Informal Settlements and Mine Development: Reflections from South Africa’s Periphery

"Historically, mining companies worldwide provided housing and developed towns to accommodate their employees. At the end of the 1980s this approach became less prevalent and attempts were made to mitigate the effects of mine development and mine closure on communities living near the mines. Permanent settlement in mining towns urgently needed to be minimized. Since the advent of democracy, South African policy has moved in the opposite direction, shifting the emphasis to creating integrated communities and encouraging home ownership. Despite this policy shift, however, mines continue to influence local housing conditions. One direct outcome has been the development of informal settlements. We surveyed 260 informal settlement households in Postmasburg, a small and remotely located town in the Northern Cape Province of South Africa. We found that because they employ contract workers and thus arouse expectations of employment, the mines here contribute extensively to the development of informal settlements. But local factors also contribute, and the functional role of informal settlements as a form of housing that supports mobility should not be underestimated. We also found that both municipal and mining company policies for informal settlements were inadequate. Finally, we found that low-income informal settlers not associated with mine employment suffered the highest levels of social disruption.IntroductionA mine generates demand for labour, which in turn generates demand for housing. When settlements spring up near a mine this often means poor housing conditions. In South Africa in the 1960s and 1970s mining companies invested heavily in company towns or mining settlements, but they have become increasingly hesitant to do so, for three reasons. First, declining resource prices in the mid-1980s and the 1990s compelled them to focus on core business interests and reduce the costs of peripheral activities such as housing (Bryceson and MacKinnon, 2013); second, at the turn of the 20th century they were often accused of taking over the role of local government (IIED, 2002) and consequently became hesitant to invest in developing mining towns; and third, changing labour regimes also curbed their investment in such towns (Haslam McKenzie, 2010). Increasingly, the companies began to endorse block-roster shifts, and outsourcing also became more common in the early 1990s. Block-roster shifts in Australia (together with improved technology) have meant that miners do not need to settle near the mines but can fly in and fly out and have their urban houses as their stable homes. This has had serious negative implications for housing in remote towns in Australia, particularly worker camps, large-scale renting out of available accommodation, and ‘hot-bedding’."