Gender and gender sensitivity in the South African housing policy : preliminary evidence from Mangaung (Bloemfontein)

Abstract

Paper presented at the XXXIII IAHS World Congress on Housing, 27-30 September 2005,"Transforming Housing Environments through Design", University of Pretoria.

Until the mid 1980s and early 1990s, international gender theory and urban and housing development theory have developed separately. Two paradigms dominated gender theory during this period, namely Women in Development and Women and Development. International housing policy approaches in the developing world have also gone through a number of phases since the Second World War, for example, state driven housing, self-help housing, macro-economic reform and the enablement approach. However, it was only with the beginning of the enablement approach (early 1990s) and the whole sector housing development approach (mid 1990s) that gender has been mainstreamed in housing and urban development (Gender and Development paradigm). The South African low-income housing policy contains principle statements regarding gender equity, yet limited guidelines exist on the implementation of these principles. Consequently, a number of researchers have identified shortcomings in terms of gender and the application of the housing policy. Some of the main concerns are the eligibility criteria and the incremental nature of the housing policy. Against this background the paper reports on research conducted in the Mangaung Local Municipality (Bloemfontein) into the gender sensitivity of housing policy implementation. In the process, approximately 400 questionnaires were completed, of which 50% were from female-headed households. The results of our investigation have led to four main findings. In the first place, despite certain structural dilemmas in ensuring gender equity in housing policy, female-headed households’ access to housing is higher than what one can expect from the population profile. Secondly, gender differences in respect of post-construction investment can be attributed to lower incomes of female-headed households. Thirdly, some differences in terms of the satisfaction levels of female-headed and male-headed households exist. Fourthly, both female and male-headed households expressed their preference for a smaller house with better services.