Urban Forum

pp 1–17 | Cite as

Why Do Planners Think That Planning Has Failed Post-Apartheid? The Case of eThekwini Municipality, Durban, South Africa

  • Sogen MoodleyEmail author


Nearly 25 years after democracy, South African cities are still burdened with an apartheid spatial form. Whilst some literature on the persistence of the legacy of apartheid spatial planning exists, not enough work has been done to understand the complex challenges facing the urban planners mandated with the task of spatial redress. Using a case study of the eThekwini Municipality in Durban, South Africa, this article responds to this gap. The research commenced with a census survey of 87 municipal planners within the municipality, supported by five interviews with senior City executives. What stood out from the survey was that three quarters of all planners admitted that municipal planning had not been successful in transforming the built environment in Durban. In trying to understand the critical challenges facing municipal planning, the top three issues emerging from the study in order of priority were the negative influence of politics that affects technical decision-making, a compliance-driven legal framework, and an unsupportive institutional environment. In unpacking findings from the study, the paper contributes to the debates around the role of planning professionals in post-apartheid spatial transformation within the context of a market economy. In particular, it exposes how political power being exerted on behalf of private developers to influence local planning decisions, compromises the interests of the poor in the city. It also brings attention to the impact of an unsupportive institutional environment in inhibiting city spatial transformation. It does not seek to propose ready-made solutions to these challenges but suggests the urgent need for a sustained conversation with strategic role players about reimagining planning, making the call for renewed action.


Spatial transformation Urban planning Municipal governance Post-apartheid restructuring 



The author wishes to acknowledge Dr Kira Erwin from the Urban Futures Centres and Jill Lincoln from the Town Planning Department of the Durban University of Technology for their constructive inputs on drafts of the paper.


