Paul Whelan and David Schmidt
Across the world, societies wrestle with the problems of how best to govern their metropolitan conurbations, so critical to national economies and the livelihoods of millions of people.
Metropolitan governance is a difficult and rather messy affair. Metros are complex, they tend to concentrate major social problems, they outgrow their boundaries. They are also politically problematic because their size makes their governments a potential threat to provincial and national governments.
In South Africa, democratic metropolitan local government systems comprising elected metropolitan councils and metropolitan local councils were established through the local negotiating process and elections prescribed in the Local Government Transition Act. New non-racial boundaries were established, the old apartheid administrations were amalgamated and major processes of re- organisation were initiated.
Metropolitan areas had considerable scope to develop their own arrangements. Research done for the White Paper by the Foundation of Contemporary Research recently describes the richness of local responses to the challenges of governing large cities, and indicates very different approaches have been adopted in the Johannesburg, Durban and Cape metropolitan areas.
A further wave of structural change is on the cards with the introduction of the Municipal Structures Bill. The Bill proposes to establish a one-tier system with a single metropolitan council having original powers for each metropolitan area, although scope is left for establishing sub-structures or ward councils to enable decentralised decision- making and to facilitate community access and participation.
The issue that should underpin this debate is a clear concept of the critical elements of effective metropolitan governance. A body of knowledge about metropolitan management has emerged internationally. This includes the following propositions:
l Ensure your metropolitan authority has the capacity to provide strategic direction and leadership. Metropolitan areas require strong leadership in a time of massive flux and uncertainty.
l Get the balance right between centralisation and decentralisation.
Most services and issues are probably best managed on a local level. Other functions require centralised provision because of economies of scale or because the issue requires a common metropolitan approach.
This has been described as the 80-20 rule: 80% of municipal functions or issues are local in character; 20% require metropolitan- scale attention.
The foundation’s research indicates rather different approaches to this balance have been adopted in the different metropolitan areas.
l Build the partnerships. Metropolitan areas require the co-operation of a variety of role players. All spheres of government have important roles in managing metros, and they need to co-ordinate their activities.
A lack of clarity of the roles of different spheres of government regarding issues from housing to transport and safety and security has impeded progress in these critical areas in probably all our metropolitan areas. Similarly, the private sector has a critical role and public/private partnerships are an increasing feature of modern urban management.
l Develop an efficent urban form and provide good infrastructure.
All the metropolitan areas have drawn up spatial development frameworks and metropolitan transport plans, and there have been some innovative approaches to service delivery.
However, changing the shape of cities and providing the necessary infrastructure to ensure decent living conditions for all and global competitiveness require a scale of capital investment which local government currently cannot afford.
l Manage municipal finances on a metropolitan basis. At the very least, all industrial and commercial rates should be pooled and distributed on a metropolitan basis.
l Protect the central business districts. These represent huge investments and networks of knowledge. They are powerful drivers of economic activity in the metro and are magnets for investment growth. At the same time, they are vulnerable and require excellent management.
l Cities are all about citizens. Involving the people, building a sense of civic pride and responsibility and fostering social harmony are fundamental ingredients for social and economic progress.
The debate on metropolitan governance of late has been dominated by a narrow focus on institutional structures. This is understandable, given the drive to set up municipal bodies for which elections due in 2000 can be held.
The more important questions, however, relate to how to establish workable and robust systems.
Paul Whelan is policy researcher at the Foundation of Contemporary Research; David Schmidt is director of the Local Government Learning Network (Logon)
ENDS
–Message-Boundary-16376–