Research Paper about The Accelerated Schools Infrastructure Delivery Initiative in South Africa

The Accelerated Schools Infrastructure Delivery Initiative, South Africa.

The Accelerated Schools Infrastructure Delivery Initiative Author: Al Zoubi, Abdel Rahman Technical University of Darmstadt “Mundus Urbano” International Cooperation in Urban Development Readings in Planning Theory Keywords: Participation; Collaborative; Planning; ASIDI; South Africa

The case study in brief: As a part of the Department of Basic Education (DBE) schooling plan for 2025, to improve learning outcomes and to make the access to education much better for the poor community in rural towns in South Africa, the Accelerated School Infrastructure Delivery Initiative (ASIDI), is a comprehensive school building program undertaken by DBE towards the eradication of inappropriate school facilities primarily in the rural areas of South Africa. The programme includes the provision of basic services – water, sanitation, and electricity through the short and long-term implementation process (DBSA, 2013).

“In July 2011, the DBE entered into an agreement with the Development Bank of Southern Africa (DBSA) as Implementing Agent, starting with the planning and construction of 50 schools in the Eastern Cape as the initial phase of ASIDI” (Design Space Africa, n.d.).

“ASIDI aims primarily to Eliminate the backlogs in school infrastructure, Upgrade the standard of schools to meet the optimum functionality levels prescribed by the Norms and Standards for Schools Infrastructure, and Eradicate inadequate, unsafe and poor physical infrastructure by using allocated funds properly” (DBSA, 2013).

In this paper I will represent the ideas where ASIDI is a good example of Collaborative Planning (the Participation in Urban Development), as the author Patsy Healey, in her article Collaborative Planning In Perspective, Planning Theory, 2003.

AL ZOUBI, ABDEL RAHMAN

1

The Accelerated Schools Infrastructure Delivery Initiative, South Africa.

How the case study meets the author’s paper?

I will be talking about the shared points between the case study and the author’s paper, which these points are representing the arguments and some of the common points from the previous assignment as a group work in the last week. From my perspective, after reading the case study and trying to analyze the case’s details, I could say that Healey’s papers were more similar and fitting to the case study. The author came up with the main argument “All planning activity involves some interactive relation and some kind of governance processes” (Healey, 2003, P107). And that what I found while am doing my paper, that project contains some interactive relations between government, private sectors, local community, and the media. The latter was playing an external part for evaluation, sharing the development of the implementation process with the local community.

To talk more about the case, the process of planning was involving many bodies, firstly the government, which represented in the Department of Basic Education (DBE), with a cooperation with the Development Bank of Southern Africa (DBSA), and Local contractors, engineers, as private sector parts, Lastly the local community represented by town representatives from the rural communities, school management teams, and some of the community people were worked with the contractors in construction phase where the projects will take place.

As Healey mentioned in her article Collaborative Planning In Perspective, Planning Theory, 2003. “The project that became Collaborative Planning was thus inspired first by the perception of planning as an interactive process. Second, I understood planning as a governance activity occurring in complex and dynamic institutional environments, shaped by wider economic, social and environmental forces that structure, but do not determine specific interactions. By governance, I meant the processes by which societies, and social groups, manage their collective affairs. There are, of course, many modes in which such governance can occur. Third, my focus was on planning and policy initiatives concerned with maintaining and enhancing the qualities of places and territories. Finally, my project was also motivated by a moral commitment to social justice, especially as realized in the fine grain of daily life experiences in the context of culturally diverse values about local environments and ways of life. This meant a concern not merely with the justness of material outcomes, but also with the processes through which policies about resource allocation and regulation are articulated and implemented” (Healey, 2003, P104).

AL ZOUBI, ABDEL RAHMAN

2

The Accelerated Schools Infrastructure Delivery Initiative, South Africa.

To apply the author’s points for the Collaborative Planning perspective in my case study, the interactive process in the project was prominent through all Stakeholder engagements, from the high level ‘management’ until the low level between social ‘community’ facilitators and local people in that community, the agreement between the DBE and DBSA which include the operational and administrational responsibilities for each part, and how the latter employed the local community to work with the contractors in the constructional phase which make kind of economy stability, respecting relation between the contractors and the local people.

And one of the main parts where played a critical part in the participation of the community was the Social and Infrastructure Delivery Division (IDD) Development facilitators, which they helped the community to be closer to the project, by establishing project steering committees in all construction and maintenance projects and included representatives such as ward councillors and local chiefs in the case of rural projects.

Social Facilitator where the connection chain between the community, DBE, and DBSA, so the community through them could participate in decision making of some points while constructing the schools, “such as; some changes at the constructed parts of the schools, material and colours changing” (Mahlangu, 2015), which that consider as a freedom for the community to participate with the social facilitator. “The DBSA successfully incorporated social facilitation in our projects as a critical element which has assisted in drawing communities closer to the projects.

IDD’s development

facilitators established project steering communities in all construction and maintenance projects and included representatives such as ward councillors and local chiefs in the case of rural projects. They were able to address conflict between workers and contractors/subcontractors, especially around payment of wages” (DBSA, 2013).

As I understand from the author’s article the goal for most of this interactive participation and collaborative planning is to achieve and enhance the qualities of places, which was a good approach in this case for sharing the opinions from the community with the implementing team through community meetings and project progress sessions. That what considered as a commitment for social justice as well.

“The impact of ASIDI is far reaching. Firstly, it is providing infrastructure that exceeds the minimum norms and standards for educational facilities in South Africa. This, in rural and other economically depressed areas, is a significant development for communities who constantly refer to ASIDI schools as ‘universities’. Secondly, much more than brick and mortar, ASIDI schools are helping to restore dignity and pride for AL ZOUBI, ABDEL RAHMAN

3

The Accelerated Schools Infrastructure Delivery Initiative, South Africa.

people who had gone far too long deprived of facilities that are taken for granted elsewhere” ("ASIDI: Who and why we are," 2018).

Personal conclusion: As a conclusion I find that the author’s article resembles my case study in perspective of the participation process and collaborative planning, providing strong points to Healey’s article. In that part of the collaborative process, participation is necessary and critical for planning and decision making. It provides an arena that allows ideas to be discussed and opinions to be shared in two directions (top-down and bottom-up), so it could make changes in the decision making process. By making power relationships more dynamic between stakeholders, and allowing more opportunity to innovate, thus these relationships enables more actors to participate in shaping the plans.

AL ZOUBI, ABDEL RAHMAN

4

The Accelerated Schools Infrastructure Delivery Initiative, South Africa.

References Development Bank of Southern Africa (DBSA). (2013). Accelerated Schools Infrastructure Delivery Initiative (ASIDI). Retrieved from https://www.dbsa.org/EN/About-Us/Projects-2017/Pages/ASIDI.aspx Design Space Africa. N.d. DBSA 50 schools in the Eastern Cape. Retrieved from http://www.designspaceafrica.com/50-schools-in-the-eastern-cape/ Healey, Patsy. (2003). Collaborative Planning in Perspective. Planning Theory, 2(2), Page 101-123.

ASIDI: Who and why we are. (2018). Retrieved from https://www.education.gov.za/Programmes/ASIDI.aspx

AL ZOUBI, ABDEL RAHMAN

5