malvernmugadzikwa
IN recent decades, African countries have faced increasing pressure to change their urban policies, practices and laws.
The goal is to transform cities into engines of economic growth and shift towards a more inclusive and developmental urban governance system.
Despite global commitments to better urban management, few African nations have implemented significant changes to their urban governance and land-management legislation.
While new laws have been drafted in some cases, many have yet to be approved by the relevant legislative bodies. Even when enacted, full implementation remains elusive for many laws.
This lack of progress is partly attributed to the “export of regulatory rules and practices from major powers to weaker states”, a common practice in international economic law that has extended to urban law due to its crucial role in shaping property rights.
The prevailing view is that a country seeking to emulate the urban development and real estate sectors of more developed nations must also adopt their laws.
While new urban laws can benefit from international experience, they should not be solely dictated by it. African lawmakers should instead focus on the underlying context that contributed to the success (or failure) of laws in other countries.
By understanding the political, administrative and legal factors at play, they can identify what might work in their own context. Additionally, lawmakers should consider the substance and principles of global commitments and translate them into practical steps for improving urban law.
The commitments outlined in Agenda 2030, the New Urban Agenda and the Paris Agreement are valuable but can only be effective when implemented through legal provisions tailored to a country’s specific environment.
Building laws in some former Portuguese colonies included strict measures to mitigate earthquake damage, despite the minimal earthquake risk in these countries.
Similarly, a colonial administrator in Nairobi, Kenya, once decided the city needed building regulations. Instead of drafting new by-laws, he simply copied those from his hometown in England, replacing references to “Blackburn” with “Nairobi”.
As a result, Nairobi’s building regulations required roofs capable of withstanding six inches of snow.
Although these snow-load requirements were removed in the 1970s, building regulations in Nairobi continue to neglect the construction needs of the urban poor.
In developing countries, building standards often serve more as a means of social satisfaction than as a practical solution for reconciling the shelter needs of the population with environmental quality.
These unrealistic standards are frequently ignored by the majority of people.
Constitution
Constitutional changes can often lead to significant shifts in urban law, particularly when they affect the powers of local governments. In South Africa, the Constitutional Court’s resolution of a long-standing constitutional issue regarding “municipal planning” in 2010 paved the way for the drafting and enactment of the Spatial Planning and Land Use Management Act (2013), which resulted in substantial changes to the country’s urban and regional planning system. Prior to this decision, national, provincial and local governments were effectively paralysed when it came to initiating urban law reforms.
Civil society organisations, especially those with a broad base of supporters, can be instrumental in lobbying for urban law reform.
The Uganda Land Alliance, which is made up of 68 non-governmental organisations and individuals and formed in 1995, successfully advocated new urban legislation that recognises customary land tenure, the registration of women’s interests in customary land and the legal recognition of tenants on mailo (communal) land.
The alliance actively engaged with parliamentarians, attending sessions daily and meeting with officials to advocate its priorities. When necessary, it drafted clauses for contentious issues and sought support from sympathetic members of parliament to champion these clauses in the legislative process.
While these victories were significant, Ugandan authorities resisted change, which ultimately dampened the success of the reforms. — Wires
Online Reporter