Neil Fraser
August 2, 2004
THOUGH almost an entire page was devoted to a feature in The Star on Monday, 19 July, entitled 'Hillbrow Inner City Regeneration Strategy aims to build a safer and better place', most of the article focused on xenophobia, with sparse resolution for lasting, integrated improvement.
The just of the article was that things have changed for the worse today with the influx of foreigners: "Hillbrow today has become one of the most dangerous parts of the city of Johannesburg where crimes mainly driven by xenophobia are on the rise. Every street corner is occupied by foreigners. We used to drink without fear, now we walk unsure of what will happen." (I'm still at a loss as to the connection between the drinking and walking!)
The few paragraphs that actually dealt with the regeneration of the area stated that roads, sidewalks, infrastructure, storm-water drains, traffic lights and road signs were receiving urgent attention. The JMPD, the newspaper reported, is evidently going to be taking strong action against slum-lords and contraveners of planning and building control by-laws and (of course!) a special unit will enforce by-laws. Two hotels housing drug lords and prostitutes have been closed down. The Better Buildings Programme is mentioned, but chiefly in relation to the refurbishing of historic buildings like the Hillbrow Tower! And this is going to turn Hillbrow into a model community? Get a life!
To get a real grip on what will make inner city regeneration work, I urge readers to take cognisance of two newly acquired must-reads that relate to this issue. The first, written by Susan Orlean, appeared in 'The New Yorker' on 26 July. Entitled 'The Outsiders, reinventing a part of town that people thought would never change', it chronicles the regeneration of South Boston.
Initially sparsely occupied due to access difficulties, the area took off in 1826 when its location attracted heavy industries. By the 1850s it boasted 16 000 residents - mostly Irish immigrants - at a time when the local Yankee establishment was trying to repulse the waves of thousands of Irish immigrants, and, failing that, to make life in Boston as uncomfortable and unwelcoming as possible by prescribing which jobs, housing and services the Irish were eligible to apply for. Xenophobia, alive and well in those long-distant days!
Yet what comes through the article is the glue that held South Boston together - a vivid sense of community and a defiant pride. Easier to develop when you are largely an immigrant community from a single origin, admittedly, but it is what appears to be sorely lacking in our local communities such as Hillbrow. This sense of community made it possible for one author of the times to declare that, in spite of the meanness of life, it was the best place in the world. That doesn't apply to Hillbrow!
Change started to take place in 1974 when the courts ruled that African-American students should be bussed to schools in South Boston and many existing white students be schooled in nearby African-American neighbourhood schools. Two years of conflict followed, which was followed in turn by flight from the area. Some major projects followed, including a new Convention Centre and others that provided easy access to the area for the first time in its history, which, together with cheap housing, made the area attractive to buyers.
The old bad things in the neighbourhood - aversion to outsiders and antagonism to change - are being shaken loose, but some of the best things about the community are slipping away. Susan Orlean writes, "The churn of gentrification in old city neighbourhoods is not a novel story, and recently gentrification has arrived, for better or for worse, in neighbourhoods no one would ever have expected to revive Washington's Capitol Hill, Brooklyn's Williamsburg... But it is an especially surprising turn in South Boston, a place that had always seemed cut off from the cycle of city life, and whose character was, for a century or so, rooted in a mighty, and sometimes violent, resistance to change." We can learn some lessons from South Boston.
The second must-read is a new report from The Brookings Institution as part of their Metropolitan Policy Program. Penned by Bruce Katz, it is entitled 'Neighbourhoods of Choice and Connection: the evolution of American Neighbourhood Policy and what it means for the United Kingdom'. An outstanding and thought-provoking paper, it demands a rethink to all involved in the regeneration of the city generally and in neighbourhoods like Hillbrow, in particular.
Katz points out that the impact of 40-plus years of experimentation, policies and programmes and billions of dollars spent in deteriorating neighbourhoods in the US has produced decidedly mixed results. To be sure, he says, some neighbourhoods can point to real improvements. But many initiatives, despite the best intentions, have failed to alleviate - and in some cases have exacerbated -the deteriorating economic and social conditions in inner cities.
