essence, the purpose of chapter 6 is to put the methodology outlined in chapter 1 into
practice and report on results of the empirical quantitative study conducted. The first section of
the chapter will focus on the logic and validity of methodology that is used. An explanation of
the two types of questionnaire that were distributed as part of the data collection methods
approved by the University and the Department of Human Settlements in Gauteng, will also be
provided. Results will then be analysed, processed and discussed.
A profile of residents living in Gauteng’s urban informal settlements [UIS] that are not
formalised and are 20 years or older, will be created to give context before any comparisons
are done in the study. To a large extent, results will be compared with the South African
government’s own assessment report on the achievement of the United Nations eight
Millennium Development Goals [MDGs]; existing research data from relevant sources, to check
231
consistency and alignment from what was previously found. This will be followed by a set of
recommendations on how to institutionalise a PME system in metropolitan municipalities’
informal settlements and respond to objectives of the study.
6.2.
Methodology
Sample surveys were preferred in the method. The purpose of a sample survey is to collect
standardised information from a carefully selected sample of respondents. This type of survey
is carried out by means of a structured questionnaire or observation guide. For purposes of the
current study, a structured questionnaire is used. Moreover, sample surveys are appropriate
when the research design requires comparable information about a relatively large number of
subjects – which is the situation in informal settlements.
In essence, information may be used to compare different groups at a given point in time, to
estimate changes over time, to compare actual conditions with the goals established in the
project design, or to describe conditions in a particular community or group. Unless all data are
collected in a sufficiently uniform and precise way, it will be impossible to make meaningful
comparisons between groups or between points in time (Valadez & Bamberger, 1994: 214-5).
Sample surveys similar to those that have been used in the study are often used in
experimental or quasi−experimental designs, in which the same information must be collected
from a sample of project participants and a control group at two or more points in time to
estimate changes in a set of indicators of project impacts. For this kind of analysis, the survey
instrument must satisfy a number of conditions. Firstly, the concepts to be measured must be
clearly defined. Secondly, the indicators must be valid measures of the concepts being studied
(Valadez & Bamberger, 1994: 214-5). In the current study, a similar approached described by
the authors as outlined in the preceding paragraphs above was followed to collect data, as
follows:
232

Three city managers or their representatives [one per metropolitan municipality – three
in total] were each sent a questionnaire [via email] and given time to complete it
independently. All questionnaires were returned.

14 community members from each metropolitan municipality identified in informal
settlements were randomly selected and surveyed using a one-on-one interview
method. In total 392 community members – [14 per municipality] - were interviewed
and surveyed.

In each informal settlement field workers and the researcher were sometimes
accompanied by a public representative [ward councillor], but he/she never participated
in the one-on-one interview process – that was independent and it only involved the
field workers, the researcher and participants.
6.2.1. Cluster sampling - processing of community [i.e. urban informal settlements] survey
results
For the purpose of the current empirical study in the community survey which is conducted in
informal settlements, a cluster sampling technique has been selected. This is a sampling
technique where the population is divided into groups, or clusters and a random sample of
these clusters are selected. All observations and determinations in the selected clusters are
then included in the sample. In the study, populations are divided into groups which include UIS
that are not formalised and those that are 20 years and older. A random sample of the required
sample is then selected from each metropolitan municipality.
Cluster sampling is typically used when the researcher cannot get a complete list of the
members of a population he or she wishes to study but can get a complete list of groups or
'clusters' of the population. In the case of UIS, information on the population is not readily
available as a result of in-and-out migration. Cluster sampling is also used when a random
sample would produce a list of subjects so widely scattered that surveying them would prove to
233
be far too expensive, which might be the case when considering all the 397 UIS in Gauteng
Province’s metropolitan municipalities.
In this study, a two-stage cluster sampling will be used, where a case of multistage sampling is
obtained by selecting cluster samples in the first stage and then selecting sample of elements
from every sampled cluster as described by Pfeffermann & Rao (2009: 1). A population of N
clusters in total will be considered from UIS selected. In the first stage, n clusters will be
selected using ordinary cluster sampling method. In the second stage, simple random sampling
will be used – when selecting specific UIS. The method will be used separately in every cluster
and the numbers of elements selected from different clusters will not necessarily be equal. The
total number of clusters N, number of clusters selected n, and numbers of elements from
selected clusters will be pre-determined. The two-stage cluster sampling has been chosen to
minimise survey costs and at the same time control the uncertainty related to estimates of
interest (Ahmed, 2009: 1).
234
6.2.2. Advantages and disadvantages of cluster sampling method
Table 6.2.2 Advantages and disadvantages of cluster sampling method
Advantages
Disadvantages
[i] It is cheap, quick, and easy. Instead of [i] It is the least representative of the
sampling the entire population when using population out of all the types of probability
simple random sampling, the research can samples. It is common for individuals within a
instead allocate resources to the few randomly cluster to have similar characteristics, so when
selected clusters when using cluster sampling.
a researcher uses cluster sampling, there is a
chance that he or she could have an
overrepresented or underrepresented cluster
in terms of certain characteristics. This can
skew the results of the study.
[ii] The researcher can have a larger sample [ii] It can have a high sampling error. This is
size than if he or she was using simple random caused by the limited clusters included in the
sampling. Because the researcher will only sample, which leaves a significant proportion
have to take the sample from a number of of the population un-sampled.
clusters, he or she can select more subjects
since they are more accessible.
6.2.3. Sample determination for the study
In the first stage, 397 urban informal settlements were considered as presented in Table
6.2.3.1. The City of Johannesburg represents the largest population of informal settlements in
metropolitan municipalities in Gauteng Province. It is followed by Ekurhuleni, then the City of
Tshwane. The number was then reduced to 191 [see: Table 6.2.3.2] after selecting urban
informal settlements that were 20 years or older. Informal settlements that are 20 years or
older were selected mainly because they have all the attributes of what defines an UIS [i.e. as
235
provided in the definition by HDA] and more importantly; the 20 year period coincided with the
advent of democracy in South Africa 1994-2014 [i.e. limitation of the study].
A further selection was made to determine UIS that have been formalised from the ones that
are still to be formalised so that the researcher can determine the extent of lack of provision of
services [see: Table 6.2.3.3]. This brought the number to 72 – which is also the sampling frame
[see: Table 6.2.3.4.]. After a determination of the sample frame [see: 6.2.4. & Table 6.2.4.], it
was necessary to calculate the representativeness of the sample size. Sample size is important
because of the scientific requirement to be precise and accurate. A good estimate of the margin
of error [or confidence interval] was then determined using a formulae - 1/√N, where N is the
number of participants or sample size.
The rule of thumb [is a principle with broad application that is not intended to be strictly accurate
or reliable for every situation] in this instance determines: ‘the more precise you need the
estimate, the more people you need’. This was followed by a representative calculation for the
empirical study and the two-stage cluster sampling, which allows the researcher to generalise
the findings to the wider population.
An equal-probability method was then used, thus each participant in the survey has an equal
chance of being selected. Because systematic sample units are uniformly distributed over the
population which is the case in point with regard to UIS; this means that any person can be
selected.
Table 6.2.3.1. UIS found in the three metropolitan municipalities
Name
of
metropolitan Number of IS per municipality
municipality
Percentage [%] to Total of
IS per municipality
Ekurhuleni
119
119/397 = 30%
Johannesburg
180
180/397 = 45%
Tshwane
98
98/397 = 25%
Total
397
100%
236
Table 6.2.3.2. Number of UIS that are 20 years or older in each metropolitan municipality
Name of metropolitan Number of UIS that are 20 years and Percentage [%] to Total of IS
municipality
older as per 6.2. above
that are 20 years and older
Ekurhuleni
17
17/119 = 14% [20 years >]
Johannesburg
105
105/180 = 58% [20 years >]
Tshwane
69
69/98
Total
191
= 70% [20 years >]
Table 6.2.3.3. Formalised UIS that are 20 years and older in each metropolitan municipality
Name of metropolitan Number of UIS that Number
municipality
of
are 20 years and formalised
above as per 6.3.
UIS Percentage [%] to Total
since formalised IS which are
establishment [20 20 years and older
years and >]
Ekurhuleni
17
16 [but are not 20 17/17
= 100%
years or older] = 0
Johannesburg
105
79
79/105 = 75%
Tshwane
69
40
40/69 = 56%
Total
191
119
237
Table 6.2.3.4. UIS that are 20 years and older which have not been formalised per
municipality
Name
of Number of UIS Number of UIS Number of UIS Percentage [%] to
metropolitan
that
municipality
years
are
20 formalised since not formalised Total
and establishment
since
older as per [20 years and >].
establishment
6.3.
[20 years and
>].
Ekurhuleni
17
0
17
17/17 = 100%
Johannesburg
105
79
105 – 79 = 26
26/105 = 25%
Tshwane
69
40
69 – 40 = 29
29/69 = 42%
Total
191
119
72
6.2.4. The sample frame
Total number of informal settlements NOT formalised is used in the cluster sampling method –
sample frame. A total of 72 urban informal settlements which are 20 years and older [i.e. 1990
– 2014] are considered for the purpose of the empirical research – this is the sample frame. A
representative sample frame is determined as follows:
Table 6.2.4. Determination of the sample frame
Name
of Number of UIS NOT formalised Percentage [%] to Total of IS
metropolitan
since establishment [20 years not
municipality
and >].
formalised
since
establishment [20 years and
>].
Ekurhuleni
17
17/72 = 24%
Johannesburg
26
26/72 = 36%
Tshwane
29
29/72 = 40%
Total
72
100%
238
The two most important considerations made in this empirical study are representativeness and
sample size. A representative sample means framing the correct people in the population to be
investigated (Sauro, 2010: 1). It is less concerned with the right sample size than with the right
target. In this study the right targets are the people living in UIS in the three identified
metropolitan municipalities. Moreover the specific targets are those who are found in IS that
are not formalised and in particular IS that are 20 years or older. Cluster sampling has been
selected as an appropriate method because it is impractical to compile an exhaustive list of the
elements that make up the target population in UIS.
Considerable time will be dedicated on identifying, finding and asking the right people rather
than on finding the right sample size. Respondents in the survey questionnaire which was
administered in the three metropolitan municipalities came from the correct population groups
and they were selected randomly. Researchers and authors have argued that randomness is
less important than representativeness (Sauro, 2010: 1).
The current empirical study is referred to in statistical terminology as a ‘single-shot survey’. This
means that no comparisons are being made [e.g. to prior surveys or benchmarks from a similar
study] and sample size is about being precise and accurate. In order to have confidence that the
survey results are representative, it is critical that a large number of randomly-selected
participants in each group are surveyed. For a 95% confidence level [which means that there is
only a 5% chance of the sample results differing from the true population average], a reliable
estimate of the margin of error [or confidence interval] is given by 1/√N, where N is the number
of participants or sample size (Niles, 2006: 1). As indicated, the rule of thumb in this instance is:
‘the more precise you need the estimate, the more people you need’ (Sauro, 2010: 1). This
means that the calculation should basically be a backwards confidence interval. Confidence
intervals are made up of a confidence level [i.e. typically 95%] and a margin of error. The
margin of error is how precise the sample needs to be.
239
6.3.
Confidence interval and level
In practice, confidence intervals are typically stated at the 95% confidence level (Zar, 1984: 4345). According to ‘The Survey System’ [http://www.surveysystem.com/sscalc.htm] a web-based
research institution, the confidence interval which is also known as the margin of error, is the
plus-or-minus figure usually reported in opinion poll results. When a confidence interval of 4 is
used and 47% of sample picks an answer – then the researcher can be sure that the entire
population between 43% [47-4] and 51% [47+4] would have picked that answer. The confidence
level indicates how sure a researcher can be about the accuracy of information. It is expressed
as a percentage and represents how often the true percentage of the population who would
pick an answer lies within the confidence interval.
The 95% confidence level means that a researcher can be 95% certain. Similarly, a 96 - 99%
confidence level means the researcher can be 96 - 99% certain. However, most researchers use
the 95% confidence level. When putting the confidence level and the confidence interval
together, a researcher can argue with certainty that 95% is the accurate percentage if the
population is between 43% and 51%. The wider the confidence interval a researcher is willing to
accept, the more certain a researcher can be, that the whole population answers would be
within the 95% confidence level [http://www.surveysystem.com/sscalc.htm].
240
Table 6.3. The margin of error for sample sizes ranging from 10 to 10000 [Adapted from Niles,
2006: 1]
Sample Size
(N)
Margin of Error
(fraction)
Margin of Error
(percentage)
10
20
50
100
200
500
1000
2000
5000
10000
0.316
0.224
0.141
0.100
0.071
0.045
0.032
0.022
0.014
0.010
31.6
22.4
14.1
10.0
7.1
4.5
3.2
2.2
1.4
1.0
The above table [Table 6.3] indicates that the larger the sample, the lower the margin of error
percentage achieved. In this study, a similar formula [1/√N, where N is the number of
participants or sample size] will be used to determine how many UIS and participants represent
the lowest margin of error [i.e. 5%] with a high confidence level [i.e. 95%].
The mathematics of probability proves the size of the population is irrelevant unless the size of
the sample exceeds a few percent of the total population that a researcher is examining. This
means that a sample of 500 people is equally useful in examining the opinions of a state of 15
000 000 as it would a city of 1 000 00. For this reason, the survey system ignores the population
size when it is "large" or unknown. Population size is only likely to be a factor when working
with a relatively small and known group of people [e.g. the members of an association]. In this
empirical study the target group consists of a large group of people and they are unknown.
241
6.3.1. Representative calculation for the empirical study and the two-stage cluster sampling
According to Fox, Hunn & Mathers (2009: 4) sampling and sample size are crucial issues in
quantitative research, which makes statistically based generalisations from the study results to
the wider areas of study. For a study to be generalised, it is essential that the sampling method
used and the sample size are appropriate - such that the results are representative, and that
the statistics can discern associations or differences within the results of a study. The findings of
a study apply to situations other than that of the cases in the study. For a study to have
scientific rigour its results must be generalised. Moreover, it is the representativeness of a
sample which allows the researcher to generalise the findings to the wider population. If a
study has an unrepresentative or biased sample, then it may still have internal validity and
reliability, but it will not be generalisable [will not possess external validity]. Consequently the
results of the study will be applicable only to the group under study (Fox, Hunn & Mathers,
2009: 5).
The formula used is 1/√N, where N is the number of participants or sample size, there are 72
identified UIS in the three metropolitan municipalities.
√ = 0.050 [5% - lowest margin of error] and N = 72
Therefore
= 1/√72
= 1/0.050x72
= 27.7 rounded off to 28
For the study to have a margin of error or confidence interval of 5%, a sample of 28 UIS will be
an almost accurate sample size to have an appropriate representativeness in the empirical
study. The 28 UIS will be apportioned based on how many or which percentage in each
municipality represent the number of IS that are NOT formalised [see: Table 6.3.1].
In Zikmund (2000: 518) selected tables for determining sample sizes for various reliabilities are
presented. Table 17.11 [Selected tables for determining sample size when the characteristic of
242
interest is a proportion – parameter in population assumed to be over 70% or under 30% and for
95% Confidence level]. For instance if the sample size is between 1 000 00 and 5 000 00 for a 5%
reliability - the sample size is 321.
This means that 336 questionnaires [i.e. sample size – 28 x 12 = 336] will be required to have a
95% confidence interval and 12 people [i.e. sampling unit] will have to be surveyed [321/28 =
11.46] to get a 5% margin of error. Using the norm referred to: ‘the more precise the estimate,
the more participants are needed’ – two more participants were added per UIS to get to 14.
The sample size then changed to 392 [392/28 = 14]. This means that the representativeness and
confidence level in the sample size were increased. The increases allow the researcher to
generalise the findings to the wider population in other UIS, which means that the findings from
the study will be generalisable, considered as reliable and have external validity.
Table 6.3.1. Apportionment based on representative formula
Name
of Number
of
UIS
NOT Percentage [%] to Total Apportionment
metropolitan
formalised
since of UIS not formalised based
municipality
establishment [20 years since establishment [20 representative
on
and >].
years and >].
formula: 1/√N =28
Ekurhuleni
17
17/72 = 24%
28 x 24% = 7
Johannesburg
26
26/72 = 36%
28 x 36% = 10
Tshwane
29
29/72 = 40%
28 x 40% = 11
Total
72
100%
28
After determining representativeness of the sample size; it is important to then conclude the
other part of the two-stage cluster sampling method. The first stage has been concluded by
calculating how many UIS will be used in each of the three clusters [i.e. informal settlements in
each of the three metropolitan municipalities], which is 28. The second stage has to do with the
determination of which individuals should be surveyed in each cluster of the sample. A method
243
called systematic sampling has been selected to determine or outline criteria for the second
stage of the cluster sample.
Systematic sampling is a statistical method involving the selection of elements from an ordered
sampling frame, similar to what has been determined in Table 6.3.1 above [i.e. Apportionment
based on representative formula: 1/√N =28]. Ekurhuleni was apportioned 7 UIS; Johannesburg
with 10 and Tshwane had 11. The most common form of systematic sampling is an equalprobability method. Using this procedure each element in the population has a known and
equal probability of selection – in 6.3.1 above, each metropolitan municipality has a sample
frame percentage determined [i.e. Ekurhuleni – 24%; Johannesburg – 36% and Tshwane – 40%].
This makes systematic sampling functionally similar to simple random sampling. It is however,
more efficient if variance within systematic sample is more than variance of population – which
is the case in the current study.
Systematic sampling is to be applied only if the given population is logically homogeneous in
terms of services they receive from the municipality [it can be argued that population in UIS [IS]
are logically homogenous in the provision of basic services by their respective municipalities].
This is because systematic sample units are uniformly distributed over the population. It will be
ensured in the empirical study that the selected sampling interval does not hide a pattern,
because a pattern would threaten randomness.
6.3.2. Questionnaires used
Two sets of questionnaires were compiled separately with guidance from the supervisor,
approved by the University and the Department of Human Settlement in Gauteng Province.
Firstly, a questionnaire was sent to the three city managers or their representatives [one per
metropolitan municipality – three in total] titled: ‘Survey questionnaire: For Government
Representative – (City Manager, his or her representative)’ - [Annexure A]. Secondly, a survey
questionnaire was administered to 28 selected Informal Settlements [IS] – this was determined
using a formula titled: ‘Survey questionnaire: For community members in informal settlements’
[Annexure B]. The 14 community members/participants/respondents in each IS were selected
[by systematic random sampling method] from the following categories:
244
-
Males [Youth, 35> and not more than 55 yrs, Elderly 60>]
-
Female [Youth, 35> and not more than 55 yrs, Elderly 60>]
-
People living with disabilities [any kind of disability as defined in the South African Constitution]
-
Africans, Whites, Coloured and Indians.
The following UIS were randomly selected based on the above criteria in the cluster sampling
units [i.e. 14 people in each sampling unit]:
a. City of Ekurhuleni [7 Informal settlements; which is 24% of 28]:
i.
Daggafontein, Springs - Daggafontein X 5
ii.
Hlahane, Germiston in Katlehong
iii.
L & J Informal Settlement, Gilliemead A H
iv.
Madelakufa 2 [Isekelo], Kempton Park, Tembisa
v.
Tamaho Informal [Mandela Park Open Mine], Alberton in Nadustria X 1
vi.
Winnie Mandela [Tembisa]
vii.
Delport ‘Rasta’
b. City of Johannesburg [10 Informal settlements; 36% of 28]:
i.
Eskom Servitude in Ivory Park - Eskom/8516 - Ward 79;
ii.
Goniwe in Ivory Park - Ward 77;
iii.
Ivory Park - Zone 1, Erf 10864/Ivory Park Ext 9/IP – Ward 77;
iv.
Mabena - Erf 6311/Ext 8/Ivory Park – Ward 78;
v.
K60 - 2329 Rabie Ridge Ext 4 – Ward 80;
vi.
Leratong Transit Area in Soweto - Erf 10 Leratong Village – Ward 127;
vii.
Chris Hani (Chicken Farm) – Soweto, Various portions 298 IQ – Ward 19;
viii.
Motsoaledi – Soweto 137/319-IQ Diepkloof – Ward 24;
ix.
Alex tributaries – Alexander, Numerous Alexandra Extensions – Ward 75;
245
x.
Iphutheng School – Alexander, 2484 Alexandra Ext 36 – Ward 76.
c. City of Tshwane [11 Informal settlements; 40% of 28]:
i.
Brazzaville - Atteridgeville West – Ward 48
ii.
Jeffsville, Atteridgeville West – Ward 48
iii.
Vergenoeg, Atteridgeville West – Ward 48
iv.
Siyahlalala, Atteridgeville West – Ward 48
v.
AD Section Matlejoane, Atteridgeville West – Ward 48
vi.
Concern and Phomolong, Atteridgeville West – Ward 48
vii.
Lochner (Mooiplaas), behind Ladium - Ward 70 Centurion
viii.
Soshanguve IA
ix.
Soshanguve MM Informal
x.
Itireleng informal settlement [Ladium – ward 51]
xi.
Phase 1 informal settlement [Mamelodi East – ward 93]
246
6.4.
Results - ‘Survey questionnaire: For Government Representative – (City
Manager, his or her representative)’ - [Annexure A]
The results from the study will be meaningless if it is not compared with previous findings that
are similar or comparable. Statistics South Africa [SSA] and the Department of Human
Settlement, through its agency the Housing Development Agency [HDA] release extensive
performance data on informal settlements in South Africa annually. However, other scientific,
credible and relevant sources of similar empirical data will also be used for comparisons, which
are directly related to the current empirical study. For the purpose of this research, the results
of the current empirical study will be largely compared to SSA and HDA empirical data sources
to make sense of the results and check consistency.
Both SSA and HDA empirical data sources already indicate that informal settlements tend to be
concentrated in key municipalities [key municipalities include metropolitan municipalities].
Across the country, the top six district municipalities in terms of numbers of households living
in informal settlements account for almost 60% of all households living in UIS. The top five
municipalities alone account for 51% of Informal Settlements in the country (HDA, 2013: 20);
they are:
-
City of Cape Town
-
Ekurhuleni
-
City of Johannesburg
-
City of Tshwane
-
eThekwini
This means that empirical data from the three identified municipalities of Ekurhuleni,
Johannesburg and Tshwane are a representative sample for Gauteng and significant when
considering their impact in the South African context. This is consistent with earlier arguments
advanced in the introduction part of Chapter 5. This strengthens the argument that the study
results can be generalised. The graphs from 6.4.1.1 – 6.4.1.15 represent answers based on the
questionnaire – that was the logic followed.
247
6.4.1.1.
Summary of results from each City Manager in the three identified metropolitan
municipalities
Graph 6.4.1 – Number of urban informal settlements in each municipality and
shacks that are marked
Number of Informal
Settlements per
municipality?
Tshwane
98
Johannesburg
Ekurhuleni
TOTAL
180
119
397
180
200
150
98
119
Number of UIS 100
Tshwane
Johannesburg
Ekurhuleni
50
0
Number
Number of UIS per municipality
Graph Heading
Number of Shacks marked?
Item
Tshwane
Johannesburg
Ekurhuleni
TOTAL
248
Yes
98
180
119
397
No
180
180
160
140
120
Number of UIS
100
98
119
Tshwane
80
Johannesburg
60
Ekurhuleni
40
20
0
Yes
No
Number of UIS per municipality and shacks that are marked
Graph 6.4.2. – Where are the shacks found or located?
1
0.9
0.8
0.7
Number of areas 0.6
0.5
per type
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
Tshwane
Johannesburg
Ekurhuleni
Areas where UIS are found per municipality
249
Graph 6.4.3. – Municipal provision of electricity
Graph Heading
Item
Yes
Provision of Electricity Tshwane
Johannesburg
Ekurhuleni
1
1
No
Comments
Rudimentary and prepaid
Not all have electricity – mainly prepaid
1 No electricity to individual houses, high masts
Graph 6.4.4. – Municipal provision of water
Graph Heading
Item
Yes
No
Tshwane [Jojo
Tanks - 200m
Provide water sources radius]
Johannesburg [City
provides standpipe
water system]
Ekurhuleni [Water
pipe is shared
200m radius]
1
1
1
Graph 6.4.5. – Municipal provision of sanitation
Graph Heading
Sanitation
Item
Yes
Tshwane [Chemical toilets
cleared 3 x per week]
Johannesburg [Communal
toilet]
Ekurhuleni [Ablutions are
shared, 1 toilet per 10
families]
250
No
1
1
1
Graph 6.4.6. – Municipal collection/removal of waste
Graph Heading
Item
Tshwane
[Plastic bags in
skip bin
emptied 1 x per
Waste collection/removal week]
Johannesburg
[1 x per week]
Ekurhuleni [1 x
per week]
Yes No
Comments
1
Plastic bags in skip bin emptied 1 x per week
1
1
1 x per week
1 x per week
Graph 6.4.7. – Municipality’s fomalisation plan
Formalisation
plan for
informal
settlements
Tshwane
Johannesburg
Ekurhuleni
Serviced stands and allocate. Service points temporary structures
while waiting for houses to be built
Formalised on developable land and regularized
80 of 119 to be relocated. 39 to be developed in situ on private
land. On council land EIA and township establishment studies
Graph 6.4.8. – Municipality’s budget for informal settlements
Graph Heading
Item
<R50m R500m >R900m
Comments
Tshwane
[800m+
1
Over R800m on the USDG
Budget for formalisation USDG]
Johannesburg
R24m+ as per built
1
[24m+]
Environmental Plan
R200m+ for informal
Ekurhuleni
settlements for interim
[900m+ for
1
services. Annual budget
services]
for houses +-R900m
251
Graph 6.4.9. – Informal settlements formalised to date
Graph Heading
Item
Number of informal
settlements formalised to
date?
Number
Tshwane
40
Johannesburg
Ekurhuleni not 20 years/older
TOTAL
79
16
135
79
80
70
60
50
40
Tshwane
Number of UIS 40
Johannesburg
30
Ekurhuleni
20
16
10
0
Number
UIS that are 20 years and older and NOT formalised per municipality
Graph 6.4.10. – Number of service delivery protests experienced by the municipality in the
past two financial years
Graph Heading
Number of service delivery
protests in past two financial
years?
Item
Tshwane
Number
0
Johannesburg
Ekurhuleni
TOTAL
22
3
25
252
22
25
20
Number of protest
actions
Tshwane
15
Johannesburg
10
Ekurhuleni
5
0
3
0
Number
Protest action recorded by each municipality in the past two financial years
Response from the City Manager of Tshwane cannot be correct, Figure 5.8. [c] in chapter 5,
indicate that the City of Tshwane has the second highest number of protest action after
Johannesburg in Gauteng Province.
Graph 6.4.11. – Main issues / complains raised by protesters
1
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
Frequency of issues
0.5
raised by protesters
0.4
Tshwane
0.3
0.2
Johannesburg
0.1
Ekurhuleni
0
Main issues raised by protesters during protest action per municipality
253
Graph 6.4.12. – Municipality’s estimated population per household in informal settlements
Graph Heading
Item
Estimated population [per
household] in your informal
settlements?
Number
Tshwane
132000
Johannesburg
Ekurhuleni
TOTAL
202170
164000
498170
250000
202170
200000
Number of
Households
150000
132000
164000
Tshwane
Johannesburg
100000
Ekurhuleni
50000
0
Number
Number of households in each municipality according City Managers
Graph 6.4.13. – Municipality’s enterprise-wide performance monitoring and evaluation
division/ office
Graph Heading
Item
Do you have an Enterprise-wide performance monitoring and
evaluation division/ office?
254
Yes
No
Tshwane
1
Johannesburg
Ekurhuleni
1
1
Graph 6.4.14. – Number of people working in the municipality’s performance division
Graph Heading
Item
How many people work in
your performance division/
can you providse the
structure
25
Number
Tshwane
22
Johannesburg
Ekurhuleni
TOTAL
2
8
32
22
20
Number of
staff/employees
15
Tshwane
Johannesburg
10
2
5
8
Ekurhuleni
0
Number
Number of staff/employees in the performance division - per
municipality
Graph 6.4.15. – Frequency at which the municipality conducts performance monitoring and
evaluation
Graph Heading
How many times in a year, do
you conduct performance
monitoring and evaluation?
Item
Number
Tshwane
4
Johannesburg
Ekurhuleni
4
4
255
Analysis of City Managers’ feedback
Information and feedback from the three metropolitan municipalities [question 1 - 15] indicate
that there are 397 UIS with the highest number in Johannesburg [45%], Ekurhuleni [30%] and
then Tshwane has the least number [25%]. If Statistics South Africa [SSA]’s data on population
sizes as indicated in Chapter 5 [5.1. Population size] is considered and compared. The total
number of UIS in Ekurhuleni mirrors its own total population size in terms of representation in
the Province, which is 30% Gauteng’s enumerated population. According to city managers in all
the three metropolitan municipalities; all shacks have been marked. Information on ‘shack
marking’ will be verified with the survey outcomes in the empirical study in informal
settlements in section 6.5.
In all of the three municipalities, UIS are in the main found/located in the following areas:

Undeveloped land;

Unused land;

Outskirts [Johannesburg and Ekurhuleni];

Land allocated for public facilities [Tshwane]; and

Unutilised natural land [Tshwane and Ekurhuleni].
This finding is consistent with the arguments as presented in Chapter 5 [5.7 – UIS in
metropolitan municipalities] substantiated by Huchzermeyer (2009:62). According to the city
managers’ of Tshwane and Johannesburg – their cities provide electricity in the form of prepaid
meters [i.e. pay as you use system]. In Ekurhuleni the municipality doesn’t provide electricity
except high mast lights in the informal settlements. All three municipalities provide water
[Tshwane – Jojo tanks and taps that are located 200m from the stand; Johannesburg –
Standpipes and Ekurhuleni provides communal taps that are 200m radius from where people
reside].
In Tshwane, the municipality provides chemical toilets for sanitation in UIS and they are cleared
three times a week. In Johannesburg and Ekurhuleni the municipalities provide communal
toilets and shared ablution facilities [one for every ten families] respectively. Waste
256
collection/removal is done once a week in municipalities. In Tshwane the municipality provides
plastic bags and a skip bin - which are emptied once a week.
Formalisation plans for UIS differ from one municipality to another in Gauteng metropolitan
municipalities. In Tshwane, the municipality plans to provide residents with serviced stands and
allocate them per family. They also provide ‘service points temporary structures’ while people
are waiting for houses to be built. The City of Johannesburg intends to formalise UIS on
developable land and regularise them; while in Ekurhuleni – the city has a plan to relocate 80 of
119 UIS. The Ekurhuleni municipality has a programme to develop 39 of its UIS in situ on private
land; on council land after Environmental Impacts Assessments [EIA] and finalise township
establishments.
Budgets for formalisation of UIS differ in all identified metropolitan municipalities in Gauteng.
Ekurhuleni has the largest amount allocated in the budget for services totalling more than R900
million, followed by Tshwane which has R800 million in its Urban Space Development Grant
[USDG]. The lowest budget is in the City of Johannesburg, which is R24 million. So far, the City
of Johannesburg is leading in terms of formalisation programme in UIS; they have 79, Tshwane
40 and last is Ekurhuleni metropolitan municipality at 16 formalised areas.
According to the city managers’ responses, Johannesburg has the highest number of the so
called service delivery protests, followed by Ekurhuleni and there are no reported service
delivery protests in Tshwane. It can be confirmed that the Tshwane information is incorrect,
because Figure 5.8.2 [c] ‘Gauteng protest action by district municipality [Adapted from
Karamoko & Jain, 2011: 25]’ shows a 20% protest action in Tshwane between 2007-2011. The
main issues raised during protests have to do with housing provision; electricity; water;
sanitation and corruption.
The highest total population of households in UIS is in Johannesburg [202170]; followed by
Ekurhuleni [164000]. Tshwane [132000] has the smallest population group in terms of
households among the metropolitan municipalities. The total number of households in Gauteng
is 498170 as recorded by the three city managers in the three municipalities. From 2001,
257
population per household has been on the increase in UIS that are located in the three
metropolitan municipalities of Gauteng, as outlined in Tables 6.4.1 [a and b] below.
Table 6.4.1. [a] People living in Informal settlements in Gauteng Province in 2001 [Source:
Census 2001 - Statistic South Africa]
Metropolitan municipality
in Gauteng Province
City of Ekurhuleni
City of Johannesburg
City of Tshwane
TOTALS
People living in
informal settlements
in 2001 [per
household]
144 733
75 255
50 548
270 536
Total population
[per household]
Percentage [%]
calculated against
total population
744 479
1 006 742
561 772
2 312 993
19, 4%
7, 4%
8, 9%
11, 6%
Table 6.4.1. [b] ESTIMATION [own calculation]: People living in Informal settlements in
Gauteng Province in 2007 [Source: Community Survey 2007 - Statistic South Africa]
Metropolitan
municipality in
Gauteng Province
People living in informal Total population [per
settlements in 2007 [per household]
household]
Percentage [%]
calculated
against total
population
City of Ekurhuleni
162535
849 349
19, 1%
[2001 households 144
733 + 12, 3% growth =
162535]
85490
[849 349 - 744 479 =
104870. 12, 3% growth]
[1 165 014 - 1 006 742 =
158272. 13, 6%]
City of Tshwane
[2001 households 75
255 + 13, 6% growth =
85490]
59697
[686 640 - 561 772 =
124868. 18, 1%]
TOTALS
[2001 households 50
548 + 18, 1% growth =
59697]
307 772
[37263 = 12% growth]
[388010 = 14, 3% growth]
City of
Johannesburg
1 165 014
686 640
2 701003
258
7, 3%
8, 7%
11, 3%
Tables 6.4.1. [a] and [b] show that the number of people moving into UIS in the three Gauteng
metropolitan municipalities is increasing each year. Statistics South Africa [SSA] Census 2011
reports that the population per household in 2011 grew even more, a figure just above the
estimation of 388010 [see: 6.4.1.(b)] to 376014 – a variance of 11996 [3%]. Observation made,
is that SSA Census 2011 has different figures from what the cities provide in the current survey
questionnaires. SSA Census 2011 reports that Gauteng’s informal settlements in metropolitan
municipalities have the following population groups per household:
Table 6.4.2. Households according to SSA Census 2011 compared to information provided by
city managers
Municipality
Households
according Households
to SSA Census 2011
Difference
in
according to City estimation
Mangers
Ekurhuleni
138 099
164000
25901
Johannesburg
125 748
202170
76422
Tshwane
112 167
132000
19833
Gauteng TOTAL
376014
498170
122156 [25%]
City managers’ reports have higher numbers which does not undermine the current
scientific/statistics figures as determined by SSA. This means that they will not provide
insufficient funds in the budget when allocations [i.e. based on the DoRA Act] for upgrading of
UIS are done. Estimates based on the General Household Survey [GHS] from 2002 to 2009
indicate that the number of households who live in informal settlements has grown, although
this may well reflect changes to the sampling frame rather than underlying dynamics – meaning
259
that estimates from the city managers might be correct (HDA, 2012: 24). However, there is a
downside to the argument. If the problem is overestimated that can create a wrong impression
that less is done to reduce informal settlements in Gauteng. This is because the SSA Census
2011 report, indicates that the influx of people into UIS is reaching equilibrium and the figures
are starting to indicate a stabilisation pattern.
The three cities report that they each have Enterprise-wide performance monitoring and
evaluation divisions/offices; with Tshwane [22] having the most staff members in its division
followed by Ekurhuleni [eight] and then Johannesburg [two]. All three cities conduct
performance monitoring and evaluation quarterly [4 times a year] as recorded in their Service
Delivery and Budget Implementation Plans [SDBIP]. The number of officials in the Enterprisewide performance monitoring and evaluation divisions/offices of the three cities is significant,
Tshwane officials complement represent 38% [22/58] in relation to the total population of UIS
not formalised; Ekurhuleni 8% [8/98] and Johannesburg 2%.
Municipal IQ research on poverty levels in wards where protests take place shows that while
communities in these areas are desperately poor and contain some of the highest
unemployment rates in the country, they still have better access to local services than residents
in the poorest municipalities in our rural areas and indeed than a national average. It is
important to check consistency and reliability of information provided by city managers against
responses provided by participants in the community survey conducted in informal
settlements. The verification and comparisons will assist in ensuring and assessing the Impact
Evaluation efficacy of the performance monitoring and evaluation of the identified
metropolitan municipalities.
260
6.5.
Results – ‘Survey questionnaire: For community members in informal
settlements’ [Annexure B]
Graph 6.5.1. Gender
Graph heading
Description
Male
Female
Gender
N = 370
Tsh
67
78
Eku
34
56
Jhb
59
76
Total
160
210
Non respondents = 22
250
200
150
Number of
respondents
Male
100
Female
50
0
Tsh
Eku
Jhb
Total
Gender distribution per municipality
A total of 370 participants responded when asked about their gender. The distribution is 57%
[210/370] females as compared to 43% [160/370] male respondents. According to Statistics
South Africa’s Census 2011 report (2011: 18), empirical data suggest that the population is
predominantly female. The population consists of 48.2% of male and 51.7% of female.
261
Table 6.5.1. Percentage distribution of the population by sex, Censuses 1996, 2001 and 2011,
and CS 2007 [Found in SSA Census 2011: 18]
On average, South Africa has a sex ratio of 95 [95 males per 100 females]. With regard to agespecific sex ratios, the figure indicates high sex ratios of 100 to 101 at ages 0-9. In general, more
males are born than females, hence, sex ratios above 100 are expected among younger age
groups. Gauteng and North West Provinces has the highest sex ratios of over 100 in 2011.
Another report by SSA on ‘Gender Statistics’ (2012: 4) indicate that seven-tenths [69,1% female
and 70,0% male] of the urban population is in the age group 15–64 years. This is the age group
which is used as the basis for calculations of labour force activity. According to the 2014 index
mundi, South Africa has the following age structure and gender distribution:
0-14
years: 28.3% [male 6,859,518 / female 6,815,185]
15-24 years: 20.2% [male 4,914,394 / female 4,866,121]
25-54 years: 38.2% [male 9,543,746 / female 8,923,605]
55-64 years: 7.1%
[male 1,470,282 / female 1,950,499]
65>
[male 1,205,657 / female 1,826,638]
years: 6.3%
262
The ratio from the empirical study is not consistent with SSA Census 2011 findings and the 2014
index mundi. However, the time at which the survey questionnaires were administered in the
UIS has to be taken into account. All questionnaires were administered between 10:00 am –
15:00 pm. This is the time of the day when employed people are not at home. SSA on ‘Gender
Statistics’ has also revealed that unemployment rates for women are higher than those for men
(SSA, 2012: 31). There is a possibility that more men were at work during 10:00 am – 15:00 pm
when questionnaires were administered; which then qualifies the result of 57% female to 43%
male participants in the empirical study. This is if the population in UIS mirrors the SSA Census
2011 findings.
Graph 6.5.1.1. Age group
Graph heading
Age group
Item
0-25
25-35
36-45
46-60
61+
N = 307
Tsh
18
47
42
21
13
Eku
13
15
20
11
9
Jhb
18
15
49
9
7
Total
49
77
111
41
29
Non respondents = 85
50
45
40
35
30
Number per
25
municipality
20
15
10
5
0
Tsh
Eku
Jhb Total
0-25
25-35
36-45
46-60
61+
Age group distribution in UIS per municipality
263
The 2007 Community Survey indicates that 23% of households living in informal settlements
comprise a single individual. This might reflect the preferences of younger, more mobile
workers who seek accommodation near their workplaces - 50% of those in informal settlements
who live on their own are under the age of 35. The 2009 GHS [General Household Survey] also
proves that nearly one third of households living in informal settlements comprise single
persons; within this segment over 50% are under the age of 35 (HDA, 2012: 35).
The 2013 statistics indicate that migration, presumably for economic reasons, has played a
significant part in shaping the population distribution in the country. In urban areas 6% of those
under the age of 35 have moved from a different Province since 2001 and a further 16% moved
from within their current Province since 2001 [3% moved from outside South Africa]. In tribal or
traditional areas 1% of those under the age of 35 have moved from a different Province since
2001 and a further 4% moved from within their current Province since 2001 [1% moved from
outside South Africa]. There is a noticeable difference in the population pyramids in urban
compared to rural areas as a result. Census 2001 indicates that nearly 41% of people living in
informal settlements regard themselves as owners, with a slightly lower 37% who say they
occupy the dwelling for free. There is no data to determine whether self-assessed ownership
reflects formal status and if not, through what mechanisms the household has come to own the
dwelling.
This result is also evident in the study based on the Table 6.4.2. It is clear from the graph that
there are more people in UIS in the three metropolitan municipalities between the ages of 2545, especially in cities of Tshwane and Johannesburg. This outcome points to evidence that
suggests that there is in-migration into these cities. It also means that the finding of the study is
consistent with other findings from other sources.
264
Graph 6.5.1.2. Race group
Graph Heading
Item
Black African
Coloured
Asian
White
TOTAL
Race group
N = 371
Tsh
140
4
0
1
Eku
86
4
0
0
Jhb
134
1
0
1
Total
360
9
0
2
145
90
136
371
Non respondents = 21
400
350
300
250
Tsh
Number of
200
respondents
150
Eku
Jhb
100
Total
50
0
Black African
Coloured
Asian
White
Race group in each UIS per municipality
In terms of race, the study found that 99% of people in Johannesburg’s UIS who are 20 years
and older are Black Africans and the same race constitutes 96% in both Ekurhuleni and
Tshwane. This is based only on those who chose to answer the question on race group. The
results of the current empirical study on average indicates a 97% Black African presence in
Gauteng’s UIS. The other race groups in Gauteng’s UIS of the three metropolitan municipalities
and that are 20 years and older; are Coloureds at 2,5% and Whites who represent 0,5% of the
total population surveyed.
265
Graph 6.5.2. Disability
Graph heading
Do you have a Disability?
Item
Yes
No
Tsh
13
130
N = 376
Eku
6
82
Jhb
16
129
Total
35
341
Non respondents = 16
350
300
250
Number of 200
respondents 150
Yes
No
100
50
0
Tsh
Eku
Jhb
Total
Prevalence of disability in UIS per municipality
In South Africa 7,5% of the enumerated population [2,870,130 people out of a total of 51
million +] lives with some form of disability. In the 2011 Census, people were asked if they had
mild or severe difficulty in the six functional areas of seeing, hearing, communicating, walking,
remembering and self-care. This information is based on figures codified by SSA Census 2011
report titled - 'Profile of persons with disabilities in South Africa' (2014: v).
Out of a total of 376 participants in informal settlements identified, who responded to the
question of disability – 9,3% [35/376] indicated that they were living with a disability. The
empirical study found that it might be possible that there are more people in urban informal
settlements that are living with a disability [variance of 1.8% more than SSA Census 2011
finding of 7.5%].
266
According to Disabled People of South Africa [DPSA] National spokesperson - Olwethu Siphuka,
the prevalence of disability is almost double the number [14%] compared to the SSA figure of
7,5%. Disabled People of South Africa (DPSA) are disputing the figures released by Stats SA
based on their membership figures as well as their door-to-door support efforts. However, SSA
has argued that the figures detailing the number of people living with disabilities [7.5%] are
dependent on whether or not people declared their disability in the SSA Census of 2011 (eNCA
article - Bianca Bothma - 9 September 2014). The results of the empirical study are midway
between what SSA Census 2011 has found and the figures released by DPSA. They can
therefore be accepted as valid.
Graph 6.5.2.1. Old age pension
Graph heading
Do you get old age pension?
Item
Yes
No
N = 370
Tsh
18
127
Eku
6
83
Jhb
13
123
Total
37
333
Non respondents = 22
350
300
250
Number of 200
respondents 150
Yes
No
100
50
0
Tsh
Eku
Jhb
Total
Respondents receiving old age pension in UIS per municipality
In Graph 6.5.2 above, 9.4% [29/307] of participants indicate that they are above the age of 60;
which is an ‘old age pension’ age for most elderly South Africans. The empirical study results in
Table 6.5.4 - which is 10% of people who receive old age pension. This is consistent with the age
267
group found in Graph 6.5.2 – with a small variance of 0,6%. The majority of residents in UIS are
not in the old age pension bracket, most of them are within the working age, which is also
consistent with earlier findings of the study.
Graph 6.5.2.2. Children
Graph heading
Do you have children?
Number
1
2
3
4-6
7+
N = 317
Tsh
37
36
23
27
1
Eku
18
30
14
14
0
Jhb
30
46
27
14
0
Total
85
112
64
55
1
Non respondents = 75
120
100
80
Number of children
Tsh
60
Eku
40
Jhb
20
Total
0
1
2
3
4-6
7+
Number of children in UIS household per municipality
The results of the empirical study on number of children per household, indicate that there are
more households with two children at 35% [112/317], followed by one child 27% [85/317], then
three children 20% [64/317] respectively. The people with 4-6 children account for 17%
[55/317] and the remaining figure of almost 1% goes to households with 7+ more children,
which is insignificant in this context. This information is consistent with the 2007 Community
Survey [CS] which reports that 53% of households in informal settlements have one or more
268
children. The results of the empirical study indicates that the number might have increased to
62% [i.e. combining 35%+27% = 62%].
The General Household Survey [GHS] empirical data from 2004 to 2009 indicates that for
households living in informal settlements, couple and single person households have grown the
fastest. Average household size of informal settlements has steadily decreased from 3.1 in 2004
to 2.8 in 2009 – these figures are still close to the findings in the current study and are
consistent. HDA (2012: 35) argues that many individuals living in informal settlements live apart
from their families because they view their homes as temporary and poorly-suited to bringing
up families - a sizeable proportion either do not share this view or face alternatives that are
even worse.
Graph 6.5.3. Government grant
Graph heading
Response
Tsh
Eku
Jhb
Total
Do you receive a
government grant?
Yes
53
42
85
180
No
92
37
60
189
N = 369
Non respondents = 23
200
150
Number of
100
respondents
Yes
No
50
0
Tsh
Eku
Jhb
Total
Receipients of government grant in UIS per municipality
269
Graph 6.5.3.1. Grant type
Graph heading
Type
Grant type
Disability
Tsh
8
51
3
Child grant
Illness
N = 195
Eku
2
49
0
Jhb
9
68
5
Total
19
168
8
Non respondents = 174
180
160
140
120
Number of 100
recipients
80
Disibility
Child grant
60
Illness
40
20
0
Tsh
Eku
Jhb
Total
Type of government grant received in each UIS per municipality
According to Statistics South Africa's latest General Household Survey [GHS] of 2012, the
number of households receiving at least one social grant increased from 29,9% to 45,5% over
the same period (SSA – GHS, 2012: 19). The current empirical study in formal settlements found
that 48,7% [180/369] of participants receive grants. The results are consistent with the SSA’s
2012 GHS, but with a variance of 3,2%; a growth that can be a result of other factors like inmigration. This is considering that the GHS was conducted in 2012 and the current empirical
study was concluded in 2014.
270
Graph 6.5.4. Employment
Graph heading
Are you employed?
Response
Yes
No
N = 354
Tsh
37
93
Eku
30
60
Jhb
28
106
Total
95
259
Non respondents = 48
300
250
200
Number of
150
respondents
Yes
No
100
50
0
Tsh
Eku
Jhb
Total
Employment status of respondents in UIS per municipality
The 2007 General Household Survey, found that the unemployment rate of 32% for those who
live in informal settlements is above the national average of 25% (HDA, 2012: 39). The 354
respondents to this question in the current study – 73% [259] stated that they are unemployed.
Statistics South Africa’s report on ‘Gender Statistics” (2012:31) indicates that unemployment
rates for women are higher than those for men. This pattern is found for both 2001 and 2011.
Furthermore, for both years, the unemployment rates are higher for black Africans than for the
other population groups. Black African women are thus most likely to be unemployed in both
2001 and 2011. This might also be one of the reasons why the study found more women [57%]
at home between 10:00 am- 15:00 pm, than men [43%] in Graph 6.5.1.
271
Graph 6.5.4.1. Years of employment
Graph heading
Number
How many years of
employed?
1 yr
6
3
4
13
1-2 yrs
3-5 yrs
6-9 yrs
10+ yrs
17
6
5
4
11
11
4
0
2
12
10
0
30
29
19
4
N = 95
Tsh Ekur Jhb
Total
Non respondents = 0
300
250
200
Number of
150
respondents
Yes
No
100
50
0
Tsh
Eku
Jhb
Total
Employment status of respondents in UIS per municipality
272
Graph 6.5.4.2. Town where you are employed
Graph heading
Place
Tsh
Eku
Jhb
Total
Town/City of
employment
Pretoria
38
2
1
41
Brits
Joburg
Springs
Alberton
Kempton Park
Sandton
Fourways
Germiston
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
4
2
10
0
0
0
0
11
1
3
0
5
2
3
2
13
5
5
10
5
2
3
45
40
35
30
Number of 25
respondents 20
15
10
5
0
Tsh
Eku
Jhb
Total
Place of employment
Graph 6.5.4.3. Means of travelling to work
Graph heading
Mode
Tsh
Eku
Jhb
Total
Means of travel to
work?
Walk
5
11
1
17
Taxi
Bus
Train
Car
17
8
5
0
8
6
3
1
14
7
6
1
39
21
14
2
N = 93
Non respondents = 2
273
40
35
30
25
Number of
respondents that are 20
employed
15
Tsh
Eku
Jhb
Total
10
5
0
Walk
Taxi
Bus
Train
Car
Means of travel to work used by respondents in each UIS per municipality
30
25
20
Number of
respondents that 15
are employed
Tsh
Eku
Jhb
10
Total
5
0
1 yr
1-2 yrs
3-5 yrs
6-9 yrs
10+ yrs
Number of years that a respondent has been employed in each UIS per
municipality
274
Graph 6.5.4.4. Type of employment
Graph heading
Type of employment
Type
Permanent
Temporary
Tsh
21
16
Eku
24
10
Jhb
25
1
Total
70
27
70
60
50
Number of 40
respondents 30
Permanent
20
Temporary
10
0
Tsh
Eku
Jhb
Total
Number of permanent/temporary employed respondents in each UIS per
municipality
The 2004 Labour Force Survey [LFS] data indicates that 37% of employed adults living in
informal settlements are permanently employed in the formal sector, noticeably lower than the
national average of 53%, for all workers (HDA, 2012: 39). Only 27% of employed individuals
living in informal settlements are employed in the informal sector, a proportion that is above
the national average (21%). According to the 2007 General Household Survey [GHS], the
unemployment rates is 32% for those who live in informal settlements and unemployment rate
of 32% is above the national average of 25%. It may well be the case that informal sector
activity is under-reported because by its nature, it is difficult to track (HDA, 2012: 39).
In the empirical study, 73% [259/354] of respondents indicated that they are unemployed – it
must however be noted that some were at work as the study was conducted between 10:00 am
– 15:00 pm. Of those who are employed [95], 82% of them have been employed between 1-9
years and 72% [70/97] are employed on a permanent basis. [NOTE: there are two more people
275
who participated on the question on type of employment than the original number of 95 who
responded to the question on employment status].
Graph 6.5.4.5. Monthly income
Graph heading
Monthly income
N = 95
Range
R0-R1000
R1000-1999
R2000-2999
R3000-3999
R4000-4999
R5000-9999
Tsh
6
14
11
3
2
1
Eku
2
9
8
7
6
2
Jhb
2
0
8
10
4
5
Total
10
23
27
20
12
8
Non respondents = +5 [There are 5 more people than the original 95]
30
25
20
Number of
employed 15
respondents
10
Tsh
5
Jhb
Eku
Total
0
Monthly income of employed respondents in UIS per municipality
According to the 2009 GHS, the primary income source for households in informal settlements
is salaries and wages (HDA, 2012: 41). The 2005/6 Income and Expenditure Survey [IES] data
source, indicates that over 85% of households who live in informal settlements have a
household income of less than R3 500 per month measured in 2006 Rand terms. Inflating
incomes to 2010 Rand [and assuming no shift in real incomes]; then 75% of households living in
informal settlements earn less than R3,500 per month in 2010 Rand terms (HDA, 2012: 41). The
276
findings of the current study are consistent with IES data source, in that those who are
employed constitute 23% and earn on average between R1 – R4000 [70% of the 23% who are
employed].
Trend data from the 2009 GHS indicate no significant shifts in main income sources through the
2008/9 recession, with the proportion of households living in informal settlements citing
salaries or wages as their primary income source remaining constant at around 66%. This is
despite a decline in employment levels from 2008 to 2009, particularly in the informal sector
which declined from 2.52 million individuals in quarter 2 of 2008 to 2.25 million in quarter 2 of
2009. This may reflect high levels of mobility, meaning that individuals who lose their jobs or
who cannot sustain their businesses may relocate or reconstitute their households in other
areas (HDA, 2012: 41). The Quality of Life Survey [QoLS] in its 2011 report indicates that
although inequality is still high in Gauteng, there is a slight decline. Table 6.5.4 below shows the
level of inequality in metropolitan municipalities.
Table 6.5.4. Measure of inequality [Gini coefficient ]in Gauteng’s metropolitan municipalities
[Adapted from: GCRO, QoLS 2011]
Year
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
Ekurhuleni
0.63
0.63
0.63
0.63
0.63
Johannesburg
0.64
0.64
0.63
0.63
0.62
Tshwane
0.62
0.62
0.62
0.61
0.61
Gauteng
0.65
0.65
0.65
0.64
0.64
Graph 6.5.4.6. Indigent registration
Graph heading
Response
Tsh
Eku
Jhb
Total
Are you registered as
indigent?
Yes
51
24
52
127
No
105
66
83
254
N = 381
Non respondents = 11
277
300
250
200
Number of
150
respondents
100
Yes
No
50
0
Tsh
Eku
Jhb
Total
Respondents registered as indigent households in UIS per municipality
In terms of section 27 of the Constitution, 1996, everyone has the right to have access to:
a) Sufficient food and water;
(b) Social security, including, if they are unable to support themselves and their dependents,
appropriate social assistance.
The section argues that the state must take reasonable legislative and other measures, within
its available resources, to achieve the progressive realisation of these rights. Empirical evidence
from the study suggest that the majority [2/3 (254/381) = 67%] of survey respondents in UIS
are not registered as indigent families. This is expressed more in Tshwane and Johannesburg
respectively. Registration as indigent for families that cannot afford municipal bills, rates and
taxes is important. This is a legal instrument used by municipalities to include registered
indigent beneficiaries for basic services [i.e. electricity, water, sanitation and waste
collection/removal]. Benefits include:
(a) 10 kl of water free of charge per month;
(b) interest free arrangements for repayment of outstanding charges;
(c) the granting of indigent status to those who qualify for indigent grants;
(d) the free installation of a prepaid meter to approved indigents;
(e) free education on how to repair water leaks at their residence;
278
(f) 50 kWh per month free electricity [or determined by Government from time to time];
(g) free refuse removal.
According to Chapter 9, Section 97(1)(c) of the Local Government: Municipal Systems Act, 32 of
2000, provision for indigent debtors consistent with its rates and tariff policies and any national
policy on indigents must be included in the Credit Control Policy of a municipality. From the
empirical study, it could be deduced that three identified municipalities should do more to
change these figures so that residents who are indigent in informal settlements can benefit
from legislative benefits of the Act.
Graph 6.5.5. When did you move into the informal settlement?
Graph Heading
When
Tsh
Eku Jhb
Total
When did you moved to
informal settlement?
0-2 years
1
7
1
9
2-3 years
4-5 years
5-9 years
10+ yrs
5
11
45
26
4
36
13
44
1
15
0
129
10
52
58
199
N = 328
Non respondents = 64
200
180
160
140
120
Number of
100
respondents
80
60
40
20
0
Tsh
Eku
Jhb
Total
0-2 years
2-3 years
4-5 years
5-9 years
10+ yrs
Number of years living in UIS per municipality
279
An analysis of data from the Community Survey [CS] indicates that the majority of people living
in informal settlements in 2007 had been living there for an extended period of time and 68%
stated that they had not moved since 2001 (HDA – Gauteng; 2012: 40). Results from the current
survey are consistent with the 2007 CS. It is clear from the table that people have been living
for an extended period [4 to 10+ years] in informal settlements in the three metropolitan
municipalities. There are however more people in UIS of Johannesburg who have been staying
for 10+ years or longer – this is consistent with the selection made for the purposes of this
research – informal settlements that are 20 years and older
The results are consistent with the findings of Census 2011 and those of the HDA in their 2013
informal settlement status. Census data indicates that the number of households living in
informal settlements has stabilised nationally. There are a total of 1 249 777 households,
containing 3 306 697 individuals who live in informal settlements (HDA, 2013: 18). Moreover,
the census 2011 results indicate that the number of households living in informal settlements,
as proxied either by dwelling type [shack not in backyard or informal residential] has stabilised
across the country as a whole (HDA, 2013: 14).
In 2001 there were 1,38 million households living in informal settlements compared to 1,25 in
2011. With regard to Enumerated Areas [EA], 1,11 million households lived in areas demarcated
by SSA as informal settlements in 2001 compared to 1,10 million in 2011 in areas demarcated
as informal residential (HDA, 2012: 7). The stabilisation is also clear from the study which is
indicated by the number of years people have been staying in the identified informal
settlements in the three metropolitan municipalities. If totals between the 4-10+ years period
are considered, then Ekurhuleni [cumulatively 93 (36+13+44) people moved between the 4-10+
years] and Tshwane [cumulatively 82 (11+45+26) people moved between the 4-10+ years] show
stabilisation.
280
Graph 6.5.6. Shack marking
Graph heading
Response
Tsh
Eku
Jhb
Total
Is your shack
marked by the
municipality?
Yes
94
48
99
241
No
50
28
41
119
N = 360
Non respondents = 32
250
200
Number of 150
respondents 100
Yes
No
50
0
Tsh
Eku
Jhb
Total
Shack marking in UIS per municipality
The indication from participants is that two thirds of the shacks in the identified UIS have been
marked by the individual metropolitan municipalities – 67% [241/360]. This is expressed mostly
in Johannesburg and Tshwane metropolitan municipalities. The results of the survey
administered to community members on outcomes regarding this issue of shack marking differ
from those of the city managers. City managers indicated [Graph 6.4.1.] that all their shacks are
marked and community survey findings show that only two thirds are marked. The shack
marking process is significant as it assists the municipality to identify families in cases of in situ
upgrading, relocation and in the provision of basic services [budgeting and resource allocation].
The outcome means that metropolitan municipalities concerned are not adequately making
provision with regards to basic services, since they do not know the correct number of shacks in
their urban informal settlements. This fact reinforces the notion that municipalities do not have
accurate statistics on the provision of basic services in UIS.
281
Graph 6.5.7. Electricity
Graph Heading
Response
Tsh
Yes
58
Do you have electricity?
No
81
*Add 8 more people who answered in 6.5.7.1
N = 361 [369]
Eku
30
56
Jhb
73
63
Total
161
200
Non respondents = 31 [23]
200
180
160
140
120
Number of
100
respondents
80
Yes
No
60
40
20
0
Tsh
Eku
Jhb
Total
Provision of electricity in UIS per municipality
Graph 6.5.7.1. Type of electricity or lighting
Graph heading
Type of
electricity/lighting
N = 369
Type
Tsh
Eku
Jhb
Total
Prepaid
74
20
61
155
Municipal
None
Connected illegally
Gas
Candle/paraffin
Generator
6
21
13
8
33
1
6
0
8
1
48
0
8
0
14
2
40
0
25
21
35
11
121
1
Non respondents = 23
282
160
140
120
Number of 100
80
respondents 60
40
20
0
Tsh
Eku
Jhb
Total
Type of electricity provided in UIS per municipality
On access to electricity, the empirical study found that 49% [180/369] have access. In 2011,
GCRO’s Quality of Life Survey [QoLS] report found that 38% of people who live in informal
settlements have access to electricity for lighting; the figure goes down to 36% for cooking. The
main source of energy for cooking and lighting for those people that do not use electricity,
paraffin and gas dominate for cooking, while the use of candles prevail to provide lighting. The
QoLS findings are consistent with the current empirical study findings with a slight reduction
and variance of -3% [36% - 33%]. The current study found that 33% [121/369] of those without
electricity use candles/paraffin.
Figure 6.5.7 Energy use by poor communities in 2011 [Adapted from GCRO QoLS 2011]
283
According to HDA (2013:23), on average households living in informal settlements appear to
live under better conditions than in 2001. By far the most significant improvement has been in
access to electricity. In 2001, 37% of households in informal settlements used electricity for
lighting, heating or cooking. This had increased to 43% of households by 2011. The results from
the current empirical study in 2014 show a 6% increase. It must be taken into account that SSA
Census 2011 results give a national outlook – while the current empirical data findings are only
looking at UIS in Gauteng metropolitan municipalities.
This can be extrapolated to a level where an argument is advanced that since the three
identified metropolitan municipalities [Ekurhuleni, Johannesburg and Tshwane] form part of
the top five municipalities that account for 51% of informal settlements in South Africa – this
means that Gauteng is leading in terms of the provision of electricity to households
enumerated during the SSA Census 2011. Out of the top five municipalities countrywide of
which Gauteng has three, the Province alone accounts for 22% [0,51] of the 43% total access to
electricity nation-wide – while others are at 21% [0,49]. Moreover, this also means that
Gauteng alone [3/5 in the top five], accounts for 60% of the 22%, which is 13,2%. The simple
equation is:

The top five municipalities’ access to electricity in informal settlements country-wide is
51% [0,51] of the total [43%] = 0,51 x 43% = 22%; then