  1. African News Agency. (2017). Controversial corruption report will be addressed – new Durban city manager. The Citizen, 19 May. Available:
  2. Albrechts, L. (2015). Breaking out of the box: ingredients for a more radical planning. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 184, 104–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Creswell, J. W. (2014). A concise introduction to mixed methods research. London: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  4. Davidson, K. (2016). State of South African cities report (p. 2016).Google Scholar
  5. Du Plessis, C., & Landman, K. (2002). Sustainability analysis of human settlements in South Africa. CSIR Building and Construction Technology Programme for Sustainable Human Settlement.Google Scholar
  6. Du Plessis, D. J. (2014). A critical reflection on urban spatial planning practices and outcomes in post-apartheid South Africa. Urban Forum, 25(1), 69–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Fox-Rogers, L., & Murphy, E. (2016). Self-perceptions of the role of the planner. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 43(1), 74–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Fainstein, S. (2000). New directions in planning theory. Urban Affairs Review, 35(4), 451–478.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Flyvbjerg, B. (2002). Bringing power to planning research: one researcher’s praxis story. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 21(4), 353–366.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Flyvbjerg, B. (2004). Phronetic planning research: theoretical and methodological reflections. Planning Theory & Practice, 5(3), 283–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Flyvbjerg, B., & Richardson, T. (2002). Planning and Foucault: in search of the dark side of planning theory. In P. Allmendinger & M. Tewdwr-Jones (Eds.), Planning futures: new directions for planning theory (pp. 44–62). London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  12. Flyvbjerg, B. (2013). How planners deal with uncomfortable knowledge: the dubious ethics of the American Planning Association. Cities, 32, 157–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Global Planners Network. (2012). Naples declaration 2012: joining voices, joining forces, taking action, Available:
  14. Gleye, P. H. (2015). City planning versus urban planning: resolving a profession’s bifurcated heritage. Journal of Planning Literature, 30(1), 3–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Grange, K. (2013). Shaping acting space: in search of a new political awareness among local authority planners. Planning Theory, 12(3), 225–243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gunder, M. (2010). Planning as the ideology of (neoliberal) space. Planning Theory, 9(4), 298–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hall, P. (2014). And one fine morning –’: reflections on a double centenary. TPR: Town Planning Review, 85(5), 557–561.Google Scholar
  18. Harris, N. (1983). Metropolitan planning in the developing countries: tasks for the 1980s. Habitat International, 7(3–4), 5–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Harrison, P. (2006). On the edge of reason: planning and urban futures in Africa. Urban Studies, 43(2), 319–335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Harrison, P. (2014). Making planning theory real. Planning Theory, 13(1), 65–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Harrison, P., Todes, A., & Watson, V. (2008). Planning and transformation: learning from the post-apartheid experience. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  22. Healey, P. (2010). Making better places: the planning project in the twenty-first century. London: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Karki, T. K. (2017). Should planners join politics? Would that help them make better cities? Planning Theory, 16(2), 186–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Lord, A., & Tewdwr-Jones, M. (2014). Is planning “under attack”? Chronicling the deregulation of urban and environmental planning in England. European Planning Studies, 22(2), 345–361.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Metzger, J., Allmendinger, P., & Oosterlynck, S. (2014). Planning against the political: democratic deficits in European territorial governance. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Mini, S. (2016). Urban transformation for sustainability and social justice in urban peripheries: new forms of urban segregation in post-apartheid cities. In D. P. Donoghue (Ed.), Urban transformations: centres, peripheries and systems (pp161–170). Farnham: Ashgate Publishing.Google Scholar
  27. Morrissey, J. E., Moloney, S., & Moore, T. (2018). Strategic spatial planning and urban transition: revaluing planning and locating sustainability trajectories. In T. Moore, F. de Haan, R. Horne, & B. Gleeson (Eds.), Urban sustainability transitions. Theory and practice of urban sustainability transitions (pp. 53–72). Singapore: Springer.Google Scholar
  28. Murray, M. J. (2008). Taming the disorderly city: the spatial landscape of Johannesburg after apartheid. Cape Town: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  29. Musvoto, G., Lincoln, G., & Hansmann, R. (2016). The role of spatial development frameworks in transformation of the eThekwini municipality, KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa: reflecting on 20 years of planning. Urban Forum, 27(2), 187–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Napier, M. (2009). Making urban land markets work better in South African cities and towns: arguing the basis for access by the poor. In S. V. Lall, M. Freire, B. Yuen, R. Rajack, & J. J. Helluin (Eds.), Urban land markets: improving land management for successful urbanization (pp. 71–97). Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. National Planning Commission. (2011). National Planning Commission Diagnostic Report. Pretoria: The Presidency.Google Scholar
  32. National Planning Commission. (2012). National development plan 2030: our future–make it work. Pretoria: The Presidency.Google Scholar
  33. Ponzini, D. (2016). Introduction: crisis and renewal of contemporary urban planning. European Planning Studies, 24(7), 1237–1245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Republic of South Africa. (1995a). Urban development strategy. Pretoria: Government Printer.Google Scholar
  35. Republic of South Africa. (1995b). Development facilitation act. Pretoria: Government Printer.Google Scholar
  36. Republic of South Africa. (1997). Urban development framework. Pretoria: Government Printer.Google Scholar
  37. Republic of South Africa. (2000). Local government: municipal systems act (act no. 32 of 2000). Cape Town: Government Printer.Google Scholar
  38. Republic of South Africa. (2013). Spatial planning and land use management act (act no. 16 of 2013). Pretoria: Government Printer.Google Scholar
  39. Sarma, S. K. (2015). Qualitative research: examining the misconceptions. South Asian Journal of Management, 22(3), 176–191.Google Scholar
  40. South African Planning Institute. (2018). What are the key planning issues in the world and in South Africa? Johannesburg: SAPI President Message.Google Scholar
  41. Sim, V., Sutherland, C., & Scott, D. (2016). Pushing the boundaries – urban edge challenges in eThekwini Municipality. South African Geographical Journal, 98(1), 37–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Todes, A. (2011). Reinventing planning: critical reflections. Urban Forum, 22(2), 115–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Todes, A. (2014). New African suburbanisation? Exploring the growth of the northern corridor of eThekwini/KwaDakuza. African Studies, 73(2), 245–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Todes, A. and Turok, I. (2017). Spatial inequalities and policies in South Africa: place-based or people-centred? Progress in Planning.
  45. United Cities and Local Governments. (2010). Terms of reference for Durban-Mzuzu mentoring process. Barcelona, Spain: UCLG.Google Scholar
  46. UN-Habitat. (2010). State of the world's cities 2010/2011: bridging the urban divide. London: EarthScan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Watson, V. (2002). Change and continuity in spatial planning: metropolitan planning in Cape Town under political transition. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  48. Watson, V. (2009). ‘The planned city sweeps the poor away…’: urban planning and 21st century urbanisation. Progress in Planning, 72(3), 151–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Watson, V. (2009a). Seeing from the south: refocusing urban planning on the globe’s central urban issues. Urban Studies, 46, 2259–2275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Urban Futures Centre/Department of Town and Regional PlanningDurban University of Technology, Steve Biko CampusDurbanSouth Africa

Personalised recommendations