Elsewhere he states that most metropolitan areas in the US remain sharply divided along racial, ethnic and class lines. Unbalanced growth patterns are not accidental: they have been deeply influenced by the politics of racial and ethnic exclusion practised in suburbs throughout the country.
These policies have exacerbated the concentration of racial and ethnic poverty in central cities (and increasingly inner suburbs) and helped construct the metropolitan dividing lines that separate areas of wealth and opportunity from areas of poverty and distress. He quotes John Powell: "Concentrated poverty should be understood as racial and economic segregation combined. It is the segregation of poor people of colour from opportunity and resources."
Katz examines three dominant renewal strategies prevalent in the States, the most dominant one being a place-based 'improving the neighbourhood' strategy, which accepts the socio-economic composition of the neighbourhood as given and looks to spark revitalisation by improving the physical stock and commercial quality of the community. Isn't this what we are doing in Hillbrow? Next is a people-based 'expanding opportunity' strategy, which seeks to link residents of distressed areas to employment and educational opportunities. The third 'transforming the neighbourhood' strategy focuses on fundamentally altering the socio-economic mix of distressed neighbourhoods and creating communities that are economically integrated and attractive to a broad range of households. It has both place-and people- based components. An illuminating analysis of a wide range of approaches within these strategies is included.
The message of his thesis, ultimately, is simple: A true rebirth of distressed areas (and the cities in which they are located) will only occur if we make these places neighbourhoods of choice for individuals and families with a broad range of incomes and neighbourhoods of connection that are fully linked to metropolitan opportunities. He comments further: "For Britain and America alike (and I suggest we add South Africa!), this thesis fundamentally challenges neighbourhood policies which, under the guise of revitalising communities, reinforce patterns of concentrated poverty - the root cause of neighbourhood distress. It also demands that neighbourhood actions operate within the broader metropolitan geography of opportunity rather than the insular, fixed borders of deprived areas." Meaty stuff!
Katz believes that the US is gradually moving towards a new, unified framework for neighbourhood policy called Creating Neighbourhoods of Choice and Connection. Neighbourhoods of choice are communities in which people of lower incomes can both find a place to start and, as their incomes rise, a place to stay. They are also communities to which people of higher incomes can move for their distinctiveness or amenities or location. This requires, first and foremost, an acceptance of economic integration as a goal of neighbourhood and housing policy. It also requires a dynamic, market-driven notion of neighbourhood change, rather than any community control vision dedicated to maintaining the status quo.
Neighbourhoods of connection are communities which link families to opportunity, wherever that opportunity is located. This requires a new, profound, and sustained commitment to improving the educational facilities in these communities and the cities in which they are largely located. It also requires a new, mature and pragmatic vision of the changing geography of opportunity, particularly with regard to jobs and other housing choices. Put the parts together, and this new vision treats people and place policies as fundamentally intertwined and mutually reinforcing.
Katz offers five central principles for creating Neighbourhoods of Choice and Connection:
- Neighbourhoods and neighbourhood policy needs to be set within a metropolitan context.
- Broader national, provincial and local policies need to align with the goals of neighbourhood policy.
- Neighbourhood policy needs to embrace economic and demographic diversity in both cities and suburbs
- Neighbourhood policy needs a mix of private- and community-sector action in both cities and suburbs.
- Neighbourhood policy needs to be implemented in an integrated, accountable and sustainable fashion.
Finally, after comparing neighbourhood policies in the US and the UK, Katz concludes that the regeneration of our most distressed neighbourhoods seems to hold out a fine opportunity for policy exchange as we enter this new century. We have much to learn and teach each other.
Although Katz is not a participant in our Cities in Change conference, to be held from 16 to 19 August, we will have a wealth of both US and UK experience to facilitate such policy exchange and to examine these critical issues. See you there!
