Abstract
Background: This article seeks to examine ethical dilemmas and clientelism in the allocation of low-cost houses using 10 selected villages under the jurisdiction of the Greater Giyani Local Municipality area as units of analysis. The hypothesis of the initial research was that political parties in control of government machinery employ low-cost houses as electioneering instruments. Aim: The aim of the article therefore is to investigate the extent to which clientelism and clientelistic strategies such as vote buying are pertinent to the housing provision. Setting: The research was guided by this question: what are the features of clientelism and their extent to the provision of low-cost houses at the Greater Giyani Local Municipality area? Methods: Mixed methods approach was used to solicit primary data in relation to clientelism and vote buying in the provision of low-cost houses. Results: The findings as presented in the article suggest that clientelism and vote buying are used in the allocation of low-cost houses but not to a larger extent as assumed. The findings therefore are not presenting a crystal clear picture regarding the manifestation of clientelism and vote buying specifically in relation to low-cost housing allocation. Conclusion: The article makes a significant contribution to the discourse on housing allocation in general and low-cost houses in particular, especially given the fact that it is located within clientelism and the strategies used in electioneering. The article further contributes to the discipline of Public Administration, Public Policy and to some extent politics. Studies in these areas fail to give attention to issues of public policy, ethics and clientelism. Municipalities and other housing provision authorities stand to benefit from the findings and the recommendations thereof. The article has the potential to shape legislative frameworks and procedures through which low-cost houses are allocated.
Highlights
Section 26(1) of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa (Hereafter referred to as the 1996 Constitution) states that ‘everyone has the right to have access to adequate housing’
The argument is premised on the view that there has been a neglect of legislative prescripts and frameworks underpinning the allocation of low-cost houses with focus shifting to political-scores settling and electioneering
Quantitative data were subjected to a Statistical Package of Social Sciences (SPSS) whilst data collected from interviews were categorised into specific thematic areas and analysed as such
Summary
Section 26(1) of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa (Hereafter referred to as the 1996 Constitution) states that ‘everyone has the right to have access to adequate housing’. Low-cost houses which became commonly known as ‘Reconstruction and Development Programme (RDP) houses’ befitted government’s approach in responding and respecting the constitutional right to adequate housing for all ‘deserving’ South Africans. In terms of the Breaking New Ground Policy of 2004 a low-cost house is one typology of social housing. In terms of such policy, social housing takes various forms such as flats, apartments, cooperative group transitional housing and shared hostels in order to include all income groups. A low-cost house is defined as housing for people whose combined monthly household incomes are below R3500 per month. The hypothesis of the initial research was that political parties in control of government machinery employ low-cost houses as electioneering instruments
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: Africa’s Public Service Delivery and Performance Review
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
