MATSETE KAPA PEHELETSO YA TJHELETE YA DIKHAMPANE TSA PORAEFETE TSA NTSHETSOPELE Published by the UFS YA LEFATSHE LE KGOLO YA http://journals.ufs.ac.za/index.php/trp TOROPO KA MORA DINAKO TSA © Creative Commons With Attribution (CC-BY) How to cite: Muzorewa, T.T. & Nyandoro, M. 2019. Investment by private land developer companies and postcolonial BOKOLONE RUWA (ZIMBABWE), urban growth in Ruwa (Zimbabwe), 1986-2015. Town and Regional planning, no.74, pp. 51-63. 1986-2015 Atikele ena e lekola ka mokgwa Investment by private land developer companies wa boleng, seabo sa letsete kapa and postcolonial urban growth in Ruwa (Zimbabwe), peheletso ya tjhelete ya dikhampane tsa poraefete tsa ntshetsopele ya lefatshe 1986-2015 ntshetsopeleng ya toropo ya Zimbabwe ka mora dinako tsa bokolone, ka ho qoolla, re itshetlehile toropong ya Ruwa Terence Muzorewa & Mark Nyandoro (Ruwa Town). Toropo ena e teteaneng e tswa pele ka ho kenya batho ba poraefete ba ntshetsang lefatshe pele kgolong le katolosong ya yona. Ditoropo tsohle tse DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.18820/2415-0495/trp74i1.5 entsweng ka mora nako ya bokolone Revised April 2019, Published 30 June 2019 di ile tsa hlaha ho tswa ho letsete kapa The authors declared no conflict of interest for this title or article peheletsong ya tjhelete ya Mmuso ka tshebediso ya Growth Point Policy. Ka ho bontsha phapang, Ruwa e ne e ikgethile, Abstract ka lebaka la hore e hlahile/thehilwe This article qualitatively analyses the role of private land developer companies’ ka mokgwa wa kopanelo ya setjhaba- investment in postcolonial Zimbabwe’s urban development, with special reference to poraefete (public-private). Atikele ena e Ruwa Town. This sprawling town is outstanding for involving private land developers ngangisana ka hore, ho se be teng ha in its growth and expansion. All postcolonial established towns had emerged out of bokgoni ba mmuso ba ditjhelete (State Government’s direct investment through the Growth Point policy. By contrast, Ruwa financial capacity) ka dinako tsa ka mora was peculiar, because it developed from a public-private partnership approach. bokolone, dikhampane tsa ntshetsopele The article argues that, in the absence of State financial capacity in the postcolonial di bapetse karolo ya bohlokwa era, developer companies played a crucial role in infrastructure development and ntshetsopeleng ya meralo ya motheo le facilitation of public amenities. Although the companies were important in spearheading ho nolofatseng ditshebeletso tsa batho. the growth of the town, they sometimes failed to meet certain standards of quality in Le hoja dikhampane di ne di le bohlokwa urban infrastructure development required by town planning authorities. Despite this bakeng sa ho etellapele kgolo ya toropo, shortcoming, the article finds that the companies were essentially the most appropriate ka nako tse ding di ne di hloleha ho fihlella vehicles of urban development in times of economic crisis in the country. maemo a itseng a boleng ntshetsopeleng Keywords: Infrastructure development, postcolonial infrastructure development, ya meralo ya motheo toropong, e neng e private land developer companies, Ruwa, Zimbabwe batlwa ke bolaudi ba thero ya toropo. Ntle le ho hloleha hona, atikele ena e fumana hore dikhampane ka hohlehohle e ne e BELEGGING DEUR PRIVAATLANDONTWIKKELAARSMAATSKAPPYE EN le disebediswa tse loketseng bakeng POSTKOLONIALE STEDELIKE GROEI IN RUWA (ZIMBABWE), 1986-2015 sa ntshetsopele ya toropo ka dinako tsa mathata a moruo naheng. Hierdie artikel analiseer die rol van private landontwikkelaarsmaatskappye se beleggings in postkoloniale Zimbabwe se stedelike ontwikkeling, met spesifieke verwysing na die dorp Ruwa. Die uitgestrekte dorp staan uit omdat private grondontwikkelaars in sy 1. INTRODUCTION groei en uitbreiding betrek was. Alle postkoloniale gevestigde dorpe het ontstaan uit die regering se direkte belegging deur die groeipuntbeleid. Daarenteen was Ruwa Scholars who have written on uniek omdat dit ontwikkel het uit ’n openbare-private vennootskapsbenadering. urban development in Zimbabwe Die artikel beweer dat ontwikkelaarsmaatskappye, in die afwesigheid van have generally viewed urban staatsfinansiële kapasiteit in die postkoloniale era, ’n belangrike rol gespeel het in die infrastructure development as ontwikkeling van infrastruktuur en die fasilitering van openbare geriewe. Alhoewel die a state or government function. maatskappye belangrik was om