Gauteng metropolitan municipalities in the top five is 3 out 5 or 60% [0,61] = 0,61 x 22%
= 13,2%.
To get to their respective contribution in the 13,2% total of access to electricity in Gauteng’s
metropolitan municipalities – those that are less than 20 years [397 -119 = 278] and the those
that were formalised [79 + 40 = 119 ] - will all have to be included into the equation before
determining the new percentage [see: Table 6.5.7]. In the current empirical study, 161
respondents indicated that they have electricity – this figure represents a sample from
specifically those UIS that are NOT formalised and are 20 years or older.
284
Table 6.5.7. Contribution of each Gauteng urban informal settlement in the three
metropolitan municipalities in terms of access to electricity
Municipality
Formalised UIS
UIS
NOT Number
formalised
of
UIS in Percentage
Gauteng
of
13,2% total access
in UIS
Ekurhuleni
0 + 16 [but are not 103
119 [30% of Total]
0.3 x 13.2 = 3.96%
20 years or older]
=0
Johannesburg
79
101
180 [42% of Total]
0.42 x 13.2 = 5.544%
Tshwane
40
58
98 [28% of Total]
0.28 x 13.2 = 3.696%
TOTAL
135/397 = 34%
262/397
= 397 = 100%
Access = 13.2%
66%
The deduction from the graph is that Johannesburg provides the highest number of households
in UIS with electricity, followed by Ekurhuleni and then Tshwane.
Graph 6.5.8. Water
Graph heading
Do you have
running water?
Response
Tsh Eku Jhb
Yes
53
32
80
Total
[22+165]187
No
90 33 55
178
*Add 22 + 165 = 187 [Omitted but answered in 6.5.8.1]
N = 365
Non respondents = 27
285
180
160
140
120
Number of 100
respondents 80
Yes
60
No
40
20
0
Tsh
Eku
Jhb
Total
Provision of water in UIS per municipality
Graph 6.5.8.1. Type of water source
Graph heading
Type
Tsh Eku Jhb
How do you receive the
water?
JoJo tank
76
23
28
127
Street tap
15
25
20
60
N = 187
Total
Non respondents = 178
140
120
100
80
JoJo tank
60
Street tap
40
20
0
Tsh
Eku
Jhb
Total
Type of water source in UIS per municipality
286
Graph 6.5.8.2. Frequency of water supply
Graph heading
How often?
Tsh
Eku
Jhb
Total
Frequency of water
delivery?
Regularly
61
25
25
111
Not too often
Very seldom
11
2
0
0
0
1
11
3
N = 125
Non respondents = 62
120
100
80
Number of
respondents
Regularly
60
Not too often
40
Very seldom
20
0
Tsh
Eku
Jhb
Total
Frequency of water provision in UIS per municipality
Of the 365 participants who responded to the question, 49% [178/365] did not have a water
supply either from a tap in the street or from a municipal source. However, 51% [187/365]
indicated that they have running water and they receive water supply through a municipal Jojo
tank 68% [127/187]. The rest remaining households have a tap in the street 32% [60/187].
Participants who receive their water supply from the municipalities’ Jojo tank/tap on the street,
indicated that the supply is on a regularly basis and the percentage is 89% [111/125] – see
Graph 6.5.8.2 above.
According to a report titled “Gender Statistics in South Africa, 2011” (SSA, 2012:14) - significant
differences in access remain between black African households and other population groups. In
2001, 50,5% of black African households were reliant on off-site sources for water. By 2011, the
percentage had dropped to 34,9%. This is still high when compared to other population groups
for whom the percentage is less than 10% for both 2001 and 2011. Although there is a decline
287
in the general population in terms of reliant on off-site sources for water; the situation in
informal settlements has not changed at 68%.
GCRO’s Quality of life survey results from the 2011 report indicate a low percentage of people
without piped water on site in Gauteng’s municipalities. Most of these people are in informal
settlements in the three metropolitan municipalities. All have high survey results in terms of
the distance that people walk to access water – which is less than 200m. Tshwane had the least
number of people who are walking more than 200m to fetch water at 25%, followed by
Johannesburg at 29%; then Ekurhuleni had almost half [48%] who walk more than 200m to
access water [see: Figure 6.5.8.3].
Figure 6.5.8.3. Water source more or less than 200m away [Adapted from QoLS 2011 report]
288
The South African Human Rights Commission [SAHRC], in a report titled ‘The Right to Access
Sufficient Water and Decent Sanitation in South Africa: 2014’ argues that access to safe drinking
water and sanitation are fundamental to the enjoyment of other rights such as the rights to
education, health, safety and an environment that are not harmful to human health or
wellbeing (SAHRC, 2014: 36). According to results from the 2011 SSA Census, 46,3% of
households in South Africa have access to piped water and just over 85% have access to water
that is of a RDP acceptable level [According to the 1994 RDP standards – which are still in use]
(SAHRC, 2014: 36). The RDP acceptable level figure in the current study is 47% [see: Graph
6.5.8.1 - 60/127 = 47%] which is lower considering the 85% reported by SSA Census 2011.
Lack of access to water and sanitation not only impedes access to other rights, but heightens
the vulnerability of particular groups of people such as women, girls and people with
disabilities. It also impacts on the right to practice one’s culture or religion. Moreover, the UN
Special Rapporteur [de Albuquerque, Report of the independent expert on the issue of human
rights obligations related to access to safe drinking water and sanitation, Human Right Council
A/HRC/6/3 16 August 2007] on the human right to safe drinking water and sanitation has
shown that inadequate water and sanitation facilities impact on the realisation of other rights
such as education, health, work and dignity, amongst others. Water and sanitation are
fundamental to the health and well-being of all people (SAHRC, 2014: 36).
The South African government has a challenge when it comes to the adequate supply of water
for citizens. In 2011, a report by the South African Institute for Civil Engineering (SAICE) and the
Centre for Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR) reported that “much of South Africa’s bulk
water infrastructure is reaching the end of its life and will require upgrade or replacement” and
that “a serious problem regarding bulk infrastructure is uncontrolled, high levels of pollution,
especially in dams. Mingling pollutants near urban areas makes identification and penalisation
of the many offenders extremely difficult.” (SAICE & CSIR, 2011: 14).
289
Graph 6.5.9. Sanitation
Graph heading
Do you have Sanitation?
Response
Yes
No
N = 371
Tsh
21
124
Eku
31
63
Jhb
72
60
Total
124
247
Non respondents = 21
250
200
Number of
respondents
150
Yes
100
No
50
0
Tsh
Eku
Jhb
Total
Provision of sanitation in UIS per municipality
Graph 6.5.9.1. Type of Sanitation
Graph Heading
Type
Tsh Eku Jhb Total
Bucket
13
16
9
38
Type of sanitation
Pit
110 39
50
199
Field
0
6
1
7
 There are 3 [247-244 = 3] people who did not respond
N = 244 [+3 missing]
Non respondents = 127
290
200
180
160
140
120
Number of
100
respondents
80
60
40
20
0
Bucket
Pit
Field
Tsh
Eku
Jhb
Total
Type of sanitation provided in UIS per municipality
Of the 371 participants in the survey on this specific question, 67% [247/371] - indicated that
they do not have access to sanitation. The lack of sanitation services was expressed in Tshwane
Metropolitan Municipality [124/145 = 86%]; Ekurhuleni [63/94 = 67%] and Johannesburg had
more people who answered in the affirmative [60/132 = 46%] as compared to their two
counterparts. The results are as follows:
Table 6.5.9. Access to sanitation per municipality [Empirical study]
Municipality
Sanitation
No Sanitation
Ekurhuleni
31/94
63/94
Johannesburg
72/132 = 54%
60/132 = 46%
Tshwane
21/145 = 14%
124/145 = 86%
TOTAL
124/371 = 33%
247/371 = 67%
= 33%
= 67%
The results from the empirical study indicate a 67% lack of access to sanitation, which is a
combined figure of all the three metropolitan municipalities. In 2012, a government report on
sanitation titled: “Report on the Status of sanitation services in South Africa” indicated that:
The startling finding is that while access to sanitation is increasing (albeit at less than an
optimal pace) from a functionality and adequacy point of view, as many as 26% (or about 3,2
291
million households) are at risk of service failure and/or are experiencing service delivery
breakdowns. Add to this the 9% (or 1,4 million households) in formal settlements that have no
services and the 584 378 households or 64% of households in informal settlements making use
of interim services and we get a picture of service delivery failure on a massive scale (DWA,
2012: 3).
The current study has found that in Gauteng metropolitan municipalities’ informal settlements
that are NOT formalised and are 20 years and older – the figure is 67% - no access. So the 64%
figure reported by DWA – which included all informal settlements in the country – is close to
the findings in this study. According to HDA (2013: 27), distribution of access to sanitation in
households living in informal settlements in Gauteng metropolitan municipalities between 2001
and 2011 is as follows [see: Table 6.5.9.1 & 2]:
Table 6.5.9.1. Access to sanitation per municipality [by HDA] 2001
Municipality
Households Higher level of Basic
access
[Flush toilet
connected
to
sewerage system].
access
level
of No access
[Basic levels of
service: Flush toilet [with
septic tank / Pit latrine
with ventilation (VIP)]
Ekurhuleni
163 310
33%
4%
63%
Johannesburg 133 976
21%
9%
70%
Tshwane
114 178
15%
4%
81%
Gauteng
411464
23%
5.6%
71%
292
Table 6.5.9.2. Access to sanitation per municipality [by HDA] 2011
Municipality
Households Higher level of access Basic level of access [Basic No
[Flush toilet connected to
levels of service: Flush toilet [with
sewerage system].
septic tank / Pit latrine with
access
ventilation (VIP)]
Ekurhuleni
138 099
20%
4%
76%
Johannesburg
125 748
22%
30%
48%
Tshwane
112 167
12%
8%
80%
Gauteng
376014
18%
14%
68%
The findings of the current study are almost similar to the findings of SSA Census 2011 and HDA
2013 study on urban informal settlements [UIS]. HDA report indicates that there was a 71% in
2001 and 68% in 2011 of households with no access to sanitation in Gauteng’s UIS. The current
study found a 67% had no access to sanitation, which is a significant finding. This means that
the three municipalities combined [and especially in Tshwane] have not improved on the
delivery of basic sanitation for almost 10 years. The study also found that there is a significant
use of pit latrine [VIP] toilet in UIS that were surveyed – especially in the Tshwane Metropolitan
Municipality. The usage of the bucket system was insignificant in all selected municipalities and
the results bear testimony to that fact. The results of the current empirical study point to a
chronic lack of sanitation services in UIS identified.
In 2011, the South African Human Rights Commission [SAHRC] received complaints from
Makhaza residents in the City of Cape Town and Moqhaka municipality in the Free State
Province. The first complaint was from the African National Congress [ANC] Youth League in the
Dullah Omar region, on behalf of Makhaza residents against the Democratic Alliance [DA] led
City of Cape Town. The second was from Gareth Van Onselen, on behalf of the DA against an
293
ANC-led municipality, Moqhaka, in the Free State. The Constitution mandates the SAHRC to
operate without fear, favour or prejudice as a Chapter 9 Institution. In line with this mandate,
the Commission investigated the complaints and ruled that both municipalities had violated the
right to dignity. In both findings, the Commission addressed the responsibility of the
municipalities to immediately enclose the toilets (SAHRC, 2014: 43).
It is important to single out the ruling of the SAHRC on the Moqhaka municipality in the Free
State as it relates directly with the issue of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation; in
particular the Department of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation [DPME]. The SAHRC’s
Moqhaka municipality finding ruled that the DPME provides a comprehensive report on the
right to sanitation in every municipality in the country. To produce this report, the DPME had to
assemble an inter-governmental task team, consisting of the Departments of COGTA, Human
Settlements, Water Affairs and National Treasury. It thus addressed two key problems
identified by the Commission, namely, the lack of real co-operative governance and the lack of
adequate monitoring aimed at timely, effective remedy for the lack of rights. The DPME
committed itself to the following in phases (SAHRC, 2014: 44 & 45):
Phase 1 deliverables:

A fully populated and geo-referenced country-wide community level classification of
quality (adequacy and functionality) of sanitation services experienced by citizens using
the Strategic Framework for Water Services criteria.

An assessment of the quality and condition of existing sanitation infrastructure
(inclusive of waste water treatment works).

Identification of the settlements where the quality of sanitation service levels does not
meet the above criteria, while also quantifying the types of investments and costs to
bring sanitation service levels to acceptable levels.
294

Key challenges hampering the attainment of adequate sanitation service levels in
identified hotspots.
Phase 2 deliverables:

An institutional assessment of municipal technical and financial capacity to expand and
sustain access to adequate and functioning sanitation services following an asset
management approach.

Establish the conditions required for a national performance monitoring framework for
sanitation service delivery and clarify the regulation and/or monitoring of sanitation
service delivery at a municipal level.

Establish the roles and responsibilities for the provision of both technical support and
support for community consultation, communication and the conclusion of variation
agreements regarding norms and standards as interim sanitation delivery arrangements.

Establish the policy, programme and legislative review implications of the recent ruling
made by the Cape High Court and Commission for the delivery of quality basic sanitation
services.

Propose sanitation master plans linked to Water Services Development Plans [WSDP]
with actions, timeframes and allocated resources to implement quality sanitation
services in areas where they are lacking.
295
The DPME subsequently submitted a report to the SAHRC. In its report DPME, it argued that:
The national findings in this report were informed by in-depth analysis of the state of sanitation
within each of the 159 Water Services Authority (WSA)… Satellite spot imaging was used to map
68 000 settlements and calculate population and household information. The settlements were
then evaluated and updated according to their current sanitation service needs. Field work at
the municipal level (not household), was done to profile the settlements according to the
classification developed for the study.
The report describes the types of information sources that were available to the DPME in
gathering data on which to base its report, namely, the Water Services National Information
System (WSNIS) based on SSA Census data with annual adjustments for calculated service
delivery and population growth. The SAHRC argued that the importance of the DPME report as
a potential planning document is undeniable. Therefore, it is crucial that the data presented is
sound and reliable. This will provide the best foundation for strong strategic planning that can
inform sanitation backlog eradication efforts, as well as allowing a realistic estimate of the costs
involved. These elements combined can then lead to a reversal of the failed attempts of the
past to provide adequate sanitation services delivery to all South Africans (SAHRC, 2014: 46).
Thus, the importance of this information and the details of the report bring the current
empirical study to focus – especially the element of Impact Evaluation [IE]. DPME in its
response provided details on calculated service delivery and population growth; strategic
planning that informs sanitation backlog eradication efforts and realistic estimates of the costs
involved. These issues are important elements of an Impact Evaluation [IE] approach which was
described in detail earlier in the chapter [cf: 3.4.2 Impact Evaluation (IE) in PME]. The results of
the empirical study, the SAHRC’s intervention and DPME response on sanitation outcomes are
proof that performance monitoring and evaluation [PME] are critical for control and
management in the public sector – especially in a municipality where essential basic services
like sanitation are provided to residents.
296
Graph 6.5.10. Waste collection/removal
Graph heading
How do you dispose of
waste in your informal
settlement?
Method
Tsh
Eku
Jhb
Total
Collected weekly by
municipality
69
50
84
203
2
10
35
47
44
25
30
0
28
0
102
25
Skip bin provided by
municipality
Dispose on street corner
No collection
N = 377
Non respondents = 15
250
200
Number of 150
respondents 100
Tsh
50
Jhb
Eku
0
Collected
Skip bin
Dispose on No collection
weekly by
provided by street corner
Municipality municipality
Total
Waste collection/removal and frequency in UIS per municipality
A research series published by the Housing Development Agency (2012, 34) indicates that
access to services by the year 2007 in Gauteng on households in informal settlements had the
same average as the South African average percentages; with regard to refuse
collected/removed by a municipality [see: Table 6.5.10].
Table 6.5.10. Access to waste collection/removal in Gauteng [2007] by municipalities
Province v/s South African average
Gauteng
South Africa
Refuse collected by municipality
51%
51%
297
In a 2007 study titled: ‘Assessment of the status of waste service delivery and capacity at the
local government level’ which was published by the Department of Environmental Affairs and
Tourism [now Department of Environmental Affairs] the percentage of households with access
to a weekly refuse removal service was determined [see: Table 6.5.10.1] per metropolitan
municipalities in Gauteng (DEAT, 2007: 45).
Table 6.5.10.1 Percentage access of households to a weekly waste removal service
Metropolitan Municipality
Access [%]
Backlog [Number of households]
Ekurhuleni
95%
39691
Johannesburg
94%
57132
Tshwane
71%
198130
Total
87%
294953
The three metropolitan municipalities combined, represented 87% access to waste
collection/removal in 2007 for all households. This was on a backdrop of a percentage just
above 60%+ [see: Figure 6.5.10] when considering the National average for the year 2007
according to SSA in all households.
Figure 6.5.10. National percentage households with access to waste collection/removal
298
Source: StatsSA.2002-2013. General Households Survey (Statistical release P0318). www.statssa.gov.za
The percentage of households which had access to the waste collection/removal services
provided by their respective municipalities increased from 57,8% in 2002, 60%+ in 2007 to 64%
in 2012. Access to refuse removal dropped to 53.1% in 2009. In 2012, Households in Gauteng
[90.9%] were most likely to have their household waste collected/removed by the municipality
at least once per week and they were also the ones with the highest access to waste removal.
Empirical data results from the current study indicate that the situation in informal settlements
is NO different from the national and provincial averages [i.e. this includes households in
houses] as predicted by SSA in 2012-2013 – amidst a 2% [66% - 64%] increase. Of the 377
respondents 250 [66%] indicated that the municipality collected/removed their waste and 102
dumping it at the street corner [an assumption is made that those who threw waste at the
corner are not agreeing that it is collected/removed by the municipality regularly, either
weekly]. A small number of 25 out of 377 indicated that waste is not collected/removed. Data
distribution is as follows:
Table 6.5.10.2. Combined figure of collected/removed waste per municipality [i.e. includes
skip provided] – from the empirical study [see: Graph 6.5.10]
Metropolitan Municipality
Combined figure of collected/removed waste per
municipality [i.e. includes skip provided] = Access
Ekurhuleni
50+10 / 250 = 24%
Johannesburg
84+35 /250 = 48%
Tshwane
69+2 /250 = 28%
AVERAGE TOTAL
250/377 66% access to waste collection/removal
299
The results from Table 6.5.10.2, indicate that UIS that are NOT formalised and are 20 years old
or more in the identified Gauteng metropolitan municipalities have a 66% access to waste
collection/removal. This is a critical finding because collection of household waste is one of the
most visual benchmarks of inequality in South Africa (DEA, 2012: 1).
DEA indicates that South African municipalities face a number of challenges with respect to
delivering an effective and sustainable waste service to all households including: insufficient
budget, skilled capacity, lack of appropriate equipment and poor access to service areas. It has
emerged over the years that South Africa has a backlog in terms of provisioning of basic waste
removal services. As a result, municipalities have been turning increasingly to
commercialisation [i.e privatisation, outsourcing] as a way of addressing the waste
collection/removal backlog (DEA, 2012: 1).
The National Waste Information Baseline Report of 2011 from the Department of
Environmental Affairs [DEA], indicates that the percentage municipal waste contribution by
Province in South Africa is calculated using normalised data to the baseline year, assuming
equal per capita waste generation across Provinces. Gauteng produces 761 kg/capita/annum
and 45% waste generated as percentage of Total waste in South Africa. The report indicates
that the municipal waste composition for Gauteng could be extrapolated to fairly represent the
composition of municipal waste in South Africa. The municipal waste composition for Gauteng
was therefore applied to calculate GW20 [organic waste, 15%] and GW30 [construction and
demolition waste, 20%]. The waste composition for general waste in 2011 based on percentage
by mass which excludes biomass waste from industrial sources is depicted by the pie chart
below [see: Figure 6.5.10.1].
300
Figure 6.5.10.1. Composition of general waste in 2011 based on percentage by mass [Adapted
from the National Waste Information Baseline Report (2011) – DEA]
General waste composition, 2011
Tyres
1%
Glass
4%
Metals
14%
Plastic
6%
Non-recyclable Municipal
waste
34%
Paper
7%
Construction and demolition
waste
21%
Organic waste
13%
Graph 6.5.11. Informal settlement registration with the municipality
Graph heading
Response
Is the informal
settlement registered
with the municipality?
Yes
No

Tsh
Eku
Jhb
Total
86
67
84
237
58
25
50
140
7 more people answered in 6.5.11.1
N = 370 + 7
Non respondents = 15
301
250
200
Number of
respondents
150
Yes
100
No
50
0
Tsh
Eku
Jhb
Total
UIS registered with council per municipality
Graph 6.5.11.1. Formalisation programme of informal settlements
Graph Heading
If No, do you know about
the formalisation
programme of the
municipality?
Response
Tsh Eku Jhb
Total
28
3
4
35
35
18
52
105
Yes
No
N = 140 - 7 [since 133 said No]
Non respondents = 0
302
120
100
80
Number of
respondents
60
Yes
40
No
20
0
Tsh
Eku
Jhb
Total
Respondents response on formalisation of their UIS per municipality
Graph 6.5.11.2. When will formalisation take place?
Graph heading
Response
If you know, when will
it take place?
Soon
Not soon
Perhaps in a long
time
N = 139 - 6 [since 133 said No]
Tsh Eku Jhb
Total
19
0
2
21
5
2
1
8
39
26
45
110
Non respondents = 0
120
100
80
Number of
respondents
Soon
60
Not soon
40
Perhaps in a long time
20
0
Tsh
Eku
Jhb
Total
When will formalisation take place in UIS per municipality
303
Empirical evidence from the study indicates that 63% [237/377] of participants in the survey
know their informal settlements’ registration status with the municipality. However, those who
said NO [140 or 37%]; also do not know about the municipality’s formalisation programme –
75% [105/140] in see: Graph 6.5.11.1. A further 79% [110/140] of respondents indicate that
perhaps formalisation of their informal settlement will happen in a long time [see: Graph
6.5.11.2]. This is significant because many of the protests that occurred in Gauteng [as
indicated in Chapter 5] were a result of lack of information about the intentions of the
municipality in the informal settlement [i.e. in-situ upgrades; relocations and provision of basic
services].
Graph 6.5.12. Do you have a representative in the informal settlement?
Graph heading
Do you have a
representative?

Item
Tsh Eku Jhb
Total
125 79 24
Yes
No
0
0
0
45 more people responded below in 6.5.12.1.
283
N = 283 [228+45]
0
Non respondents = 109
250
200
150
Number of
respondents
Yes
No
100
50
0
Tsh
Eku
Jhb
Total
Do you have a representative in the UIS? categorised per municipality
304
Graph 6.5.12.1. Who is your representative in the informal settlement?
Graph heading
If a Yes, who is it?
Item
Councillor from the
Ward
Member from the
Ward Committee
Community member
N = 283
Tsh Ekur Jhb
Total
65
27
38
130
55
36
30
121
17
8
7
32
Non respondents = 0 <45 [since 228 said Yes]
140
120
100
Number of
respondents
80
Tsh
60
Eku
Jhb
40
Total
20
0
Councillor from
the Ward
Member from the
Ward Committee
Community
member
Who is your representative in the UIS? Categorised per municipality
Graph 6.5.13. Do you know the Ward Councillor?
Graph heading
Do you know your
Ward Councillor?
N = 276
Response
Yes
No
Tsh Eku Jhb
Total
104
62
21
186
46
25
19
90
Non respondents = 116
305
200
180
160
140
120
Number of
100
respondents
80
Yes
No
60
40
20
0
Tsh
Eku
Jhb
Total
Do you know the ward councillor? Categorised per municipality
Graph 6.5.14. Frequency of meetings with the Ward Councillor
Graph heading
How often do you have
meetings with the Ward
Councillor?
N = 289
How often?
Once per month
Once in three
months
Once in six months
Once a year
Tsh Eku Jhb
Total
29
17
9
55
25
39
64
128
43
3
12
13
33
2
88
18
Non respondents = 103
306
140
120
100
Number of
respondents
80
Tsh
60
Eku
Jhb
40
Total
20
0
Once per month
Once in three
months
Once in six
months
Once a year
Frequency of meetings with the ward councillor in UIS per municipality
Evidence form the empirical study indicates that residents of UIS in the three identified
metropolitan municipalities have had opportunities to engage with their municipal councils.
Respondents’ in the survey questionnaire [see Graphs 6.5.12.1. & Table 6.5.13] – especially
participants living in Tshwane’s UIS - indicated that they have a representative who is either a
councillor or member of the ward committee. Tshwane represents 42%; followed by
Johannesburg [24%] and Ekurhuleni [22%]. When asked by frequency of meetings between the
ward councillor and the community, participants responded in the following manner:
Table 6.5.14. Frequency of meetings with the ward councillor
Metropolitan
Monthly
3 months
6 months
Yearly
Total %
Ekurhuleni
17
39
12
13
68/289 = 28%
Johannesburg
9
64
33
2
106/289 = 37%
Tshwane
29
25
43
3
97/289 = 35%
AVERAGE TOTAL
55
128
88
18
289/289 = 100%
Frequency %
19%
44%
31%
6%
municipality
307
There is more interaction on a monthly basis between informal settlement residents in
Tshwane than the other metropolitan municipalities. It is clear that the Johannesburg ward
councillors interact with their informal settlements residents on a three months basis, which is
more than in the other two metropolitan municipalities. Overall, the empirical study indicates
that interaction between ward councillors and the communities they serve in UIS takes place
more often on a six months basis [44%]; then on a quaterly basis [31%]; every quaterly [19%]
and then once a year [6%].
The GCRO QoLS 2011 report findings are consistent with empirical data from current study.
QoLS indicates that there is a decrease in number of participation in ward committee from 41%
to 37.8%. When considering interactions on a six months basis [44%]; a quaterly basis [31%]
and a monthly interaction [19%] all of them together – the average result is a 31,3% which is
below the QoLS finding in 2011 – a figure which might be indicating a downward trend.
Figure 6.5.14 Participation in various fora [Adapted from GCRO QoLS 2011]
308
Chapter 4 of the Local government: Municipal Systems Act [MSA], 32 of 2000 emphasises and
creates legislative obligation for municipalities in respect of community participation. The Act
has a dedicated chapter on community participation, and various other references to
community participation. Moreover, participation by the local community in the affairs of the
municipality must take place through political structures for participation in terms of the Local
government: Municipal Structures Act 117 of 1998 [i.e. ward committees]. There are
mechanisms, processes and procedures for participation in municipal government that are
established both in terms of the Acts mentioned above and by the municipality. A municipality
must establish appropriate mechanisms, processes and procedures to enable the local
community to participate in the affairs of the municipality, and must for this purpose provide
for:

the receipt, processing and consideration of petitions and complaints lodged by
members of the local community;

notification and public comment procedures, when appropriate;

public meetings and hearings by the municipal council and other political structures and
political office bearers of the municipality, when appropriate;

consultative sessions with locally recognised community organisations and, where
appropriate, traditional authorities; and

report-back to the local community.
Graph 6.5.15. Municipal bill
Graph heading
Do you receive a bill from
the Municipality?
N = 355
Response
Yes
No
Tsh Eku Jhb Total
2
26
59
87
140
54
74
268
Non respondents = 37
309
300
250
Number of 200
respondents
150
receiving a
municipal bill 100
Yes
No
50
0
Tsh
Eku
Jhb
Total
Do you receive a municipal bill? Categorised per municipality
Graph 6.5.15.1. Reason for the bill
Graph Heading
What do you receive
the bills for?
Response
Water and Electricity
Water, Sanitation and
Waste
Water
N = 72 + 15 [since 87 said Yes]
Tsh
Eku
Jhb
Total
0
1
1
2
0
21
44
65
0
1
4
5
Non respondents = 15 [since 87 said Yes]
70
60
50
Number of
40
respondents
receiving a municipal 30
bill
20
Water and Electricity
Water, Sanitation and Waste
Water
10
0
Tsh
Eku
Jhb
Total
What is the municipal bill for? Categorised per municipality
310
Graph 6.5.15.2. How often do you receive a bill?
Graph Heading
How often do you
receive a bill?
Response
Monthly
Once in three months
Add 18 more people
N = 69 + 18 [since 87 said Yes]
Tsh
Eku
Jhb
Total
0
18
33
51
0
7
11
18
Non respondents = 18 [since 87 said Yes]
60
50
40
Number of
respondents
30
receiving a
municipal bill
20
Monthly
Once in three months
10
0
Tsh
Eku
Jhb
Total
Frequency of municipal bill distribution in UIS per municipality
Housing Development Agency (2013: 24) argues that there is no data in the census to assess
whether households pay for municipal services. There is data available in the General
Household Survey [GHS] to assess whether households pay for services but there is no
indication as to who they are paying. According to the GHS for households living in informal
settlements 9% of households whose main source of drinking water is supplied by the
municipality pay for water while 19% of those with a flush toilet connected to a public
sewerage system pay for sewerage. A total of 58% of households who have refuse/rubbish
removal services pay for the service while 70% of households connected to mains electricity
pay for electricity (HDA, 2013: 24).
311
In the empirical study, when participants were asked about whether they use electricity, the
majority of them reported that they use prepaid, while some get it directly from the
municipality and a few of them are connected illegally. The summary is as follows:
Prepaid
155
Municipal
25
Connected illegally
35
Total
215
As indicated in the preceding paragraph, 70% of households connected to the mains electricity
pay for electricity (HDA, 2013:24). This is consistent with the findings in the empirical study in
the three metropolitan municipalities. Those who buy prepaid electricity and those who receive
electricity from the municipality, when put together they give a figure just above 72%
[155+25=180/215] which is consistent with HDA’s 2013 findings.
The empirical evidence from the study indicates that 75% [268/355] of participants say that
they do not receive a municipal bill or account. The majority of participants 99% [2/142] who do
not receive a municipal bill or account are in the Tshwane Metropolitan Municipality. The city
alone constitutes 52% [140/268] of all participants who responded ‘NO’ to the question in the
survey. The other 48% who do not receive a municipal bill or account are distributed between
Johannesburg [28%] and Ekurhuleni [20%] metropolitan municipalities respectively. When
participants [i.e. 87 of those who responded] were asked what they received municipal bills or
accounts for, their response was as follows:
Water and electricity
2%
Water, electricity and sanitation
75%
Water
6%
Non response
17%
312
From the figures provided above, it is clear that participants/respondents would pay for a
combined municipal bill instead of different bills for a variety of services.
6.6.
Analysis of participants’ responses
The 5880 [N] expected responses and out of 15 questions in the survey questionnaire, 5119
participants responded to questions. This gives a total of 761 Non respondents at 87% response
rate. The following table is a summary of the highest to the lowest response per participant:
313
Table 6.6.1. Analysis of participant’s responses on the survey questionnaire
Question number in the
Responses received
Non respondents
survey questionnaire
Percentage [%] of
respondents per
question
4 – Indigent registration
381
392 – 381 = 11
97.2%
10 – Waste
377
392 – 377 = 15
96.1%
377
392 – 377 = 15
96.1%
376
392 – 376 = 16
95.9%
9 - Sanitation
371
392 – 371 = 21
94.6%
1 – Gender, age and race
370
392 – 370 = 22
94.3%
7 - Electricity
369
392 – 369 = 23
94.1%
3 – Government grant
369
392 – 369 = 23
94.1%
8 - Water
365
392 – 365 = 27
93.1%
6 – Shack marked by
360
392 – 360 = 32
91.8%
15 – Municipal bill
355
392 – 355 = 37
90.5%
5 – Moving into the
328
392 – 328 = 64
83.6%
289
392 – 289 = 103
73.7%
283
392 – 283 = 109
72.2%
276
392 – 276 = 116
70.4%
5246
Total expected 5880 –
89%
collection/removal
11 – Registration of
informal settlement
2 – Disability, old age
pension and children
municipality
informal settlement
14 – Meetings with the
Ward Cllr
12 – Representation in the
informal settlement
13 – Do you know the
Ward Cllr?
TOTAL [1-15]
Respondents 5246 = Non
respondents 634
314
Graph 6.6. Analysis of participant’s responses on the survey questionnaire
100
97.296.195.9
94.6
94.3
94.1
94.1
93.1
96.1
91.8
90.5
4. Indigent registration
89.18
90
10. Waste collection
83.6
11. Registration of informal
settlement
80
73.7
72.2
70.4
70
2. Disability/ old age, pension &
children
9. Sanitation
1. Gender, age and race
60
Percentage per
question
7. Electricity
3. Government grant
50
8. Water
6. Shack marked by municipality
40
15. Municipal bill
30
5. Moving into the informal
settlement
14. Meetings with the Ward Cllr
20
12. Representation in the informal
settlement
13. Do you know the Ward Cllr?
10
total
0
Feedback on the 15 questions asked [Order of priority]
315
An analysis on the 15 survey question, indicates that the five top issues according to
respondents in informal settlement residents, are issues on [i] indigent registration; [ii] waste
collection/removal; [iii] registration of informal settlement; [iv] disability, old age pension and
age; and [iv] sanitation. It is also clear that informal settlement residents are not so much
concerned about their ward representatives, the councillor or ward committee members. Their
lack of adequate response to questions 12, 13 and 14 bears testimony to the assertion made in
this regard. In summary, participants order of priority in terms of how they responded on the
four main points of discussion [i.e. minimum basic services] - responses can be categorised as
follows:
Table 6.6.2. Order of priority in terms of participants responses on minimum basic services
Order of priority [i.e. minimum basic Number of
Expected responses
services]
responses
and Non respondents
Waste collection/removal
377
392 – 377 = 15
96%
Sanitation
371
392 – 371 = 21
94.6%
Electricity
369
392 – 369 = 23
94.1%
Water
365
392 – 365 = 27
93.1%
TOTAL
1482
1568 [86]
94.4%
316
Percentage
Graph 6.6.2. Order of priority in terms of participants responses on minimum basic services
96
96
95.5
95
94.5
Percentage
94.6
94.4
94.1
Sanitation
94
93.5
Waste collection/ removal
93.1
93
Electricity
Water
total
92.5
92
91.5
Basic service in order of priority
When the responses on the four main points of discussion [i.e. minimum basic services] are
considered, among all the 15 survey questions in the questionnaire it is clear that participants
had a higher response rate compared to the average total when all questions of the survey are
considered. This is significant because it indicates that participants are interested in the four
issues identified. Although the empirical results indicate varying numbers and percentages,
overall UIS residents are to a high degree concerned about all the four issues and how they
impact on their livelihood – 94.4%. The empirical results predict that waste collection/removal
[96%] and sanitation [94.6%] are the two most important issues for urban informal settlement
residents in the selected metropolitan municipalities. It is also apparent that residents of these
settlements are interested in the issues of electricity [94.1%] and water [93.1%] respectively.
317
6.7.
Profile of residents living in an informal settlement that is not formalised
and is 20 years or older, in the three Gauteng metropolitan municipalities
The empirical study allows the researcher to determine 15 traits that can be used to profile
residents living in an informal settlement that are NOT formalised and are 20 years or older - in
the three metropolitan municipalities in Gauteng as follows:
1. They are mostly occupied by Black Africans [97% chance] - 57% are female and 43%
male;
2. Residents are mostly between the ages of 25-60 [75%] and those between the ages of
25-45 account for 61% of the total population;
3. Households are likely to have two or more children [73%] and 9,3% of residents are
living with a disability;
4. Close to half [48.7%] of the residents receive a social grant and is mainly a child support
grant – 86%;
5. Most residents are unemployed [73%];
6. Two thirds of the residents [67%] are not registered as indigent families;
7. Those who are employed [23%], earn on average between R1000 - R4000;
8. Those who are employed use public transport to go to work [80%], 18% walk to work
and the remaining 2% use a car as means of travel to work.
9. Their UIS is likely to be registered with the municipality [64%]; two thirds [67%] of
residents live in shacks that have been marked by the municipality and they don’t
receive a municipal bill [75%];
10. Almost half of residents have access to electricity [49%] and are using a pre-paid
electricity system;
11. Just over half of the residents have water supply through a Jojo tank or from a tap
within a 200m radius from the household [only 51% access];
12. Most residents are using a pit latrine toilet [54%] and a few use a bucket latrine [10%]
for sanitation purposes. 66% of all respondents in UIS do not have access to sanitation;
318
13. Their municipality is likely to come once a week in the urban informal settlement to
collect/remove waste [66% have access];
14. They are not aware when the municipality will formalise their UIS [79%];
15. Two thirds [67%] know the ward councillor and have at least have a meeting once in
three months or at most in six months with an elected public representative.
6.7.1. Eradication of informal settlements – the 2004 ‘Informal Settlements Upgrading
Programme Business Plan’ [ISUPBP]
The profile in the preceding section is a product of programmes and projects that were
undertaken by government in the national, provincial and municipalities in Gauteng. In a
document titled: ‘Breaking new ground’ 2004 – A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR THE
DEVELOPMENT OF INTEGRATED SUSTAINABLE HUMAN SETTLEMENTS. The Department of
Human Settlements [DHS] indicate that there is a need to acknowledge the existence of
informal settlements and recognise that the existing housing programme will not secure the
upgrading of informal settlements. There is also a need to shift the official policy response to
informal settlements from one of conflict or neglect, to one of integration and co-operation,
leading to the stabilisation and integration of these areas into the broader urban fabric. The
programme implementation status was expected by 2007/8 financial year (SA – DHS, 2004: 24 25).
The DHS also outline a process with specific interventions that will be used for the eradication
of informal settlements through in-situ upgrading in desired locations, coupled to the
relocation of households where development is not possible or desirable (SA – DHS, 2004: 25).
The process is outlined in the departments ‘Informal Settlements Upgrading Programme
Business Plan’ and interventions are:
o
New funding mechanism for informal settlement upgrading – The funding
mechanism support the upgrading of informal settlements through a phased
process:
-
Phase 1 – The first phase will survey the community, will determine
the housing and infrastructural needs of the community through a
319
process of consultation and will determine the geo-technical and
physical suitability of the land for in situ upgrading.
-
Phase 2 – The second phase focuses on the provision of basic services,
social amenities and secure tenure to the entire community.
-
Phase 3 – During the final phase, housing is to be developed in
response to community demand and may take a variety of forms
including
medium-density
housing
and
free-standing
houses
constructed through mutual aid and community self-help or local
contractors.
o
Implementation – Upgrading projects will be implemented through partnership
between National, Provincial government and municipalities and will commence
with nine pilot projects, one in each Province building up to full programme
implementation status by 2007/8.
According to this report, an expectation was created, that after pilot projects for the eradication of informal settlements through in-situ upgrading and relocation of households where
development is not possible or desirable – the 2007/8 financial year would mark full
programme implementation status. It was envisaged that the identification of pilots would
proceed from October 2004 and that the programme will be fully operational from 1 April 2005
(SA – DHS, 2004: 25). This aspects like the provision of basic services, social amenities and
secure tenure to the entire community would have been realised.
The report of the DHS is significant because it gives credible evidence that the South African
government had a plan in place - ‘Informal Settlements Upgrading Programme Business Plan’ to
eradicate informal settlements through a phased approach. Therefore this fact must be
considered during the assessment and measuring of impact [Impact Evaluation – IE]. This
means that evaluation [IE] should consider the period from 2007 when the plan was put in
place to at least a period not less than 2011 when full implementation was initially supposed to
have occurred.
320
6.8.
Impact Evaluation based on SSA Census 2001 and 2007 Community Survey
Tables 6.8.1 – 6.8.4 provide a summary of the Impact Evaluation [IE] conducted for the selected
list of four basic services [i.e. electricity, water, sanitation and waste collection/removal].
Comparisons are made with SSA Census 2001 and Community Survey 2007 to assess impact
and measure improvements or regression, if any. The year 2007 is significant, because the
GWM&E was introduced in that year.
Table 6.8.1. Access to electricity comparisons with Census 2001 and Community Survey 2007
ELECTRICITY
2001
2007
Current
Empirical
study Impact
findings in 2014
Evaluation
Candle & Parrafin
70%
68%
33%
+35%
Prepaid/From City
30%
30%
49%
+19%
Other
1%
1%
18% [Illegally connected; -17%
Gas; Generator and None]
Access to Electricity %

30%
30%
49% [Below MDGs by 1%]
+19%
Out of 369 respondents
Table 6.8.2. Access to water provision comparisons with Census 2001 and Community Survey
2007
WATER
2001
Piped water in dwelling 38%
2007
Current
Empirical
study Impact
findings in 2014
Evaluation
37%
0%
-37%
57%
51%
-6%
49% [No access to water]
-44%
51% [Above MDGs by 1%]
-43%
or yard
Piped
water
on 52%
community stand [Jojo
Tank and Street tap]
Other
10%
5%
Access to water %
90%
94%

Out of 365 respondents
321
Table 6.8.3. Access to sanitation provision comparisons with Census 2001 and Community
Survey 2007
SANITATION
2001
2007
Current
Empirical
study Impact
findings in 2014
Evaluation
Pit latrine
46%
54%
54%
0%
Flush
27%
26%
34% [Have access]
+8%
Bucket latrine
9%
4%
10%
-6%
Others [i.e. None]
17%
17%
2%
+15
Access to sanitation %
27%
26%
34% [Below MDGs by 16%]
+8%

Out of 371 respondents
Table 6.8.4.
Access to waste collection/removal comparisons with Census 2001 and
Community Survey 2007
WASTE
2001
2007
Current
Empirical
study Impact
findings in 2014
Evaluation
49%
54%
+5%
23%
27%
-4%
Communal refuse / skip 7%
10%
12%
-2%
No rubbish disposal
16%
7%
+9%
59%
66% [Above MDGs by 16%]
+7%
Removed
by 57%
municipality
once
a
week
Own
refuse 23%
dump/street
corner/
No rubbish disposal
Access
to
9%
waste 64%
collection/removal %

