Abstract
This paper illustrates how advances in spatial analysis contribute not only to an enhanced understanding of the complex dynamics of social and economic spatial patterns, but also to exploring the implications thereof for development policies. The paper reflects on a set of incremental advances in spatial analysis achieved recently in South Africa, illustrating the value to a project undertaken to inform national urban policy development. The unique challenge of the project was to conduct a more nuanced, national level spatial analysis, moving beyond administrative boundaries, to enable the identifying, describing, and comparing of a range of settlement types in South Africa in terms of key characteristics and functional roles. The paper illustrates how recent advances in spatial analysis have enabled identifying and defining the wide range of densely settled clusters, local towns and service centers, regional service centers, cities, and bigger city-region areas, all forming part of a polycentric network (or backbone) of towns and cities. In conclusion, it is argued that advances in spatially nuanced and relational analysis are not only invaluable in generating a more nuanced understanding of the space economy, but also in enabling commensurate and context-specific investment and policy responses, contributing to development and urban management discourses.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
These advances and terms such as mesoframe are explained in more detail in the background section of the paper.
See the description of GAP2 in the next section.
Analysis conducted by CSIR, Built Environment in collaboration with Econrise, HSRC and the African Centre for Cities (ACC) for the South African Cities Network (SACN), Department of Provincial and Local Government (DPLG), and The Presidency.
The underlying UFI database on urban and other nodes (which now forms part of GAP) is based on a study and database developed for Stats SA (Republic of South Africa 2003) and further work (undertaken by CSIR) which involved: (1) the checking of place names and the geo-location of nodes; (2) the adding of nodes in metropolitan areas and around major towns (where suburban or outlying zones might contain a shopping centre, etc.); and (3) the re-interpolation of the original UFI values based on commercial land use and/or nearness to central business districts and other major nodes (Naudé et. al 2007).
Commuter areas in this context refers to settlements (as reminiscent of the Apartheid legacy) dependant on government subsidies sustaining daily commuting from dormitory towns to areas of employment.
Two geographic potential indices and associated area demarcations were calculated within the project context. The first index was designed to identify areas that have above a certain “market threshold” of local and nearby job opportunities or purchasing power. To implement this, a travel time discounted measure of local and nearby household income (a proxy for purchasing power) was calculated. The second index focused on identifying areas with more than a defined minimum level of accessibility to services, measured in terms of a travel-time discounted function of the services at local and nearby nodes (within a maximum range of 40 min travel time). As in the case of delimiting nodal mesozones, the Urban Functional Index (UFI) was used as a composite measure of the range and quantity of services.
Given the fact that South Africa does not have a national income poverty line, the National Spatial Development Perspective (NSDP) used the 2004 Minimum Living Level (MLL) developed by the Bureau of Market Research at the University of South Africa, and this information has been spatially disaggregated using the mesoframe. The MLL has been criticized for making use of the lowest possible amount on which a household can live, thus painting a rather bleak picture of the amount of people living in poverty.
See South African Cities Network et al. (2008) for the extensive analysis
References
Brand, R., & Gaffikin, F. (2007). Collaborative planning in an uncollaborative world. In Planning Theory, 6, 282–313.
Brown, D. L., & Cromartie, J. B. (2004). The nature of rurality in postindustrial society. In T. Champion, & G. Hugo (Eds.), New forms of urbanization: Beyond the urban–rural dichotomy. Aldershot: Ashgate.
Champion, T., & Hugo, G. (2004). Introduction: Moving beyond the urban-rural dichotomy. In T. Champion, & G. Hugo (Eds.), New forms of urbanization: Beyond the urban–rural dichotomy. Aldershot: Ashgate.
Coombes, M. (2004). Multiple dimensions of settlement systems: Coping with complexity. In T. Champion, & G. Hugo (Eds.), New forms of urbanization: Beyond the urban–rural dichotomy (p. 123). Aldershot: Ashgate.
Couclelis, H. (1991). Requirements for planning-relevant GIS: a spatial perspective. In Papers in Regional Science, 70, 9–19.
Council for Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR). (2006). Geospatial Analysis Platform 2. http://www.gapweb.co.za.
ESPON (European Spatial Observation Network). (2004). Diversity within the European territory: A selection of new European maps. ESPON Briefing 1.
Faludi, A. (2003a). The application of the European Spatial Development Perspective: introduction to the special issue. Town Planning Review, 74(1), 1–9.
Faludi, A. (2003b). Unfinished business: European spatial planning in the 2000s. Town Planning Review, 74(1), 121–140.
GTZ (2002). Project process review of decentralised development planning—A South Africa–German cooperation project. Unpublished Report. GTZ.
Hanson, G. H. (2005). Market potential, increasing returns and geographic concentration. In Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(1), September: 1–24.
Harris, N., & Hooper, A. (2004). Rediscovering the ‘Spatial’ in public policy and planning: an examination of the spatial content of sectoral policy documents. In Planning Theory and Practice, 5(2), 147–169.
Harrison, P. (2002) Towards integrated inter-governmental planning in South Africa The IDP as a building block. Unpublished report. Pretoria: Department of Provincial and Local Government.