die groei van die dorp te bevorder, het hulle soms nie sekere standaarde van gehalte in stedelike infrastruktuurontwikkeling wat deur Because of this, they have missed stadsbeplanning beveel is, nagekom nie. Ten spyte van hierdie tekortkoming, bevind the role of Private Land Developer die artikel dat hierdie maatskappye op daardie stadium die mees geskikte ‘voertuie’ vir Companies (PLDCs) in rapidly stedelike ontwikkeling in die land was. growing towns. They have also Sleutelwoorde: Infrastruktuurontwikkeling, postkoloniale infrastruktuurontwikkeling, missed the intricate links between private grondontwikkelaarsmaatskappye, Ruwa, Zimbabwe the state and developer companies
Dr Terence (T.T.) Muzorewa, Lecturer, Department of Development Studies, Rural and Urban Development Research, Midlands State University, Harare Campus, 1 Kwame Street, Harare, Zimbabwe. Phone: +263 78212 3244, e-mail:
SSB/TRP/MDM 2019 (74):51-63 | ISSN 1012-280 | e-ISSN 2415-0495
51 SSB/TRP/MDM 2019 (74) leading to a not-so-intended stimulated it. The uniqueness of in the early 1990s (Mlambo, 1997) public-private partnership. Ruwa Town development indicates and the controversial land reforms Literature by, for example, Moszoro how modern urban development of 2000. The government and the and Krzyzanowsk (2011), Ding was achievable in Zimbabwe based emerging urban administrations, on and Lichtenbery (2009) and on a total different experience. their own, were financially constrained Van Der Veen (2009) on PLDCs The article articulates how a growth during ESAP (1990/1991-1995) to and their functions in terms of urban point, initially rendered defunct, was put up infrastructure in the form of spaces has mainly focused on the then reorganised into a flourishing roads, sewerage and water systems, role and efficacy of these non-state post-independence fast-growing town electricity facilities, educational institutions in industrial and fast- following an influx of residents from institutions and health facilities, which industrialising societies’ growth and the rural areas and from nearby major was commensurate with a rapidly expansion. Until 2015, the role that metropolitan centres such as Harare. urbanising area. The government-run private sector companies and their Ruwa Local Authority or Ruwa Local investment played in developing Board (RLB), therefore, in a top-up 2. LITERATURE REVIEW urban land for residential and type of land access for development, commercial purposes was significant, In order to understand urban invited PLDCs to create a partnership given the difficult economic development in Ruwa, Zimbabwe, in service provision and town circumstances prevalent in Zimbabwe it is important to introduce the development. The developers owned during this period (Nyandoro & theory on partnership included 99% of the 3 188 ha of land available Muzorewa, 2017: 8). In general, the in this study. The existing theory for development in the area and had State in no partnership with private focuses on PLDCs, public-private better financial resources (Ruwa Town sector companies was instrumental partnerships (PPPs), bilateral Council, 2011: 7). These private sector in aiding town growth in a number partnership and the Regional, Town companies responded positively to the of areas in Zimbabwe. However, the and Country Planning Act (1976) call as they were in the business of country’s first specific experience as the base for a partnership. buying, developing and selling land. As with developer companies taking a result, between 1987 and 2015, there a leading corporate role in the 2.1 Urban development in were nine major and active developers emergence of a town, born out of the Ruwa, Zimbabwe operating in Ruwa. These were ashes of a defunct growth point, only The unremitting economic crisis Mashonaland Holdings Private Limited, manifested itself in the Ruwa case. in Zimbabwe (with the effect of Chipukutu Properties, Zimbabwe Reinsurance Corporation (ZIMRE), The article investigates the role of hindering industrialisation) has Wentspring Investments Private PLDCs in the development of Ruwa demonstrated not only the lack Limited, Damofalls Investments Land Town in Zimbabwe. It assesses the of state and urban authorities’ Developers, Fairview Land Developers, contribution of these institutions to capacity to finance urban growth, Zimbabwe Housing Company, the infrastructure development and but also the centrality of non- Barochit Property Developers, and expansion