Out of 377 respondents
322
Summary results on Impact Evaluation [IE] findings using MDGs as a
predetermined target [50%] – comparison with SSA Census 2001 and
Community Survey 2007:
Electricity
49% [Below MDGs by 1%]
Sanitation
34% [Below MDGs by 16%]
Water
51% [Above MDGs by 1%]
Waste collection/removal
66% [Above MDGs by 16%]
6.9.
Impact Evaluation based on the MDGs country report of South Africa in
2013
After creating a profile in 6.7 above, it is critical to conduct a measurement of impact [i.e.
Impact Evaluation] of the reform programme [GWM&E] based on the United Nations
Millennium Development Goals in the context of the South African government. The MDGs are
expected to be achieved by 2015 – 50%. For the purpose of this study, the outcomes and
results of the empirical study in 6.7 above will be compared with the statistics produced by
South Africa’s MDGs country report of 2013. The IE assesses the changes that can be attributed
to a particular intervention.
The IE will determine whether the performance monitoring and evaluation [PME] system as
introduced by the South African government, through the Government-wide Monitoring and
Evaluation [GWM&E] policy, under the Department of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation
[DPME] in metropolitan municipalities in Gauteng Province, had an effect on the efficiency and
effectiveness of the delivery of minimum basic services in urban informal settlements [water,
electricity, sanitation and waste collection/removal], since its introduction in 2007.
City managers [i.e. Ekurhuleni, Johannesburg and Tshwane] in their response to the
questionnaire that was administered indicated that they have an enterprise-wide monitoring
323
and evaluation system with staff in the respective offices. Through this office, the municipalities
concerned conduct performance monitoring and evaluation on a quarterly basis. Results of
their responses are contained in Graphs 6.4.13 – 6.4.15. The objective is to measure whether
the reform programme of government [in a municipality] is producing intended results and
assist to attain the targeted results [i.e. MDGs – 50% by 2015].
Table 6.9.1. Similarities between South African development objectives and the MDGs
[Adapted from SSA, Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) - Country report 2013: South
Africa – page 18]
Government
programme Development objective
since 1994
Integrated,
MDG comparable goal or
target
Sustainable
Rural Implement access to free Goal 7: Halve the proportion
basic
services
(water, of people without sustainable
Development Programme - ISRDP
sanitation, and electricity)
access to safe drinking water
and basic sanitation.
and
Urban Renewal Programme - URP
The South African government argues that it has demonstrated coherence between its agenda
for development and the Millennium Development Goals [MDGs]. According to the 2013
country report on MDG, the policy and programme tools that are used to address the
development challenge are processes of managing and leading what is termed the continuity of
change. The national agenda implemented through RDP and GEAR in the first fifteen years of
democracy and through NDP and NGP, constitute this continuity of change. The argument
presented by the South African government is that MDGs do not constitute a separate
development agenda from the national effort; they are an integral part of that agenda (SA-SSA,
2013: 17). Table 6.9.2 below provides the comparison:
324
Table 6.9.2. Proportion of households below Food Poverty (R321 per month in 2011 prices)
with access to free basic services (%) [Adapted from SSA, Millennium Development Goals
(MDGs) - Country report 2013: South Africa – page 26]
Basic Service
MDGs status – National Urban
Informal Total
Proportion of households Settlements
below food poverty [R305 three
per month in 2009 prices]
in
Impact
the percentage as
Metropolitan compared
municipalities
in MDGs
Gauteng
of 50%
to
target
Electricity
65% [More than half]
49% [Below target]
< - 1%
Sanitation
23.3% [Below target]
34% [Below target]
< -16%
Water
56% [More than half]
51% [Below target]
< - 5%
Waste
28.3% [Below target]
66% [Above target]
> +16.7%
collection/removal
The report by Statistics South Africa on MDGs indicates that there are no set targets on
proportion of households below Food Poverty [R321 per month in 2011 prices] with access to
free basic services (%) and in particular water; electricity; sanitation and waste
collection/removal. However, it has been indicated in Table 6.8.1 above that the MDG
comparable goal or target is Goal 7. The goal is clear that the intention is to halve the
proportion of people without sustainable access to safe portable water and basic sanitation. As
a result the target for 2015 is 50%. For the purposes of the current study, a 50% target will be
adopted and used including for electricity and waste collection/removal as they form part of
minimum basic services in the South African context.
This argument is supported by an earlier presentation in chapter 1, that Part B of Schedule 5
[exclusive provincial competence] of the 1996 Constitution, identifies services that fall within
the ambit of the sphere of local government and its constituent municipalities. The part of the
325
Constitution as it has relevance and for purposes of the study – the minimum basic services
means: water, sanitation, electricity, and waste collection/removal. Considering the argument
as presented in the preceding paragraph together with the findings as outlined in Table 6.8.2 –
Metropolitan municipalities are performing below MDGs target of 50%. Summary results in
order of priority [lowest/far from target to highest/closest to target] indicate the following:
Electricity
-
< - 1%
Sanitation
-
< -16%
Water
-
< -5%
Waste collection/removal
-
> +16.7%
Table 6.9.3. Percentage of indigent households receiving free basic services [Adapted from
SSA, Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) - Country report 2013: South Africa – page 26]
Basic service
2004
2007
2011
2014 [% in Difference
the study]
[2014-2013]
Electricity
29.3%
50.4%
59.5%
49%
-10.5%
Sanitation
38.5%
52.1%
57.9%
34%
-23.9%
Water
61.8%
72.3%
71.6%
51%
-20.6%
Waste
38.7%
56.6%
54.1%
66%
+11.9%
collection/removal
Electricity
-
< 10.5%
Sanitation
-
< 23.9%
Water
-
< 20.6%
Waste collection/removal
-
> +11.9%
326
When the findings of the empirical study are compared with the percentage of indigent
households receiving free basic services [Table 6.9.3.] the outcome is worse than when they are
compared with MDGs as outlined in Table 6.9.2 which measures proportion of households
below Food Poverty [R321 per month in 2011 prices] with access to free basic services. The
results of the comparative analysis points to under-performance by metropolitan
municipalities, in providing minimum basic services in identified UIS.
When considering the fact that all selected UIS in the empirical study are above 20 years or
older – the findings show a negative trend. Thus, the findings indicate that the eradication of
the informal settlements plan [‘The 2004 ‘Informal Settlements Upgrading Programme Business
Plan’] that was implemented by the Department of Human Settlements [DHS] and which was
expected to eradicate informal settlements [i.e. urban and rural] through a phased approach by
the 2007/8 financial - has had minimum impact or performed below expected results in
Gauteng’s UIS in particular.
The outcomes substantiate the assertion that the Urban Renewal Programme [URP] of the
government has not achieved similar results that are shown nationally by SSA in the 2013
MDGs country report – when compared with empirical study results in UIS that are located in
Gauteng’s metropolitan municipalities. This finding is substantiated when empirical study
results are compared with the national average in both indigent households receiving free basic
services and proportion of households below Food Poverty.
It can be argued that although the national average figures are showing an upward progression
in most areas [i.e. especially in indigent households receiving free basic services] and surpassed
the MDGs [50% target] in some instances, the overall outcomes in UIS that are not formalised
and are 20 years or older, indicate a target output percentage combined of exactly 50%
[Electricity 49% + Water 51% + Sanitation 34% + Waste collection/removal 66% = 200%/4 =
50%].However, the results remain below 50% when services are considered individually –
especially electricity and sanitation remain below 50% in all comparisons.
The enterprise-wide performance monitoring and evaluation system that the city managers
conduct quarterly should have picked up an early warning: that the provision of basic services
327
in UIS [i.e. 20 years and older] is not on par with national averages and are not improving to
reach MDGs set target of 50%, sooner than 2015 – as it has been the case with the national
findings provided by Statistics South Africa [SSA] 2013 report on MDGs. The SSA 2013 country
report indicates that MDGs set target of 50% by 2015 was long achieved in 2007 when
considering indigent households receiving free basic services – a category that most of the
unemployed in UIS [i.e. 73% according to the empirical study findings].
328
6.10. Conclusion
The quantitative study assists in the process of bridging the gap between theory and practice,
which are critical for success in research. The empirical research is a rigorous practical
interdisciplinary study of governance and public management with special focus on
performance monitoring and evaluation in municipalities – using Impact Evaluation [IE].
Empirical data from the survey questionnaires were compared to the United Nations eight
Millennium Development Goals [MDGs] and other existing research data from various sources –
but mainly empirical data from Housing Development Agency [HDA] in the Department of
Human Settlements [DHS] and Statistics South Africa’s [SSA] various survey research reports
[i.e. Census 2001 and 2011, Community Survey 2007, General Household surveys].
Sample surveys were preferred in the method. Questionnaires were administered to three city
managers and 392 community members. In total, 395 questionnaires were distributed. A
cluster sampling technique was selected as the preferred method to determine the sample size.
Furthermore a two-stage cluster method was deployed, where a case of multistage sampling is
obtained by selecting cluster samples in the first stage and then selecting a sample of elements
from every sampled cluster. In the first stage, [n – 28] clusters were selected using the ordinary
cluster sampling method. In the second stage, simple random sampling was used when
selecting specific informal settlements.
There are 397 UIS in total in the three metropolitan municipalities considered in the study. An
important observation is that the City of Johannesburg represents the largest population of UIS
in metropolitan municipalities in Gauteng Province. It is followed by Ekurhuleni, then the City of
Tshwane. However, Ekurhuleni has less UIS that Johannesburg and Tshwane respectively when
considering UIS that are not formalised and are 20 years or older.
The total number of 397 was then reduced to 191, after selecting UIS that are not formalised
and are 20 years or older. These UIS were specifically selected because they have attributes of
what defines an informal settlement and more importantly that the 20 year period coincided
329
with the advent of democracy in South Africa 1994-2014 [limitation of the study]. This selection
was done so that the researcher can determine the extent of provision of services. This brought
the number from 191 to 72 – which is the sampling frame. After determining the sample frame,
it was then necessary to calculate the representativeness of the sample size based on a 95%
confidence level. It was argued that sample size is an important scientific requirement if the
findings of the empirical study are to be regarded as precise and accurate.
An estimate of the margin of error [or confidence interval] was then determined using a
formula - 1/√N, where N is the number of participants or sample size. The rule of thumb in this
instance states: ‘the more precise you need the estimate, the more people you need’. This was
followed by a representative calculation of the two-stage cluster sampling; which determines
the number of UIS and the participants. This determination allows the researcher to generalise
the findings to the wider population. The result was 28 UIS and 392 participants respectively,
with 14 participants chosen per settlement which resulted in 392 [28 x 14] respondents that
were randomly selected for the survey.
An equal-probability method was adopted, thus, each participant in the survey had an equal
chance of being selected. The reason for adopting an equal-probability method is because
systematic sample units are uniformly distributed over the population – which is the case in
point with regards to UIS. This means that any person can be selected.
Results of the two surveys were then processed and analysed in two sections. Firstly, the three
questionnaires from city managers and secondly the 392 questionnaires from community
members in the identified UIS from the three metropolitan municipalities were considered. A
conclusion can be reached that the empirical study used a statistically valid method that is
logical and scientific. The findings can therefore be generalised and regarded as precise and
accurate.
330
City Managers responses
The findings and outcomes are documented in the chapter on graphs [6.4.1.1.1 – 6.4.1.1.15]
and on various tables. However for the purposes of the observation and conclusion, only the
critical aspects of the findings will be highlighted. Results from the questionnaire sent to city
managers indicate that there are 397 informal settlements with the highest number in
Johannesburg [45%], Ekurhuleni [30%] and then Tshwane with the lowest number [25%].
Ekurhuleni’s UIS population mirror its own total population size in terms of representation in
the Province, which is 30% of the total Gauteng population – Johannesburg and Tshwane are
close at 42% to 45% and 28% to 25% respectively. Responses from the city managers are
contrary to the findings from community members when it comes to the number of shacks that
have been marked. The finding is that 67% of shacks were marked instead of 100% as indicated.
Budgets for formalisation of UIS differ in all identified metropolitan municipalities in Gauteng.
According to city managers’ responses, Johannesburg has the highest number of the protest
actions, followed by Ekurhuleni and with no reported protest action in Tshwane. However,
reports from other sources indicate that Tshwane follows Johannesburg in terms of protests
action recorded. The main issues raised during protest actions have to do with housing
provision; electricity; water; sanitation and corruption. This finding is consistent with data from
Municipal IQ and other sources as discussed in Chapter 5.
Statistics South Africa [SSA] Census 2011 report has indicated that the influx of people into UIS
is reaching equilibrium and the figures are show a stabilisation pattern – 376 014. However, the
total population of households in Gauteng according to city managers is 498 170 in the three
municipalities. The difference in estimation is 122 156 households – which is 25%. The
statistical gap is significant between what metropolitan municipalities are indicating versus the
findings from SSA Census 2011 – perhaps it is a result of growth between 2011 and 2014.
An important observation from the findings of city managers is that all the three cities have an
Enterprise-wide performance monitoring and evaluation division/office and they individually
331
conduct performance monitoring and evaluation quarterly [four times a year] based on targets
in their Service Delivery and Budget Implementation Plans [SDBIP].
Community members’ responses
The findings and outcomes are documented in the chapter on graphs [6.3.1. – 6.5.15.2] and on
various tables. However for the purposes of the summary, only the critical aspects of the
findings will be highlighted. The results from the community survey in UIS provided more
information than the one received from city managers.
Analysis of participant’s responses show an 89% overall participation percentage of all the 15
questions asked. This is significant for the purposes of generalising the findings. More
importantly, the order of priority in terms of participants’ responses on minimum basic services
showed a higher percentage on the four services in the study [waste collection/removal – 96%;
sanitation – 94.6%; electricity 94.1% and water – 93.1%]. There was an overall participation
percentage of 94.4%.
Responses from the questionnaire are summarised in the 15 traits that can be used to profile
residents living in an informal settlement that are not formalised and are [20 years or older in
the three metropolitan municipalities in Gauteng. A discussion on the Impact Evaluation based
on the SSA Census 2001; Community survey 2007 and 2013 South Africa report on MDGs was
engaged. The intention was to compare findings of the empirical study; the current status [i.e.
2013] based on a different epoch of Statistical findings by SSA - on the provision of minimum
basic services for indigent households receiving free basic service and households below Food
Poverty [R321 per month in 2011 prices]. It was mentioned in the chapter 6, that for the
purposes of the current study, a 50% target is adopted and used, including for electricity and
waste collection/removal as they form part of minimum basic services in the South African
context – even though they are not specifically mentioned in MDG 7.
The objective of the comparisons was to check whether government programmes like URP and
the 2004 ‘Informal Settlements Upgrading Programme Business Plan’ [ISUPBP] by the
Department of Human Settlements have produced results as expected or had an impact.
332
Discussions in the chapter demonstrated that the South African government has coherence
between its agenda for development and the Millennium Development Goals [MDGs]. The
governments’ agenda on the implementation of policy of RDP and GEAR in the first fifteen
years of democracy to implementation of the current NDP and NGP has over the period
integrated the process towards the achievement of MDGs. In essence, MDGs are an integral
part of the South African government development agenda.
The enterprise performance monitoring and evaluation that city managers conduct every
quarter was also checked if it had a positive impact or resulted in increased access of basic
services in informal settlements under discussion. The Government-wide Monitoring and
Evaluation [GWM&E] policy; under the Department of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation
[DPME] in metropolitan municipalities in Gauteng Province was assessed. In particular how the
policy assisted government in the delivery of minimum basic services in UIS [water, electricity,
sanitation and waste collection/removal].
The findings show that although the identified UIS in the study, have access to basic services,
the percentage as compared to indigent households receiving free basic service and households
below Food Poverty (R321 per month in 2011 prices) with access to free basic services is less –
low impact since ISUPBP and URP were implemented. The outcome is that less than 50% was
achieved in two services [electricity 49% and sanitation 34%] of the basic services and more
than 50% in the other two services [water 51% and waste collection/removal 66%].
It can be stated that the results of the comparative analysis points to under-performance by
metropolitan municipalities in adequately providing minimum basic services in identified UIS.
Meaning, the GWM&E in municipalities [i.e. Enterprise-wide monitoring and evaluation] as
managed by city managers had a 50% combined impact on the three basic services of
electricity; water and sanitation – a marked improvement was found with regards to waste
collection/removal. However, these outcomes are still inadequate when considering the
national average.
When considering the fact that all selected UIS in the empirical study were 20 years or older –
which covers the period of comparison [2004; 2007; 2009 and 2011] - the results were
333
supposed to have been different as it was the case with the national averages or percentages
with regard to people who are not living in UIS. The 2013 SSA country report indicated that
MDGs’ set target of 50% by 2015 has been achieved in 2007 by the South African government,
especially when considering indigent households receiving free basic services [electricity, water,
sanitation and waste collection/removal] in South Africa.
334
CHAPTER 7: SUMMARY, CONCLUSION, RECOMMENDATIONS and REFERENCES
7.1.
Chapter 1
Chapter 1 was about introducing the study. Local sphere of government in the South African
context was described as codified in the Constitution [section 151 (1) and 152 (1)] and clarity on
its mandate as outlined in the Local Government: Municipal Structures Act, 117 of 1998 was
explained. Part B of Schedule 5 [exclusive provincial competence] of the 1996 Constitution,
which identifies services that fall within the ambit of the sphere of local government and its
constituent municipalities, was identified as it has relevance to the current study. For purposes
of the study, minimum basic services means: water, sanitation, electricity, waste
collection/removal.
The chapter provided details with regard to definitions and operationalisation of key concepts;
motivation for the research; problem statement; research objectives and questions; sequence;
research methodology (unit of analysis, sampling, geographical locations, data collections
arrangements and limitations); administrative process and approvals.
The intention of the chapter was to give context and indicate that the study will specifically
focus on how performance monitoring and evaluation [i.e. IE – Impact evaluation], which is
inherent in the control function of municipalities, can assist in making sure that the local sphere
of government in South Africa provides effective and efficient delivery of minimum basic
services in UIS. The objective of the chapter was to formulate the topic outline for the thesis.
This included definitions and operationalisation of terms; motivation for the research; problem
statement; research objectives and questions; sequence; methodology and briefly explaining