Healy, P. (2004). The treatment of space and place in the new strategic spatial planning in Europe. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 28(1), 25–67.
Hugo, G., Champion, T., & Lattes, A. (2003). Towards a new conceptualization of settlements for demography. Population and Development Review, 29(2), 277–297.
Maritz, J., Naudé, A., & Badenhorst, W. (2008). Developing a mesoscale geoframe. Paper presented at the GIS Polonia Conference, 8–12 September 2008. Zakopane, Krakouw.
Meiklejohn, C., & Coetzee, M. (2003). Integrated Development Planning. In Hologram. Cape Town: Nolwazi.
Mhlongo, M., Green, C. A., Morojele, N., Badenhorst, W., Naudé, A., & Mashiri, M. (1999). Developing a typology of rural areas of South Africa for use in a rural transport strategy. Report No. CR-99/076. National Department of Transport. Pretoria.
Mohamed, H. (2006). Conceptual Framework for District/Metro Application of the National Spatial Development Perspective. Unpublished paper.
Naudé, A., Badenhorst, W., Zietsman, L., Van Huyssteen, E., & Maritz, J. (2007). Geospatial Analysis Platform—Version 2: Technical overview of the mesoframe methodology and South African Geospatial Analysis Platform. CSIR Report number: CSIR/BE/PSS/IR/2007/0104/B.
Naudé, A., Zietsman, L., & Mans, G. (2008a). A new basis for profiling South Africa's settlement system. Unpublished paper.
Naudé, A., Van Huyssteen, E., & Goss, H. (2008b). Geospatial Analysis Platform and tools: Supporting planning and decision making across scales, borders, sectors and disciplines. Paper presented at the South African Planning Institute’s Planning Africa Conference, 13–16 April 2008. Sandton.
Naudé, A, Van Huyssteen, E., Maritz, J., & Badenhorst, B. (2008c). Geospatial Analysis Platform: Supporting strategic spatial analysis and planning. Poster presented at the 2nd CSIR Biennial Conference: Science real and relevant. 17–18 November 2008. Pretoria.
Oranje, M., & Van Huyssteen, E. (2007). A brief history of intergovernmental development planning in South Africa. In Town and Regional Planning. 51, 1–15.
Pillay, U. (2008). Urban policy in post-apartheid South Africa: Context, evolution and future directions. Urban Forum, (19), 109–132.
Republic of South Africa. (2003). Census 2001: Investigation into appropriate definitions of urban and rural areas for South Africa. Discussion document: Report No. 03-02-20 (2003). Pretoria: Statistics South Africa.
Republic of South Africa. (2005). National Integrated Development Planning (IDP) Hearing Report. Unpublished report. Pretoria: Department of Provincial and Local Government.
Republic of South Africa (2006a). National spatial development perspective (NSDP). Pretoria: The Presidency.
Republic of South Africa (2006b). Draft regional industrial strategy. Pretoria: Department of Trade and Industry.
Republic of South Africa. (2008). Toolkit for Integrated Planning (TIP). Unpublished report and website http://tip.csir.co.za. Pretoria: Department of Science and Technology.
South African Cities Network. (SACN), the Department of Provincial and Local Government (dplg) and The Presidency. (2008). National Spatial Trends Overview. Unpublished Report and Annexures.
Todes, A. (2008). Rethinking spatial planning. Town and Regional Planning (forthcoming).
Watson, V. (2002). Change and continuity in spatial planning: metropolitan planning in Cape Town under political transition. London: Routledge.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to once again acknowledge that the paper is largely based on the “National Spatial Trends Overview” project commissioned in 2008 by the SACN, DPLG, and The Presidency. The original analysis was undertaken by CSIR, Built Environment team (Elsona van Huyssteen, Alize le Roux, Cathy Meiklejohn, Jarrel Whisken, Karishma Busgeeth, David le Maitre, and Andries Naudé) in collaboration with Shirley Robinson (Econrise). The typology and description of the different types of settlements in South Africa were developed in collaboration with Prof. Sue Parnell (Centre for African Cities), David Schmidt (Strategies for Change and Project Manager for SACN), Seana Nkhahle (SACN and Project Coordinator), Prof. Ivan Turok (Univ. of Glasgow) and Prof Mark Oranje (UP). Specific contributions were provided by Dr. Sharon Biermann, David McKelly, Dr. Pieter Schmitz (all from CSIR), Prof. Larry Zietsman, and Willem Badenhorst (Mandala GIS). Inputs were made during the process by Prof. Owen Crankshaw (UCT), Dr. Jo Lorentzen (HSRC), and Prof. Alison Todes (Wits), as well as by other members of the SACN, DPLG, and Presidency Project Steering Committee, namely, Sithole Mbanga (SACN), Yusuf Patel, Nellie Lester (both from DPLG), Hassen Mohamed, Khulekani Mathe, and Bea Drost (all three from The Presidency, PCAS).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
van Huyssteen, E., Biermann, S., Naudé, A. et al. Advances in Spatial Analysis to Support a more Nuanced Reading of the South African Space Economy. Urban Forum 20, 195–214 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12132-009-9061-1
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12132-009-9061-1