of the local economy of state institutions in the country Tawona Gardens Private Limited. Ruwa since its inception in 1986. to facilitate the development of PLDCs were a unique case of urban infrastructure and public 2.2 Private land developer non-direct government investment amenities in sprawling towns. companies (PLDCs) in postcolonial urban growth in the Ever-changing rural and quasi- country. This article shows that urban authorities managed various PLDCs, also referred to as postcolonial small town growth in services in the period up to 1986, developers, are companies that Zimbabwe is not a homogeneous, but service provision generally subdivide land, which they own or but rather a heterogeneous and remained in shambles. There was purchase from individual private contested process that involves a need for improved services by the owners, into urban residential numerous town developer actors. growing numbers of people moving plots for the purpose of making a These private developer players in in from Harare and different parts profit (Chirisa, 2013: 113). PLDCs Ruwa (a town located in the East of the country to settle there after are responsible for advancing the of the capital, Harare) operated as independence (Nyandoro & Muzorewa, process of urbanisation worldwide. autonomous units who, however, 2017: 6). Residents of the area mainly Van Der Veen (2009) illustrates interacted with the government hoped that independence would how major western cities such as mostly at the infrastructure rapidly transform towns such as Ruwa London, New York and Amsterdam development level, not necessarily from a rural to an urban settlement. have involved private developers in at the spatial planning level. However, this did not happen as fast their growth and renewal processes. The government did not purposely as anticipated, due to the economic In Britain, the companies were intend to have this interaction, crisis besetting Zimbabwe in the early popularised by Margaret Thatcher but the lack of capacity and funds 1980s – a crisis exacerbated by the during her reign as Prime Minister, in a country experiencing myriad introduction of the Economic Structural while President Ronald Reagan economic hardships since the 1990s Adjustment Programme (ESAP) made them popular in the United
52 Terence Muzorewa & Mark Nyandoro • Investment by private land developer companies and postcolonial urban growth in Ruwa
States of America (USA) for providing clear and unambiguous principles in permit in order to develop land. housing and urban infrastructure their contracts with PLDCs in order The development permit was the (Mifaftab, 2004: 90). In the East, to avoid the domination of these primary document establishing a China and Russia also employed for-profit private partners. The work legal partnership between PLDCs PLDCs in building essential of these scholars clarifies the and local authorities in Ruwa infrastructure and expanding partnership theory, and their ideas and contained conditions and their cities (Wei, Taubenbock have partly influenced the analysis guidelines for the developer. The & Blaschke, 2017: 32; Ding & of the nature of the partnership that RTCPA was a step taken by the Lichtenberg, 2009: 1). In most cases emerged in Zimbabwe between the government of Zimbabwe to create worldwide, development organisations Ruwa local authorities and PLDCs. regulations for housing, sanitation, employed PLDCs to expand and transportation (road) and industrial renew towns and cities that were 2.4 Bilateral partnership infrastructure development under already established, but in Ruwa, Since Ruwa is a new town developed the Ruwa Development Plan of 1996 these companies took a leading role during the independence era, (Ruwa Town Council, 2011: 2). in shaping the built environment from there is hardly any literature on As stipulated by the Act, no the inception of the town until 2015. it compared to big cities such as development involving the In Zimbabwe, PLDCs operated Harare and Bulawayo. In a D.Phil. change of land use and intensity within the context of urbanisation and study on Ruwa, Chirisa (2013: 46-47) of infrastructure building was land markets. Marongwe, Mukoto uses the stewardship theory and allowed without a development and Chatiza (2011: 11-12) analysed the partnership model as major permit (National Archives of urban markets in the country, concepts to guide his analysis on Zimbabwe 38971, 1995). Before defining them as the platform