the administrative processes and approvals that were necessary for the study to commence –
the objective of the chapter was reached.
335
7.2.
Chapter 2
Chapter 2 dealt with the public administration perspective of the study. The intention was to
indicate that the study combines the quantitative data of the positive tradition with the
qualitative data of the phenomenological tradition, but more importantly the objective of the
chapter was to locate the study of performance monitoring and evaluation [PME] in the
discipline of Public Administration.
Arguments in the chapter pointed towards one view, that municipal PME is a control function
used by administration and management. It is about conducting regular performance
monitoring and evaluation of programmes and projects in the municipal IDPs and SDBIPs by
ensuring that there is effective and efficient delivery of services as outlined in section 72 (1) of
the Local Government: Municipal Finance Management Act, 56 of 2003. The outcomes of a
properly implemented PME programme in a municipality by its management should yield
results that assist in other managerial aspects and functions of a municipality.
The chapter proved that PME outcomes greatly contribute and have a direct effect on other
public administration related aspects that are also important in the governing of a municipality
- in particular: Budgeting [i.e. Finance]; Planning; Policy implementation; Governance;
Compliance and Risk Management; Finance; Planning; Policy implementation; Governance;
Compliance and Risk Management. Another aspect of the chapter was the notion of
performance monitoring and evaluation [PME] as a reform programme. The key to a reform
programme in the public sector governance requires strong political will and authority. The
objective [a] of the chapter was achieved as stated.
336
7.3.
Chapter 3
In essence, chapter 3 addressed principles of PME and presented a view that a capable,
efficient, effective and delivery orientated state is essential to achieve sustainable socioeconomic development. To a considerable extent, the policy framework for the GovernmentWide Monitoring and Evaluation [GWM&E] was discussed and analysed. The chapter indicated
that PME is oriented towards providing its users with the ability to draw causal connections
between the choice of policy priorities, the resourcing of those policy objectives, the
programmes designed to implement them, the services actually delivered and their ultimate
impact on communities.
Legislative requirements for performance monitoring and evaluation [PME] were discussed
extensively, in particular Chapter 6 of the Local Government: Municipal Systems Act, 32 of 2000
in sections 38 - 45; The Public Audit Act, 25 of 2004 in section 20(2)(c) including 4(1) and 4(3) of
the Act and the MFMA, 56 of 2003 section 121 (4)(d). The chapter explained in detail, the
concept of performance monitoring and evaluation [PME] with specific reference to its historic
context from the 1960s and 70s in OECD [Organisation for Economic Co-operation and
Development] countries.
A key feature in the chapter was a discussion on Impact Evaluation [IE] in performance monitoring and
evaluation [PME] with specific reference to the International Initiative for Impact Evaluation [3ie]
methods and approaches to address the “evaluation gap”. Another important feature of the chapter
and finding was the fact that government agencies and institutions in South Africa have been
evaluated using IE by donors who are contributing to South Africa’s development needs. They
identified a correlation between programmes and the positive impact they have on improving
people’s lives for the better. In sum, the objective [b] of the chapter was achieved as stated.
337
7.4.
Chapter 4
Chapter 4 was to consider a selection of international concepts of performance monitoring and
evaluation [PME] as it relates to the public sector and note important lessons that can enhance
PME in South Africa. Countries that have introduced structured performance monitoring and
evaluation [PME] systems in their public sector management programmes and projects were
selected and discussed.
Comparatively, South Africa is developing a fully-fledged PME system in its government; which
is globally competitive [i.e. Chile, Colombia and Mexico] and even among other countries more
developed than South Africa [i.e. USA, UK and Australia]. Various countries have approached
performance monitoring and evaluation in many unique ways. A set of different examples per
selected country were considered.
The South African PME system has some characteristics that are similar to those of the selected
unique experiences from other countries. Because of its late introduction of PME systems,
South Africa can learn from various international experiences as they pertain to PME. Especially
from the developing countries like those in Latin America, which exhibit some of the similarities
with South Africa, considering inequalities, population densities in urban areas and the overall
economic outlook. The objective [c] of the chapter was achieved as stated.
338
7.5.
Chapter 5
Chapter 5 discussed local government during colonialism and apartheid in South Africa – the
origins and characteristics of urban areas [1800 -1994]. The intention was to trace the origins of
cities and informal settlements in particular. Legislative provisions for urban Blacks during
apartheid since 1923 till 1984 were also discussed.
The three phase transition of local government from 1993 – 2000 [and the period thereafter]
was extrapolated with reference to Constitution of the Republic of South Africa; the 1998 White
Paper on Local Government; Local Government: Municipal Demarcations Act [MDA], 27 of
1998; Local Government: Municipal Structures Act, 117 of 1998; Local Government: Municipal
Systems Act, 32 of 2000 (Notice 2649 of 2003); Local Government: Municipal Finance
Management Act, 56 of 2003; Local Government: Municipal Property Rates Act, 6 of 2004 and
the National Policy Framework for Public Participation, 2007.
Discussions on the importance of community participation in local government were also
highlighted in the chapter. A summary of the Constitution, Acts, regulations and policies
relevant to public participation in South Africa were provided. The chapter delved into the core
of the research, which was a discussion on UIS in metropolitan municipalities. The state of local
government in South Africa was discussed with focus on the lack of capacity and skills shortage
in municipalities, municipal demarcation debate, the issue of protest action and violent protest
came to focus. The two objectives [d and e] of the chapter were achieved as stated.
339
7.6.
Chapter 6
Chapter 6 was about the quantitative empirical research study. The quantitative study assisted
with the process of bridging the gap between theory and practice, which are critical for the
success of this research.
The three cities indicated that they have an Enterprise-wide performance monitoring and
evaluation division/office. They also conduct performance monitoring and evaluation quarterly
[four times a year] as recorded in their Service Delivery and Budget Implementation Plans
[SDBIP].
An outcome of Chapter 6, was the 15 traits that can be used to profile residents living in UIS [20
years or older] of the three metropolitan municipalities in Gauteng. The other outcome was
that the three metropolitan municipalities did not yet achieve the 50% target for provision of
electricity and sanitation in UIS – water and waste collection/removal are both above target.
The chapter achieved the objective [f and g] as stated.
340
7.7.
Conclusion
A research question was asked, why is governance, performance monitoring and evaluation
[PME], and in particular Impact Evaluation [IE] in metropolitan municipalities significant? The
answer to the question above, is that the concept of governance, which refers to practices that
enable government activity, where such activity is broadly defined as the production and
delivery of publicly supported goods and services [i.e. provision of electricity, water, sanitation
and waste collection/removal] have been proven to be critical and significant in ensuring that
government delivers on its constitutional mandate. Performance monitoring and evaluation
[PME] is significant in assessing, measuring and making a determination whether programmes
and projects that are commissioned by metropolitan municipalities [i.e. even those from
National and Provincial government] assist in producing outcomes, results and outputs that are
expected by the communities they serve.
The problem statement stated that there is a need for performance monitoring and evaluation
[in particular Impact evaluation – IE] of municipal programmes and projects to assess impact –
in areas where people live in conditions of squalor, abject poverty and underdevelopment, in
UIS – to check if South Africa is advancing or regressing in its pursuit to achieve the United
Nations [UN] Millennium Development Goals [MDGs] – in particular Goal 7. The study designed
a scientific method which is valid to assess impact in UIS. An assessment was also made and a
determination reached that South Africa is advancing in its mission to achieve MGDs.
It has been proven in the study that when results of an evaluation are compared to set targets
[MDGs], the impact can be assessed and measured. In response to the problem statement, it
can be stated that performance monitoring and evaluation [PME] and in particular Impact
Evaluation [IE] as introduced by the South African government, through the “Government-wide
Monitoring and Evaluation system” [GWM&E]; under the Department of Performance
Monitoring and Evaluation [PME] in metropolitan municipalities in Gauteng Province; can assist
341
in assessing and measuring impact for effective and efficient delivery of minimum basic services
in UIS.
The MDG targets as outlined [i.e. theory] by the South African government were measured and
analysed [i.e. technical aspects of the adopted methodology] and the empirical evidence
emanating from the results [i.e. measuring impact of municipal projects and programmes on
the delivery of minimum basic services] indicate a connection between quantitative and
qualitative research as outlined in Chapter 6. The combination of both theory and practise is a
key feature of this study and it is a critical contribution to knowledge production in the field of
public administration and management.
7.8.
Recommendations
7.8.1.1.
Impact Evaluation should be considered as one of the preferred method for
performance monitoring and evaluation [PME] in metropolitan municipalities.
7.8.1.2.
Metropolitan municipalities should consider a programme of regularly surveying
community members in UIS, to assess the impact of its programmes and in the
process measure and codify up-to-date statistics on the delivery of basic
services.
7.8.1.3.
Access to electricity, water and sanitation should be aggressively increased to
meet South Africa’s development targets and the United Nations Millennium
Development Goals [MDGs] – especially sanitation in UIS.
342
7.9.
Areas of consideration for future research
7.9.1.1.
The role of Ward and PR councillors should be revised in such a way that they
complement each other in the management and administration of ward
functions and responsibilities.
7.9.1.2.
Communication platforms between the metropolitan municipalities and UIS
residents, especially critical information on municipal formalisation plans of
informal settlements.
7.9.1.3.
Urban informal settlements formalisation programme inclusion in the municipal
IDPs and SDBIPs. Responsibilities of the ward councillor and the city manager.
7.9.1.4.
A coordinated approach guided by Intergovernmental Relations [IGR] principles
for successful and rapid implementation of programmes like ISUPBP and URP at
national, provincial and local spheres of government.
7.9.1.5.
Indigent registration in metropolitan municipalities to ensure that the necessary
basic services are provided to poor households.
343
7.10. Researcher’s notes
In all the 28 identified UIS and with each randomly selected participant/respondent - a face to
face or one-on-one interview method was used. The type of method was selected because a
specific target population [i.e. UIS] was sampled. The other reason was for the researcher and
fieldworkers to explore the responses of the people and gather more and deeper information.
The researcher assumed [from personal experience] that personal interview surveys will assist
in probing answers of the respondents and at the same time, observe the behaviour of the
respondents, either individually or as a group.
There are, however advantages and disadvantages in a face to face or one-on-one interview
method. The advantages as observed by the researcher include a high response rate [i.e. 87%
for the current study]; tolerable longer interviews [i.e. some participants/respondents in urban
informal settlements did not understand English and it was necessary to use other languages,
as a result respondents would be more confident expressing their long answers orally than in
writing]
and
better
participants/respondents
observation
behaviour
[i.e.
attitude
and
behaviour
of
towards the municipality or public representative was also
observed]. In the end, it was also important for the researcher to get first-hand experience and
better understand the condition in UIS.
There are two most important disadvantages in a face to face or one-on-one interview – cost
and time. The researcher travelled to different UIS together with field workers and the exercise
was time consuming and costly. During the course of conducting field work a door-to-door
interview survey approach was adopted. It meant that the researcher and fieldworkers had to
go directly to each house/shack of the participant/respondent and conduct the interview onthe-spot. Most respondents were willing to cooperate and an important observation made was
that their response was in the hope that something positive will come out of the research
study.
344
7.11. References
Articles, dissertations [published and unpublished], conference papers,
newspapers, official government documents, speeches, reports and thesis
[published and unpublished]
Ahmed, S. 2009. Methods in Sample Surveys. The Johns Hopkins University and Saifuddin
Ahmed.
Albrow, M. 2001. Society as Social Diversity: The Challenge for Governance in the Global Age. In
Governance in the 21st Century, edited by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and
Development, 149–82. Paris: OECD.
Allan, K. & Heese, K. 2011. Understanding why service delivery protests take place and who is
to blame. Municipal IQ report.
Bhatta, G. 2003. Post-NPM Themes In Public Sector Governance. Working Paper No.17.
Burger, J. 2009. The Reasons behind Service Delivery Protests in South Africa. Justice and Politics
Programme. Institute for Security Studies (ISS), Article.
Briceño, B & Gaarder, M.M. 2009. Institutionalizing Evaluation: Review of International
Experience. International Initiative for Impact Evaluation (3ie).
British Broadcasting Corporation. 2000. UN summit agenda; the largest gathering of world
leaders in history meets in New York to discuss the role of the United Nations in the 21st
century. BBC News, 2000-12-07.
345
Chelimsky, E. 1988. Evaluation and Public Policy: The Use of Evaluation. Washington, D.C.:
World Bank, Economic Development Institute.
CONEVAL (2008). Informe de evaluación de la Política de Desarrollo Social en México.
Commission on Global Governance. 1995. Our Global Neighborhood: The Basic Vision. Geneva,
Switzerland: Commission on Global Governance.
Davies, P. 2008. Making policy evidence-based: The UK experience. World Bank Middle East and
North Africa Region Regional Impact Evaluation Workshop Cairo.
Dickinson, K. P., West, R.W., Kogan, D.J., Drury, D.A., Franks, M.S, Schlichtmann, L. & Vencil, M.
1988. Evaluation of the Effects of JTPA Performance Standards on Clients, Services, and Costs.
Washington, DC: National Commission for Employment Policy.
Dipres. 2008. System of Management Control and Results-Based Budgeting. The Chilean
Experience.
European Union [EU]. 1997. Evaluating EU Expenditure Programmes: A Guide. Brussels,
European Union.
Fox, N. Hunn, N. & Mathers, N. 2009. Sampling and Sample Size Calculation. The NIHR RDS for
the East Midlands / Yorkshire & the Humber.
Gauteng City-Region Observatory. 2011. About the GCR.
Gauteng Provincial Government [GPG]. 2011. Gauteng 2055: A discussion document on the
long-term development plan for the Gauteng City-Region.
Görgens, T. & Van Donk, M. 2011. From basic needs towards socio-spatial transformation:
coming to grips with the ‘Right to the City’ for the urban poor in South Africa. Isandla Institute.
346
Heilmann, S. 2008. ‘Experimentation under Hierarchy: Policy Experiments in the Reorganisation
of China’s State Sector, 1978-2008’. Center for International Development at Harvard
University, Working paper No. 172.
Housing Development Agency [HDA]. 2012. South Africa: Informal settlements status. research
series published by the Housing Development Agency.
Housing Development Agency [HDA]. 2013. South Africa: Informal settlements status. research
series published by the Housing Development Agency
Independent Evaluation Group (IEG). 2007. A diagnosis of Colombia’s National M&E System,
SINERGIA. ECD Working Paper series, no. 17.
Isandla Institute. 2011. Local politics and factionalism: Local government as a site of
contestation. Discussion Paper and Roundtable Report prepared by Isandla Institute December
2011.
Iverson, A. 2003. Attribution and Aid Evaluation in International Development: A Literature
Review, for the International Development Research Centre Evaluation Unit.
Jones, H. 2011. A guide to monitoring and evaluating policy influence. The Overseas
Development Institute.
Karamoko, J & Jain, H. 2011. Community Protests in South Africa: Trends, Analysis and
Explanations.
Karim, M. R. A. 1992.The Changing Role of Government: Administrative Structures and Reforms
in Commonwealth Secretariat. Proceedings of a Commonwealth Roundtable in Sydney,
Australia. London.
347
King I. 1994. Report on Corporate Governance for South Africa. Institute of Directors in Southern
Africa.
King II. 2002. Report on Corporate Governance for South Africa. Institute of Directors in
Southern Africa.
King III. 2009. Report on Corporate Governance for South Africa. Institute of Directors in
Southern Africa.
Kotze, H.J. 1998. Local government in South Africa: Public and opinion leader perceptions of
selected issues. Johannesburg, South Africa. Kanrad – Adenauer Stiftug.
Kusek, J.Z. & Rist, R.C. 2004. Ten steps to a results-based monitoring and evaluation system. The
World Bank, Washington, D.C.
Lahey, R. 2010. The Canadian M&E System: Lessons learned from 30 Years of Development. ECD
Working Paper Series - No. 23. IEG – World Bank.
Mackay, K. 2007. How to Build M&E Systems to Support Better Government. Washington, DC.
World Bank.
Mackay, K. 1998. The Development of Australia’s Evaluation System. ECD WORKING PAPER
SERIES NO. 13.
Mackay, K. 2006. Institutionalisation of Monitoring and Evaluation Systems to Improve Public
Sector Management. ECD WORKING PAPER SERIES - NO. 15.
Mathekga, R. & Buccus, I. 2006. The challenge of local government structure in South Africa:
Securing community participation. Centre for Public Participation. Critical dialogue - Public
Participation in Review: IDASA.
348
Mathoho, M. 2013. Examining the politics of municipal demarcation. Afesis-corplan.
Mbeki, T.M. 2004. State of the Nation address.
Meyer, R.H. & Dominitz, J. 1991. Educational Performance Indicators in Theory and Practice: An
Analysis of School Report Cards. Paper presented at the Association for Public Policy Analysis and
Management annual conference, Washington, DC, October.
Mgwebi, G. 2009. It is your right to participate in how you are governed. Afesis-corplan [Afesiscorplan is a core member of the Good Governance Learning Network (GGLN), an initiative to
bring together civil society organisations involved in the field of local governance in South
Africa. The aim is for the organisations to network and share information towards the goal of
strengthening participatory democratic local governance].
Misselhorn, M. 2008. Position paper on informal settlements upgrading (Draft). PART OF A
STRATEGY FOR THE SECOND ECONOMY FOR THE OFFICE OF THE SOUTH AFRICAN PRESIDENCY.
Compiled for Urban LandMark.
Mokonyane, N. 2011. Statement by Gauteng Premier, during the presentation of Local
Government Performance Review 2006 – 2011.
Municipal IQ. 2013. Communities can make a difference with protest action. 10 April 2013,
Business Day – Newspaper article.
Municipal IQ. 2013. Municipal IQ’s updated Municipal Productivity and Hotspots Monitor
results.
Municipal IQ. 2013. Protests in Eastern Cape echo those in Gauteng. 12 December 2013,
Business Day – Newspaper article.
Naidoo, G. 2004. Leadership and governance for sustainable public service. The case for
selected South African public service organisations. Thesis. University of Pretoria.
349
Niles, R. 2006. Statistics Every Writer Should Know. RobertNiles.com.
Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development [OECD]. 1986. Methods and
Procedures in Aid Evaluation. Paris.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development [OECD]. 2002. Glossary of Key Terms
in Evaluation and Results-Based Management. Paris: OECD/ DAC.
Offe, C. 2005. Social Integration through Democratic Governance: Current Answers and Further
Questions. Paper presented at the Sixth Global Forum on Reinventing Government, May 24–27,
Seoul, South Korea.
Patel, K. 2011. Rebellions of the poor, by the poor, for the poor. Daily Maverick - Newspaper
article.
Pollitt, C. 2011. The impacts of the new public management in Europe: A META-ANALYSIS.
COCOPS WORK PACKAGE 1 – DELIVERABLE 1.1.
Quah, Jon. ST. 1992. The Changing Role of Government: Administrative Structures and Reforms.
Administrative Reform and National Development in Commonwealth Secretariat. Proceedings
of a Commonwealth Roundtable in Sydney, Australia. London.
Ravallion, M. 2009. Evaluation in the Practice of Development. Lecture at 3ie’s Annual
Conference [in collaboration with NONIE and AFREA] “Perspectives on Impact Evaluation”,
Cairo, Egypt.
Rabie, B. 2011. Improving the systematic evaluation of local economic development results in
South African local government. Dissertation - unpublished.
350
Robinson, J. 1992. The Politics of Urban Form: Differential Citizenship and Township Formation
in Port Elizabeth 1925-1945. Unpublished paper.
