Megaprojects not a panacea

CRITICS: ‘THEY TAKE YEARS TO GET OFF GROUND’

The idea was considered as a way of bringing housing under centralised planning.

Government’s policy to phase out smaller low-cost housing projects in favour of megaprojects was underdeveloped. The new approach moved swiftly from announcement to discussion documents and frameworks, to the creation of lists of large-scale projects.

Most of this occurred behind closed doors, with little consultation. And there has been little space to examine the limitations of this approach – as well as the merits of alternatives, such as smaller urban infill projects.

Megaprojects are glamorous as they are visible and more impressive than diffuse, small-scale projects. As a result, politicians can brand their delivery more effectively.

Some advocates of the megaprojects, notably Gauteng, were particularly attracted to the idea of creating whole new “post-apartheid cities” which could meet the “live, work and play” needs internally. Starting afresh with new settlements would be a way of designing urban spaces to avoid the inequalities and inefficiencies that beset existing cities.

They would also bring major projects to poor areas that had little else to drive any significant economic growth.

Some critics are less concerned about the scale of the projects than the fact that they could be poorly located. That’s largely because better-located land is more expensive and there isn’t a great deal of well-located land that is large enough to accommodate new settlements.

There is also the fear that once construction jobs run out, residents would have to bear the cost of travelling long distances to jobs outside the settlement.

Megaprojects on the urban periphery are also counter to the plans expressed in policy documents to curb urban sprawl and densify existing cities. If new projects are located far from sewage, water, electricity and roads, then these would have to be laid out at great costs.

Big projects take many years to get off the ground, suspending delivery.

Human Settlements Minister Nomaindia Mfeketo said catalytic projects “worth more than half-a-trillion rand” had been initiated.

Yet, she also announced that the budget had suffered a “massive cut” as a result of the fiscal challenges.

It must be considered whether all housing should be delivered in megaprojects, or whether a range of project sizes should be encouraged to facilitate urban infill projects within existing urban areas.

Planned megaprojects should be evaluated with respect to their location, total cost and sustainability. SA can’t afford to construct housing in spaces that have few economic prospects and limited benefits.

This article was first published on The Conversation and has been edited.