for housing and infrastructure delivery. any construction or development interaction among land buyers, land Merging stewardship theory and the commenced, PLDCs were, therefore, developers and retailers, as well as partnership model, he came up with obliged to apply for a development the process of registration of land what he calls ‘institutional pluralism’, permit to the Department of Physical and property. They are part of the which he defines as “the cooperation Planning of the Ministry of Local framework that governs planning of the government and civic society Government. The Department and land administration in the groups including the private sector, of Physical Planning worked country. In examining the situation community and non-governmental with local planning authorities to facing different land developers in organisations” in providing urban draft the permit and to authorise the urban land market in Zimbabwe, infrastructure (Chirisa, 2013: 2). permit applicants to start work. Marongwe et al. (2011: 12) contend His thesis calls for the creation of a This then marked the evolution and that most of the companies’ forum for institutions to collaborate consolidation of a collaborative economic and policy challenges for the general good of citizens in process demonstrating the emanated from the economic crisis housing provision (Chirisa, 2013: 39). involvement of multiple stakeholders. facing the country post-1980. Unlike Chirisa’s institutional pluralism, In order to achieve common this article focuses on the bilateral objectives, the various stakeholders 2.3 Public-private partnerships partnership between Ruwa local mobilised by the State and the local (PPPs) authorities and PLDCs. While the government-run town council to Moszoro and Krzyzanowsk (2011: 3) article examines Ruwa’s experience interact and negotiate horizontally, examine broad public-private with PLDCs taking a leading role actively involved the urban planning partnerships and the theory in the emergence of a town, it also authorities in the permit process underpinning them. In their work, shows (using qualitative approaches) (Follador, Duarte & Carrier, 2018: 1; they view PPP institutions’ operations the companies’ differential impact Nyandoro & Muzorewa, 2017: 3). as closely linked to PLDCs, and on town development and the Involving the Ruwa planning PPPs as “cooperation agreements importance in Ruwa of imbedding authorities in making decisions between a public authority and the partnership theory or approach on permit applications gave the the private sector to provide public to urban studies. The Regional, Council a sense of ownership of service”. These scholars provide Town and Country Planning Act the infrastructure development the background of the theory and of 1976 provided the most solid projects applied for by developers the risks involved in using the PPP foundation of a partnership in Ruwa. in a country not historically known approach in urban development and for such collaboration between public service delivery. According to 2.5 The Regional, Town and multiple social actors, councils and Moszoro and Krzyzanowsk (2011: 3), Country Planning Act (1976): the State. However, such ownership The basis for a partnership governments must be cautious of was nominal, as the Council lacked the tendency by private entities to The Regional, Town and Country direct control of the activities of the take total control of public projects. Planning Act (RTCPA) of 1976 land developers except through Hence, they urge governments to set required one to have a development granting the permit (for which they
53 SSB/TRP/MDM 2019 (74) were the custodians) and exacting endowment payments from the developers. This, in some way, constituted a modicum model for private land developers to have a measure of control over land in the post-colony in Zimbabwe. The RTCPA clearly stipulated that applicants for land subdivision for development purposes should set aside land for public amenities. It, thus, made it mandatory for PLDCs to set aside land for their construction (Government of Zimbabwe, 1996). After granting the land permit to a PLDC, it became the duty of the local planning authority to monitor the development activities of the developer company. Once issued, the permit was valid for between 12 and 24 months depending on the scale of the land development project applied for (Government of Zimbabwe, 1996). Development permits offered to PLDCs show