SAICE & CSIR. 2011. SAICE Infrastructure Report Card for South Africa 2011. The South African
Institution of Civil Engineering.
Saule Júnior, N. 2008. The Right to the City: A Strategic Response to Social Exclusion and Spatial
Segregation. In R. Cymbalista (Ed.), The Challenges of Democratic Management in Brazil: The
Right to the City (p. 39-83). São Paulo: Instituto Pólis, Ford Foundation.
Sauro, J. 2010. Measuring Usability. Quantitative Usability, Statistics & Six Sigma.
Schacter, M. 2000. Sub-Saharan Africa: Lessons from Experience in Supporting Sound
Governance. ECD WORKING PAPER SERIES NUMBER 7.
Segone, M. 2008. Bridging the gap. The role of monitoring and evaluation in evidence-based
policy making. UNICEF Evaluation Working Papers Issue # 12. Geneva: UNICEF Geneva.
Evidence-based policy making and the role of monitoring and evaluation within the new aid
environment.
South Africa, Audito General South Africa [AGSA]. 2012. General report on the audit outcomes
of local government, 2011-12.
South African Cities Network [SACN]. 2011. State of the Cities Report. Johannesburg: SACN.
South Africa, 2009. Department of Cooperative governance and Traditional Affairs [COGTA].
State of local government. Pretoria.
351
South Africa, Department of Human Settlements. 2004. ‘Breaking new ground 2004’ – A
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF INTEGRATED SUSTAINABLE HUMAN
SETTLEMENTS.
South Africa: Department of Monitoring and Evaluation. 2011. National Evaluation Policy
Framework [NEPF]: Draft 3. Pretoria.
South Africa: Department of Water Affairs. 2012. Sanitation Services – Quality of Sanitation in
South Africa. Report on the Status of sanitation services in South Africa.
South Africa, GCIS. 2010. South Africa Yearbook, GCIS publishers. Pretoria.
South Africa, National Treasury. 2004. Public Private Partnership MANUAL. National Treasury
PPP Practice Notes issued in terms of the Public Finance Management Act. Pretoria.
South Africa, National Treasury. 2007. Framework for Managing Programme Performance
Information. Pretoria.
South Africa, National Treasury. 2011. Local government budgets and expenditure review.
Pretoria.
South Africa, Presidency. 2009. GREEN PAPER: NATIONAL STRATEGIC PLANNING. Pretoria.
South Africa, Presidency. 2009. Improving Government Performance: Our Approach. Pretoria.
South Africa, Public Service Commission [PSC]. 2008. Basic concepts in Monitoring and
Evaluation. Pretoria.
South Africa, Statistics South Africa [SSA]. 2007. Community Survey 2007. Pretoria.
352
South Africa, Statistics South Africa [SSA]. 2011. Census 2011 - Statistical release (Revised)
P0301.4. Pretoria.
South Africa, Statistics South Africa [SSA]. 2012. General Household Survey [GHS]. Pretoria.
South Africa, Statistics South Africa [SSA]. 2012. Statics South Africa’s report on ‘Gender
Statistics’. Pretoria.
South Africa, Statistics South Africa [SSA]. 2013. Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) Country report 2013: South Africa. Pretoria.
South Africa, Statistics South Africa [SSA]. 2014. Statistics South Africa’s Census 2011 report on
'Profile of persons with disabilities in South Africa'. Pretoria.
South Africa, South African Human Rights Commission [SAHRC]. 2014. ‘The Right to Access
Sufficient Water and Decent Sanitation in South Africa: 2014’. Pretoria.
United Nations [UN], 2000. [a] General Assembly Session 55, Meeting 3, 6 September 2000. New
York.
United Nations [UN], 2000. [b] General Assembly Session 55, Meeting 8, 8 September 2000.
New York.
United Nations [UN], 2000. [c] United Nations Millennium Declaration. The General Assembly
Session 55, Meeting 8, 8 September 2000. New York.
United Nations [UN]. 2002. ECOSOC Decision 2002/308. Report of the Secretary-General on the
role of public administration in the implementation of the United Nations Millennium
Declaration. New York
United Nations [UN], 2005. Resolution adopted by the General Assembly [without reference to a
Main Committee (A/60/L.1)] 60/1. 2005 World Summit Outcome. United Nations. New York.
353
United Nations Development Programme [UNDP]. 1995. Public Sector Management:
Governance and Sustainable Human Development. New York: UNDP.
Whelan, J. (2008) Advocacy evaluation: review and opportunities. Brisbane, AU: The Change
Agency.
White, H.2006. Impact Evaluation: The Experience of the Independent Evaluation Group of the
World Ban. World Bank, Washington, D.C., p. 3
Wholey, J. 1979. Evaluation: Promise and Performance. Washington, D.C. Urban Institute.
World Bank. 1987. The Twelfth Annual Review of Project Performance Results. Washington,
D.C., Operations Evaluation Department.
Books
Babbie, E. & Mouton, J. 2007. The Practice of Social Research. Oxford, Oxford University Press.
Barnow, Burt S., 1992. The Effects of Performance Standards on State and Local Programmes:
Lessons for the JOBS Programme. In Charles F. Manski and Irwin Garfinkel, eds., Evaluation of
Welfare Training Programmes. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1992, 277-309.
Boaz, A. & Nutley, S. 2003. Evidence-based policy and practice, in T. Bovaird & E. Löffler (eds.).
Public Management and Governance. London: Routledge Taylor and Francis.
Boonzaier, E. 1996. The cape herders: a history of the Khoikhoi of Southern Africa. D. Philip,
Cape Town.
Bouckaert, G. 1994. The history of the productivity movement. Pp. 362-97. In M. Holzer & A.
Halachmi (eds). Competent Government: Theory and Practice: The best of public productivity
and management review. 1985-1993. Burke. Chatelaine Press.
354
Campbell, J. L., Hollingsworth, J.R. & Lindberg, L.N. 1991. Governance of the American economy.
Cambridge. Cambridge Univ. Press.
Chelimsky, E. 1987. Linking Program Evaluations to User Needs. In Dennis Palumbo, ed., The
Politics of Program Evaluation. Beverly Hills, Calif. Sage.
De Visser, J. 2005. Developmental local government. A case study of South Africa. Intersentia
Antwerpen – Oxford.
De Visser, J. & Powell, D. 2012. Service Delivery Protest Barometer 2007-2012. Cape Town.
Multi-level Government Initiative, Community Law Centre.
Dunsire, A. 1973. Administration. The word and the science. London. Martin Robertson.
Gardner, H. 1997. Thinking About Thinking. The New York Review of Books XLVI/: 23-27.
Gildenhuys, J.S.H. & Knipe, A. 2000. The organisation of government. An introduction. Pretoria:
Van Schaik.
Hatry, H.P., Alexander, M & Fountain, J.R. 1989. Service Efforts and Accomplishments Reporting:
Elementary and Secondary Education, Norwalk, CT: Governmental Accounting Standards Board.
Hatry, H. P., Fountain, J.R. Jr., Sullivan, J.M. & Kremer, L. 1990. Service Efforts and
Accomplishments Reporting: An Overview. Norwalk, CT: Governmental Accounting Standards
Board.
Heinrich, C.J. and Lynn L.E. 2000. Governance and Performance: New Perspectives. Washington,
DC: Georgetown University Press.
355
Heller, P. 2008. Local Democracy and Development in Comparative Perspective. In M. Van Donk,
M. Swilling, S. Parnell, and E. Pieterse (eds.), Consolidating Developmental Local Government:
Lessons from the South African Experience, (pp. 153-175). Cape Town: UCT Press.
Hemmati, M. 2002. Multi-Stakeholder Processes for Governance and Sustainability: Beyond
Deadlock and Conflict. London: Earthscan.
Hollingsworth, J. R., Schmitter, P.C. & Streek, W. eds. 1994. Governing capitalist economies.
Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press.
Hyden, G. 1992. Governance and the study of politics. In Governance and politics in Africa,
edited by G. Hyden and M. Bratton, 1-26. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner.
Kloot, L. & Martin, J. 1998. Strategic Performance Managements Balanced Approach to
Performance Management Issues in Local Government. Melbourne: Victoria University of
Technology.
Kooiman, J., ed. 1993. Modern governance. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Kooiman, J. 2003. Governing as Governance. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Landau, M. 1972. Political science and public administration: Studies in the Methodology of
Political Inquiry, Macmillan, New York, 1972.
Lipsky, M. 1980. Street level bureaucracy: The dilemmas of individuals in public service. New
York: Russell Sage.
Lynn, L. E., Jr.; Heinrich, C.J. & Hill,C.J. 2000. The empirical study of governance: Theories,
models and methods, Washinton DC: Georgetown University Press, 2000-a.
356
Mc Lennan, A. 1997. Into the Future: Restructuring the public service in Managing Sustainable
Development in South Africa (eds. Patrick FitzGerald, Anne McLenna, Barry Munslow), Cape
Town: Oxford University Press.
Najem, T.P. & Hetherington, M. (ed.) 2003. Good Governance in the Middle East Oil Monarchies.
London and New York: RoutledgeCurzon.
Osborne, D & Gaebler, T. 1992. Reinventing Government. Boston, Mass.: Addison-Wesley
Publishing.
Osborne D & Plastrik P. 2000. The Reinventor’s Fieldbook: Tools for Transforming Your
Government. Jossey-Bass: San Francisco, CA, USA.
Peters, B. G. 1996. The future of governing: Four emerging models. Lawrence: Univeristy Press
of Kansas.
Pfeffermann; D. & Rao C.R. 2009. Handbook of Statistics Vol.29 A Sample Surveys: Theory,
Methods and Infernece. Elsevier B.V. ISBN 978-0-444-53124-7.
Pollitt, C. 1990. Managerialism in the public service. Oxford, UK: Basil Blackwell.
Pressman, J. L. & Wildavsky, A. 1973. Implementation. Berkeley: Univ. of California Press.
Rautenbach, I.M & Malherbe, E.F.J. 1994. Staatsreg. Johannesburg. Lex Patria
Raven'Hart, R. 1967. Before Van Riebeeck. Cape Town: Struik.
Rhodes, R.A.W. 1997. Understanding governance: Policy networks, governance, reflexivity and
accountability. Philadelphia, PA: Open Univ. Press.
Rogers, S. 1994. Performance Management in Local Government. Essex: Longman.
357
Rossi, P.H, Lipsey, M.W. & Freeman H.E. 2004. Evaluation, A Systematic Approach,
Seventh Edition. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
Rossi, P. H. & Freeman, H.E. 1993. Evaluation: A Systematic Approach. 5th ed. Beverly Hills,
Calif.: Sage.
Scott, D. 1992. The Destruction of Clairwood: A Case Study on the Transformation of
Commercial Living Space, in D. M. Smith (ed.), The Apartheid City and Beyond (Johannesburg,
1992).
Thornhill, C. 1994. Public Service Reform: Probability or Improbability. ISBN 0-86979- 977-0, 5
October 1994 University of Pretoria. Pretoria.
Thornhill, C. & Hanekom, S.X. 1995. The Public Sector Manager. Durban: Butterworths
Valadez J. & Bamberger M. 1994. Monitoring and evaluating social programs in developing
countries: A handbook for policymakers, managers and researchers. Washington, D.C. World
Bank.
Van der Waldt, G. 2004. Managing Performance in Public Sector: Concepts, Considerations and
Challenges. Cape Town: Juta.
Van der Waldt, G. Venter, A. Van der Walt, C. Phutiagae, K. Khalo, T. Van Niekerk, D. & Nealer,
E. 2007. Municipal Management. Serving the people. Juta and company.
Van Niekerk, L. 2012. South Africa Yearbook 2011/12. Additions by ShowMe. Further
information was taken from Wikipedia.
358
Walters, M. 1995. The Performance Management Handbook. London, Institute of Personnel
and Development.
Thornhill, C. 2012. JJN Cloete’s South African Public Administration and Management - 10th
revised edition.
Zar, J.H. (1984) Biostatistical Analysis. Prentice Hall International, New Jersey. pp 43–45
Zikmund, W.G. 2000. Exploring Marketing Research [Chapter 17: page 518], 7th edition, The
Dryden Press, 2000.
Journals
Baines, G. 1990. The Origins of Urban Segregation: Local Government and the Residence of
Africans in Port Elizabeth, c. 1835-1865, South African Historical Journal, 22, pp. 74-75. Ibid.
Barrier M. 2003. Mervyn King: Principles, Not Rules.The Internal Auditor, 60: 68–72.
Cameron, R. & Milne, C. 2009. Minnowbrook, Mount Grace and the State of the Discipline.
Journal of Public Administration, 44(2):380-95.
Carstens & Thornhill C. 2000. THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN ADMINISTRATIVE REFORM AND
NEW PUBLIC MANAGEMENT. Journal of Public Administration. Vol 35 no 3.
Christopher, A.J. 1983. From Flint to Soweto: Reflections on the Colonial Origins of the
Apartheid City, Area, Volume 15, Number 2. Page 145.
Cloete, J.J.N. 1985. Public administration or public management. SAIPA Journal of Public
Administration, 19(2).
359
Crous, M. 2004. SERVICE DELIVERY IN THE SOUTH AFRICAN PUBLIC SERVICE: IMPLEMENTATION
OF THE BATHO PELE PRINCIPLES BY STATISTICS SOUTH AFRICA, Journal of Public Administration,
Vol 39 no 4.1
Ekboir, J. 2003. ‘Why impact analysis should not be used for research evaluation and what the
alternatives are’, Agricultural systems 78: 166-184
Flyvbjerg, B. 2006. Five Misunderstandings About Case-Study Research. Qualitative Inquiry
Volume 12 - Number 2.
Fox, R., Nel, E. & Reintges, C. 1991. 'East London', in Lemon (ed.), Homes Apart, p. 58; E. L. Nel,
'Racial Segregation in East London, 1836-1948', South African Geographical Journal, 73, pp. 6061. See also K. Tankard, 'The Development of East London Through Four Decades of Municipal
Control 1873-1914', unpublished Ph.D thesis, Rhodes University, 1990, Ch. 10.
Hoag, C. 2012. Can Organisations Learn without Political Leadership? The Case of Public Sector
Reform among South African Home Affairs Officials. Politique africaine n° 128 – 2012.
Hood, C. 1991. A PUBLIC MANAGEMENT FOR ALL SEASONS?. Public Administration Vol. 69
Spring.
Huchzermeyer, M., 2006. Challenges facing people-driven development in the context of a
strong, delivery-oriented state: Joe Slovo Village, Port Elizabeth. Urban Forum, 17(1), 25-53.
Huchzermeyer, M. 2009. The struggle for in situ upgrading of informal settlements: Case studies
from Gauteng. Development Southern Africa 26 (1): 59-73.
Kakabadse, A. and Korac-Kakabadse, N. (2002) Corporate Governance in South Africa:
Evaluation of the King II Report, Journal of Change Management , 2, 305–317.
360
Kanyane, M.H. 2006. Municipal Skills challenges for accelerated service delivery in South Africa.
Journal of Public Administration, 41(3).
Klein, G., Moon, B., Hoffman, R.R. 2006. Making sense of Sensemaking 1: alternative
perspectives, Intelligent Systems 21(4): 70-73.
Koma, S.B. 2010. THE STATE OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT IN SOUTH AFRICA: ISSUES, TRENDS AND
OPTIONS. Journal of Public Administration. Vol 45 no 1.1
Kurtz, C. & Snowden, D. 2003. The New Dynamics of Strategy: sense making in a complex and
complicated world. IBM Systems Journal 42(3): 462-483.
Kuye, J.O. 2007. THE ROLE OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION IN LEADERSHIP AND GOVERNANCE: A
REVIEW OF CIVICS, CITIZENSHIP AND POLITICAL EDUCATION. Journal of Public Administration
Vol 42 no 7.
Kuye, J.O. & Mukamunana, R. 2005 REVISITING THE AFRICAN PEER REVIEW MECHANISM: THE
CASE FOR LEADERSHIP AND GOOD GOVERNANCE IN AFRICA. Journal of Public Administration,
Vol 40 no 4.1
Lynn, L.E. 1998. The New Public Management: How to Transform a Theme into a legacy. Public
Administration Review May/June 1998, Vol. 58, No. 3.
Mabin, A. 1986. 'Labour, Capital, Class Struggle and the Origins of Residential Segregation in
Kimberley', Journal of Historical Geography, 12 , p. 22; see also G. H. Pirie, 'Kimberley', in Lemon
(ed.), Homes Apart.
Maserumule, M.H. 2008. Framework for strengthening the capacity of municipalities in South
Africa: A developmental local government perspective. Journal of Public Administration,
43(3.2).
Millar, R & Millar, A. 1981. "Developing Client Outcome Monitoring Systems: A Guide for State
and local Social Service Agencies." Washington, DC: The Urban Institute, September.
361
Maylam, P. 1995. Explaining the Apartheid City: 20 Years of South African Urban Historiography.
Journal of Southern African Studies, Volume 21, Number 1, March.
McCurdy H. E. & Cleary R.E. 1984. Why can’t we resolve the research issue in public
administration? Public Administration Review (44) 49-55.
Mogale, T, 2005. Local governance and poverty reduction in South Africa. Progress in
Development Studies (Vol.5, 2 2005).
Naidoo, G. & Kuye, J.O. 2005, SERVICE DELIVERY IN THE SOUTH AFRICAN PUBLIC SERVICE: AN
OVERVIEW FROM 1994 TO 2003, Journal of Public Administration, Vol 40 no 4.1.
Parnell, S. 1991. 'Sanitation, Segregation and the Natives (Urban Areas) Act: African Exclusion
from Johannesburg's Malay Location, 1897-1925', Journal of Historical Geography, 17, 3, p. 273.
22 Davenport, Beginnings of Urban Segregation, p. 5. 23 A.
Peters, B.G., & Pierre, J. 1998. Governance without government: Rethinking public
administration. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 8: 223-42.
Pierre, J. 1999. Models of Urban Governance : The Institutional Dimension of Urban Politics.
Urban Affairs Review 1999 34: 372.
Rhodes, R.A.W. 1996. The new governance: Governing without government. Political Studies
44:652-67.
Rossi, P. & Wright, J. 1984. "Evaluation Research: An Assessment." Annual Review of Sociology
10:331−52.
Roux, N.L. 2005. Unrest at the local sphere of government in South Africa: Unrealistic
expectations or the inability to implement policies? Strategic Review for Southern Africa.
362
Roux, N.L & Nyamukachi P.M. 2005. A REFORM MODEL FOR THE IMPROVEMENT OF MUNICIPAL
SERVICE DELIVERY IN SOUTH AFRICA. Journal of Public Administration. Vol 40 no 4.1; December.
Schwella, E. 1985. Public Administration or Public Management – another perspective or why
not Public administration and Public Management? SAIPA Journal of Public Administration,
20(1).
Smith, A.B. 1983. The disruption of Khoi society in the seventeenth century. Africa Seminar 23
February 1983. University of Cape Town: Centre for African Studies: 1-16.
Stallings, R. 1986. Doctoral programmes in public administration, Public Administration Review,
46(3), 235-240.
Stewart, A.C. & Carpenter-Hubin, J. (2000) The Balanced Scorecard Beyond Reports and
Rankings, Planning for Higher Education, 29 (2), pp. 37-42.
Suk Kim, P; Halligan, J; Cho, N; Oh, CH & Eikenberry, AM. 2005.Toward Participatory and
Transparent Governance: Report on the Sixth Global Forum on Reinventing Government. Public
Administration Review. November/December, Vol. 65, No. 6.
Schwella, E. 1985. Public Administration or Public Management – another perspective or why
not Public administration and Public Management? SAIPA Journal of Public Administration,
20(1).
Swanson, M.W. 1976. The Durban System: Roots of Urban Apartheid in Colonial Natal, African
Studies, 35.
Swanson, M.W. 1977. The Sanitation Syndrome: Bubonic Plague and Urban Native Policy in the
Cape Colony, 1900-1909, Journal of African History, 18.
363
Swanson, M.W. 1983. The Asiatic Menace: Creating segregation in Durban, 1870-1900,
International Journal of African Historical Studies, 16.
Thornhill, C. 2006(a). EFFECTIVE MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT AND ADMINISTRATION AS
PRECONDITIONS FOR EFFICIENT SERVICE DELIVERY. Journal of Public Administration, Conference
proceedings 46.
Thornhill, C. 2006(b). THE DOMAIN OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION. Journal of Public
Administration, Vol 41 no 4.1
Thornhill, C. 2008. The transformed local government system: some lessons. Journal of Public
Administration, 43(3.2).
Ul Haque, N. & Aziz, J. 1999. The Quality of Governance: 'Second-Generation' Civil Service
Reform in Africa, Journal of African Economies, Oxford University Press, vol. 8(0), pages 68-106,
December.
Van Heerden, M. 2009. The constitutional obligation on government to perform public
administration efficiently and effectively. Politeia, 28 (1):46-65.
Van Rooyen, E.J. 2007. Reflections on community participation in the context of good
governance. Africa Journal of Public Affairs 1(1): 41.
Vaughn, M & Verstegen Ryan, L. 2006. Corporate Governance in South Africa: a bellwether for
the continent?. CORPORATE GOVERNANCE IN SOUTH AFRICA. Volume 14 Number 5.
Wholey, J.S. Hatry, H.P. 1992. The Case for Performance Monitoring. Public Administration
Review. Volume 52 number 6, p 604-10 Nov-Dec.
364
Local government: legislation
Local Government Transition Act [LGTA], 209 of 1993.
Local Government: Organised Local Government Act, 52 of 1997.
Local Government: Municipal Structures Act, 117 of 1998.
Local Government: Municipal Demarcation [MD] Act, 27 of 1998.
Local Government: Municipal Systems Act, 32 of 2000.
Local Government: Municipal Finance Management Act [MFMA], 56 of 2003.
Local Government: Municipal Property Rates Act, 6 of 2004.
National government: legislation
National Government: Public Service Act, 103 of 1994.
National Government: Public Finance Management Act, 1 of 1999.
National Government: Promotion of Access to Information Act [PAIA], 2 of 2000.
National Government: Promotion of Administrative Justice Act [PAJA], 3 of 2000.
National Government: Financial Advisory and Intermediary Services Act, 37 of 2002.
National Government: Public Audit Act, 25 of 2004.
National Government: Companies Act, 71 of 2008.
South Africa, Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996.
White papers
South Africa, White Paper on Local Government [WPLG]. 1998. Pretoria.
365
Internet
http://www.afesis.org.za/Local-Governance-Articles/it-is-your-right-to-participate-in-how-youare-governed
http://www.afesis.org.za/index.php/local-governance/93-local-governance
articles/1347-
examining-the-politics-of-municipal-demarcation.
http://www.gcis.gov.za/resource_centre/sa_info/yearbook/2010-11.htm
http://www.gcro.ac.za/about-gcr/overview
http://www.idrc.ca/uploads/user-S/10557699520iverson-final2.doc
http://www.info.gov.za/speeches/2008/08020811021001.htm
http://www.measuringusability.com/
http://www.sciencebuddies.org/science-fair-projects/project_ideas/Soc_participants.shtml
http://www.surveysystem.com/sscalc.htm
366
Annexure A
Survey questionnaire: For Government Representative
For Office Use
Student
Supervisor
Verified
Not Verified
Topic: Performance monitoring and evaluation of metropolitan
municipalities in Gauteng, Republic of South Africa
Name of Student:
Kgosi Maepa
Purpose:
Research Questionnaire (Government
Officials)
PhD – Public Affairs
Professor Dr Thornhill
Course:
Supervisor:
367
Survey questionnaire: For Government Representative – City Manager or his or her representative)
Disclaimer & purpose of the survey questionnaire:
The survey questionnaire you are about to answer is for the sole purpose of the research study.
Participants are not under any obligation to answer questions or parts of the questionnaire if they
choose not to participate – participation is on free will.
Answers will be analysed, processed and be used as part of the PhD thesis. Information received will be
stored for 10 years at the University of Pretoria and it will be used solely for the purpose of this study.
Please note the following:

This study involves an anonymous survey. Your name will not appear on the questionnaire and the
answers you give will be treated as strictly confidential.

You cannot be identified in person based on the answers you give. [Kindly note that consent cannot
be withdrawn once the questionnaire is submitted as there is no way to trace the particular
questionnaire that has been filled in.]

Your participation in this study is very important to us. You may, however, choose not to participate
and you may also stop participating at any time without any negative consequences.

Please answer the questions in the attached questionnaire as completely and honestly as possible.
This should not take more than 15 minutes of your time.

The results of the study will be used for academic purposes only and may be published in an
academic journal. We will provide you with a summary of our findings on request.
Please contact my study leader [Prof C. Thornhill; email: [email protected] (Tel: +27 12 420 3606)
Room: EMS 3-108] if you have any questions or comments regarding the study.
Topic:
Performance monitoring and evaluation of metropolitan municipalities in Gauteng, Republic of South
Africa
Purpose of the study:
The purpose of the study is to investigate whether the performance monitoring and evaluation
introduced by the South African government, through the so called “Government-wide Monitoring and
Evaluation system” (GWM&E) under the National Treasury in municipalities and in particular
metropolitan municipalities in Gauteng Province; has an effect on the delivery of minimum basic
services in informal settlements.
368
Part A - Informal Settlements
Question 1
How many informal settlements are there in your municipality? Please indicate the following:
Number (e.g. 35)
Are the shacks marked in informal settlements?
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Question 2
Where are these informal settlements in your city found (location)?
a)
b)
c)
d)
e)
f)
In the outskirts
unused land;
former buffer strips;
undeveloped land between formal township developments or settlements;
on the edges of new townships;
on land allocated for public or commercial facilities that show no signs of ever being developed
for its official purpose; and
g) on unutilised and unprotected ‘natural’ land
Part B – Basic services in informal settlement (Electricity, water, sanitation and waste collection)
Question 3
Do you provide electricity in your informal settlements and is it direct from the City or is it Pre-paid?
Yes or No
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
369
Question 4
Do you provide Water sources in your informal settlements and is it direct from the City or Prepaid?
Yes or No
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Question 5
Do you provide sanitation in your informal settlements, is your answer is ‘Yes’, in what form?
Yes or No
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Question 6
Do you collect waste in your informal settlements?
Yes or No
How many times in a week?
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Part C – Formalisation of informal settlements
Question 7
What is your formalisation plan for informal settlements?
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
370
Question 8
How much of your municipal capital budget have you set aside in the current financial year, to deal
with formalisation of informal settlements?
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Question 9
How many informal settlements were formalised in the previous financial year in your municipality?
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Part D – Protest action in informal settlements
Question 10
How many service delivery protests have you had in informal settlements in the past 2 financial years
(2009/10 & 2010/11)?
Question 11
What were the 3-4 main issues in the memorandum from residents of these informal settlements?
Please indicate if they are associated with the following issues:
a)
b)
c)
d)
e)
f)
g)
h)
i)
j)
Water provision
Electricity provision
Waste collection
Lack of sanitation
Leadership (Councillor of municipality)
Corruption
Housing provision
Roads
Schools
Unemployment
371
Question 12
What is the estimated population found in informal settlements in your City?
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Part E – Performance Monitoring and Evaluation
Question 13
Do you have an enterprise-wide performance monitoring and evaluation division / office in your City?
Yes or No
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Question 14
How many people work in this division/office? Can you provide the structure and who is it reporting to
(please attach the structure)?
Number (e.g. 5)
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
372
Question 15
How often is your performance monitoring and evaluation (M&E) division / office in your City
monitoring and evaluating performance of the IDP and SDBIP, especially with regards to provision of
basic services in informal settlements?
How many times in a financial year?
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
373
Annexure B
Survey questionnaire: For community members in informal settlements’
For Office Use
Student
Supervisor
Verified
Not Verified
Topic: Performance monitoring and evaluation of metropolitan
municipalities in Gauteng, Republic of South Africa
Name of Student:
Kgosi Maepa
Purpose:
Research Questionnaire (Community
members)
PhD – Public Affairs
Professor Dr Thornhill
Course:
Supervisor:
374
Survey questionnaire 1: For community members in Informal settlements
Disclaimer & purpose of the survey questionnaire:
The survey questionnaire you are about to answer is for the sole purpose of the research study.
Participants are not under any obligation to answer questions or parts of the questionnaire if
they choose not to participate – participation is on free will.
Answers will be analysed, processed and be used as part of the PhD thesis. Information
received will be stored for 10 years at the University of Pretoria and it will be used solely for the
purpose of this study.
Please note the following:

This study involves an anonymous survey. Your name will not appear on the questionnaire
and the answers you give will be treated as strictly confidential.

You cannot be identified in person based on the answers you give. [Kindly note that consent
cannot be withdrawn once the questionnaire is submitted as there is no way to trace the
particular questionnaire that has been filled in.]

Your participation in this study is very important to us. You may, however, choose not to
participate and you may also stop participating at any time without any negative
consequences.

Please answer the questions in the attached questionnaire as completely and honestly as
possible. This should not take more than 15 minutes of your time.

The results of the study will be used for academic purposes only and may be published in an
academic journal. We will provide you with a summary of our findings on request.
Please contact my study leader [Prof C. Thornhill; email: [email protected] (Tel: +27 12
420 3606) Room: EMS 3-108] if you have any questions or comments regarding the study.
Topic:
Performance monitoring and evaluation of metropolitan municipalities in Gauteng, Republic of
South Africa
Purpose of the study:
The purpose of the study is to investigate whether the performance monitoring and evaluation
introduced by the South African government, through the so called “Government-wide
Monitoring and Evaluation system” (GWM&E) under the National Treasury in municipalities and
in particular metropolitan municipalities in Gauteng Province; has an effect on the delivery of
minimum basic services in informal settlements.
375
Make a cross X in the correct block
PART A (Personal information)
Question 1
What is your gender?
Male 1
What is your age?
-25
25-35
36-45
46-60
61+
1
2
3
4
5
What is your race?
African
Coloured
Asian
White
1
2
3
4
Female 2
Question 2
Are you living with a disability?
Yes 1
No 2
Do you receive government pension?
Yes 1
No 2
How many children do you have?
None
One
Two
Three
4-6
7+
0
1
2
3
4
5
PART B (Income and employment) Questions 3 - 4
Question 3
Do you receive a grant?
Yes
1
No
2
Is it a:
Disability grant?
Yes
1
No
2
376
Child support grant?
Illness linked grant?
Yes
Yes
1
1
No
No
2
2
Question 4
Are you employed?
Yes 1
No 2
-1 year
1-2 years
3-5 years
5-10 years
10+ years
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
1
1
1
1
1
No
No
No
No
No
2
2
2
2
2
Walk
Taxi
Bus
Train
Car
Other
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
1
1
1
1
1
1
No
No
No
No
No
No
2
2
2
2
2
2
If yes, where?
…………………………………………………………………………………
If yes, for how long have you been working there?
How do you travel to work?
Is it a permanent or temporary job?
No job
Permanent
Temporary
How much do you earn (or combined household
income) monthly?
-R1000
R10001999
R20002999
R30003999
R40004999
R50009999
R10000+
377
Yes 1
Yes 1
Yes 1
No 2
No 2
No 2
Yes 1
No 2
Yes 1
No 2
Yes 1
No 2
Yes 1
No 2
Yes 1
No 2
Yes 1
No 2
Yes 1
No 2
Question 4.1
Are you registered as an indigent family in the municipality?
Yes 1
No 2
PART C (Period in the informal settlement, Electricity, Sanitation, Water and Waste
collection)
Question 5 - 10
Question 5
When did you move to this informal settlement?
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
Less than 2 years
Two or three years
Four or five years
Five to nine years
Ten years or more
1
2
3
4
5
Question 6
Is your shack marked by the municipality?
Yes 1
No 2
Yes 1
No 2
Question 7
Do you have electricity?
If the answer is yes, please indicate the following:
(a) I buy prepaid electricity
Yes 1
(b) The City supplies us with electricity and we pay per month Yes 1
No 2
No 2
If the answer is no, please indicate the following:
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
I do not have electricity at all
I have connected illegally
I use gas
I use candles and paraffin
I use a petrol generator for electricity
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
378
1
1
1
1
1
No
No
No
No
No
2
2
2
2
2
Question 8
Do you have running water on your stand?
Yes
1
No 2
If the answer is no, where do you get water?
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
We do not have water at all in the informal settlement
JoJo tank provided by the municipality
There is a common tap in our street
Municipality delivers water now and then
How often do they deliver water?
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Regularly
Not often
Very seldom
1
1
1
1
Yes 1
Yes 1
Yes 1
No
No
No
No
2
2
2
2
No 2
No 2
No 2
Question 9
Do you have sanitation/sewer system connected in your stand? Yes 1
No 2
If the answer is no, please indicate the following:
(a)
(b)
(c)
I use a bucket
I have a “pit toilet” in my stand
I use the nearby field
Yes
Yes
Yes
1
1
1
No
No
No
2
2
2
Question 10
How do you dispose of waste?
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
The City collects waste every week
I throw waste into a skip provided by the City
I throw waste at a corner and the community cleans it up now and
then
There is no waste collection point from the City
379
Yes 1
Yes 1
1
Yes
No 2
No 2
No 2
Yes 1
No 2
PART D (Formalisation program of the Municipality) Questions 11 – 15
Question 11
Is your informal settlement registered with your
Municipality?
Yes
1
No
2
Yes
Yes
Yes
1
1
1
No
No
No
2
2
2
Yes
1
No
2
Yes
1
No
2
Yes 1
Yes 1
Yes 1
No
No
No
2
2
2
Yes
No
2
No
No
No
No
No
2
2
2
2
2
If the answer is No:
Do you know about any formalisation programme?
When will it happen?
Soon
Not so soon
Perhaps in a long
time
Question 12
Do you have representatives/a committee here in the
informal settlement?
If Yes, who is the representative?
Indicate the following:
(a)
(b)
(c)
A Councillor from the Ward
A member from the Ward Committee
A member from the community
Question 13
Do you know your local Ward Councillor?
1
Question 14
How often do you have meetings with your local Ward Councillor?
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
Monthly
Every three months
Once in six months
Every year
Never
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
380
1
1
1
1
1
Question 15
Do you receive a monthly bill from your municipality?
Yes 1
No
2
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
1
1
1
1
No
No
No
No
2
2
2
2
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
1
1
1
1
No
No
No
No
2
2
2
2
What is the bill for?
Indicate the following:
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
Water and electricity
Water, sanitation and waste
Electricity
Water
How often do you receive this bill?
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
Monthly
Every three months
Once in six months
Every year
381
Was this manual useful for you? yes no
Thank you for your participation!

* Your assessment is very important for improving the work of artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project

Download PDF

advertisement