What is the Meaning of a National Democratic Revolution – Part 2

What is the Meaning of a National Democratic Revolution – Part 2

Identifying an Appropriate Unit of Analysis

To recap from the previous Part, for the past thirty years since South Africa had established a new democratic dispensation, it has been difficult to move beyond the guaranteeing of individual and equal rights towards ensuring that the wealth of the country is shared by the people as a whole, which is at the essence of a national democratic society. The essential reason for this difficulty is that the ANC failed to critically evaluate its weaknesses and strengths, and at the same time identifying succinctly the various threats and opportunities, both as a movement and a country.

The reason for such a failure is largely based on a dearth of an appropriate unit of analysis, which could fittingly assist in assessing successes and difficulties in the entire country, despite the various disparities that are characteristic of most, if not all, post-colonial states generally, and South Africa being a post-apartheid state, in particular, where resources were unevenly distributed along racial lines.

Attempts were made previously to use the provinces as units of analysis, which was rather myopic, given the enormous levels of inequalities that exist among these nine entities. Some have extreme cases of poverty and wealth alongside each other, most are predominantly rural, while one is intensely urbanised, and only two or three have pockets of urbanisation that are comparative to first world standards. Accordingly, it would have been imprudent to use such entities as suitable units of analysis.

Local government, on the other hand, which consists of 257 units, is the worst to use as a unit of analysis, despite efforts at grading them into three categories, which are rife with discrepant socio-economic conditions. Most of the local municipalities are unsustainable from a perspective of service provision, as they are largely dependent on national government grants that end up being consumed by labour costs. Especially in most of the rural municipalities that are unable to raise their own revenue due to non-existent local economies, become a burden to the provincial and national governments, which are also facing shrinking tax bases as the economy is challenged by limited investments coupled with energy and water shortages.

Local government has been plagued with severe problems such as a lack of human capacity and resources, poor governance and limited intergovernmental and intra-municipal coordination. These municipalities are unattractive to both foreign and local investments as the basic infrastructure is in shambles and lacks appropriate maintenance. This is an incessant situation that can only be resolved through restructuring the municipalities to become sustainable entities, which is unachievable through the current dispensation, thus requiring a constitutional amendment. This sphere of government is unstable in mostly rural provinces, with questionable audit outcomes, and is characterised by altering administrations even before their terms of office are consummated.

Alternatively, and a more feasible solution, is the adoption and effective implementation of the District Development Model (DDM), which appears to be manageable and providing a capacitating platform for development, particularly its implementation and measurement. South Africa’s nine provinces are divided into 52 districts, which are both district and metropolitan municipalities, 44 and 8 respectively. They are the second level of administrative division, below the provinces and (in the case of district municipalities) above the local municipalities. The districts cover the entire area of the continental republic, and each district is completely contained within a single province, thus eliminating cross-provincial districts.

Each district municipality is composed of several local municipalities, with which it shares responsibilities, whereas metropolitan municipalities are responsible for the entire district under their control. Only five provinces have metropolitan cities, with Gauteng having three, Eastern Cape with two, and KwaZulu-Natal, Western Cape and the Free State having one each. This is also an exposition of the discrepancies between provinces, which makes them inadequate as units of analysis to measure development, as they are absolutely incomparable. District municipalities are seen as successors to former Regional Services Councils (RSC) as they are Category-C municipalities, which execute some of the functions of local government for a district and share the functions of local government with local municipalities. They actually could be appropriately referred to as “counties”, as they share similarities with counties in other countries.

Metropolitan municipalities are referred to as Category-A municipalities, representing large densely urbanised regions that encompass multiple towns and so constitute a Metropolis. For example, eThekwini Metropolitan Municipality encompasses the city of Durban and surrounding towns. In areas which are primarily rural, local government is divided into district municipalities and local municipalities, and these are areas that are not eligible to have a metropolitan municipality in terms of Section 155 of the South African Constitution. As in district municipalities wherein local municipalities represent a subdivision of the district municipality, they form the third layer of government. Metropolitan municipalities, on the other hand, have custom subdivisions, known as “administrative regions”. However, these are not official or formal subdivisions, as is the case with district municipalities.

District municipalities, especially when compared to metropolitan municipalities, make appropriate units of analysis, as they are composed of several local municipalities each, with one, two or three towns each. The main reason they make suitable units of analysis is their manageable number, economic significance, cultural coherence and population density, as well as their potential to improve the performance of local government, improve spatial governance and promote social and economic development. At the district level, the process of putting together the development evaluation plan may include collecting data on various district variables like poverty indicators, gender issues, climate challenges and security measurements, such as those relating to immigration, crime and corruption.

Furthermore, district municipalities can be made useful in managing rural and urban migration; determining and supporting local economic drivers; managing spatial form, land release and land development; and determining infrastructure investment requirements as well as ensuring long-term infrastructure adequacy to support integrated human settlements, economic activity and provision of basic services, such as community and social services.

A complete review of the entire local government system is required, taking into account its capacity, its relationships with other spheres of government, and the expectations of municipalities. Accordingly, it will become apparent that the District Development Model provides the most appropriate unit of analysis for assessing shortcomings, defining their root causes, and addressing them correctly for equity to be achieved in terms of service delivery and socio-economic upliftment. With regard to the latter, the model can thus be utilised as an agent for transformation, especially in the fight against the three scourges of unemployment, poverty and inequality (To be continued).

Castro Khwela
Good morning fellow Compatriots!🙏🏾✊🏾👊🏾