that most of the projects Figure 1: Map of Zimbabwe showing Ruwa undertaken by the developers in Source: Department of Surveyor General, Harare, 2013 Ruwa ranged in size from 25 to 600 hectares. The primary role of the companies derived from the new and Table 1: Urban populations of Ruwa and other towns in Zimbabwe, 1982-2012 astute town planning that replaced 2002-2012 growth City 1982 Census 1992 Census 2002 Census 2012 Census the old piecemeal or ad hoc planning. percentage Harare 656 011 1 189 103 1 444 534 1 485 231 0.28 3. STUDY AREA Bulawayo 413 814 621 742 676 784 653 337 -0.35 Chitungwiza 172 556 274 912 321 782 356 840 10.9 3.1 Development background of Mutare 69 621 131 367 170 106 187 621 10.3 Ruwa town Epworth 114 067 167 462 46.8 Gweru 78 918 128 037 141 260 157 865 11.8 Situated 23 km from the capital Kwekwe 47 607 75 425 93 072 100 900 8.4 city of Zimbabwe, Harare’s central Kadoma 44 613 67 750 76 117 92 469 21.4 business district (CBD), Ruwa town Masvingo 30 523 51 743 69 993 87 866 25.5 is a postcolonial established town Chinhoi 24 322 43 054 56 794 77 929 37.2 (see Figure 1 for location of Ruwa in Zimbabwe). The town was founded Norton 20 405 44 397 67 591 52.2 on a White commercial farming area, Marondera 19 971 39 384 52 283 61 998 18.6 which existed under the Bromley Ruwa 01 447 23 689 56 678 139.3 Ruwa Rural Council (BRRC) in Chegutu 19 606 30 191 43 424 50 255 15.7 the now Goromonzi District of Zvishavane 20 597 32 984 35 128 45 230 28.8 Mashonaland East Province. Ruwa Bindura 18 243 21 167 33 637 42 861 27.4 was established in 1890 as a farming Beitbridge 11 596 22 136 41 767 88.7 area and its first local administrative Redcliff 22 109 29 959 32 417 35 904 10.8 Victoria 8 126 16 826 31 519 33 660 6.6 authority, the BRRC, was set up Falls in 1950 (Muzorewa, 2017: 15). Rusape 8 216 13 920 22 741 30 316 33.3 In 1980, when Zimbabwe became Chiredzi 10 257 21 116 25 849 30 197 16.8 independent, the BRRC changed Kariba 12 364 20 736 22 726 26 112 16.4 its name to the Goromonzi Rural Karoi 8 748 14 763 22 383 26 009 16.2 District Council, and the area Chipinge 6 077 11 582 16 539 25 214 52.5 assumed growth point status in 1986 Gokwe 7 418 17 703 23 906 35.0 (Muzorewa, 2017: 15). Operating as a growth point from 1986 to 1990, Source: Central Statistical Office, Population Unit, Harare, 2014
54 Terence Muzorewa & Mark Nyandoro • Investment by private land developer companies and postcolonial urban growth in Ruwa
Ruwa became an urban area under 4.1 Town planning in Ruwa and in duplication of zoning of land the administration of the Ruwa Local its interface with private use or services in adjacent or Board (RLB) set up in September sector companies neighbouring development projects. 1990 (Ruwa Town Council, 2011: 6). The early stages of Ruwa’s In the aftermath of these It was subsequently granted town development were characterised by developments, being the first status and effectively weaned from ad hoc or piecemeal planning. This urban local authority responsible metropolitan Harare in 2008, with methodology of planning involves for Ruwa, in 1990, the Ruwa Local the Ruwa Town Council (RTC) given the use of a number of independent Board discovered that the area had the role to administer the town. and different micro-layout plans been characterised by incremental (Chigara, Magwaro-Ndiweni, It only took two decades for Ruwa and ad hoc subdivision of private Mudzengerere & Ncube, 2013: to develop from a rural growth point land without an overall planning 32). Such type of planning has document in place. Therefore, the to a town. It was the fastest growing been associated with a myriad of RLB started to prepare the Ruwa town in the country between 2002 weaknesses that include lack of Local Development Plan (LDP) with and 2012, which was characterised harmony in land use, uncoordinated the aim of harmonising development by an economic meltdown. Table developments in sprawling and stopping piecemeal planning 1 shows the population growth environments, and disorderliness. by adopting formal planning in of Ruwa vis-à-vis other towns. In Zimbabwe, piecemeal planning the development of the town. The was a result of the incapacity of Table 1 illustrates population preparation of the first draft of the small towns to develop both local growth in percentage terms of all LDP took place from 1991 to 1996, development plans and master plans major towns in Zimbabwe between but it was only approved in 2000 (Chigara et al., 2013: 32). Generating 1982 and 2012. The last census (Muzorewa, 2017: 108). This was or creating local development plans in Zimbabwe was held in 2012. rather too late to rectify the damage involved consultation with land A comparison of the population caused by piecemeal planning, since surveyors. This was a cumbersome some PLDCs had already received growth rates of the towns shows process for small towns such as their land development permits, with that Ruwa’s growth was exceptional. Ruwa with limited technical staff However, before the developer and financial resources. In Ruwa, others already engaged in developing companies-Council-partnership, using piecemeal planning, every the areas allocated to them. Ruwa did not have an urban PLDC prepared a plan or diagram Notwithstanding these challenges, infrastructure, because it still showing the subdivision of the land PLDCs’ planning resulted in the existed as a commercial farming to be developed. Because the plans development of more residential area, as illustrated in Figure 2. were prepared in isolation and areas than any other land scheme in different periods, this resulted Figure 2 shows Ruwa in 1980 in Ruwa and most of the residential before the intervention of PLDCs in the development process of the town. The area was a commercial farming area with some supporting infrastructure for farming ventures.
4. METHODOLOGY In assessing the role played by the developers in the growth of Ruwa, the article uses primary and secondary sources to derive research data. Primary data was mainly derived from interviews chiefly based on purposive sampling targeting Ruwa residents, PLDCs’ personnel and workers of the Ruwa Council. The Ruwa Town Repository or Archive was a main source of primary data. Secondary sources (journals, books, articles, and newspapers) were useful in situating the Ruwa case within broader urban studies in Figure 2: Ruwa in 1980 Zimbabwe and the world at large. Source: H.A. Cartography, 2019
55 SSB/TRP/MDM 2019 (74) plots were sold to people who were over to the Ruwa Council in a Although Damofalls established working in Harare and Chitungwiza. process, which began in 1996, fewer industries than Mashonaland The number of residential areas in a year after the abandonment Holdings, it established a Ruwa outgrew the industrial parks, of ESAP (The Herald, 2007: 6). thriving industrial area housing thereby causing a degree of partial They serviced the town with roads, 23 manufacturing industries. dependency for jobs and services residential and industrial plots, However, by the end of 2015, the on Harare. This was because, and other infrastructure between Damofalls industrial site was not generally, Zimbabwe was facing an the late 1980s and 1990 when fully functional, because it was economic crisis of major proportions the Zimbabwe economy was still developed in the mid-2000s, a period between 2000 and 2008 that led to relatively stable (see Figure 3). when the nation at large was facing the collapse of the manufacturing In the early 1990s, the well-serviced economic turmoil. The economic industry. However, despite the industrial plots attracted a number crisis facing the nation retarded collapse of industries, housing of companies to operate in the industrial growth in the country, in continued to be a necessity among town (Muzorewa, 2017: 133). general, and in Ruwa, in particular. people in the country, causing a high Odero (2003: 5) notes that the On the whole, the post-2000 demand for residential plots, but a well-serviced industrial plots and the economic crisis in Zimbabwe meant low demand for industrial plots. building of a water pump station by that, by 2015, Ruwa’s industrial this developer effectively reduced area only housed 205 industries. 4.2 Contribution of private land the cost of industrial investments developer companies in the Figure 3 is a satellite view of the to prospective investors, thereby growth of Ruwa, 1986-2015 Ruwa industrial area developed attracting industries to the area. The by Mashonaland Holdings. PLDCs made significant contributions serviced plots, for instance, attracted It gives a good view of the road in various areas of town development industrial companies such as Agric- network providing easy access that included the development Africa to relocate from Harare to to every industrial plant. of residential, commercial and Ruwa, because the cost of investing industrial areas (Ruwa Town in new industrial plants and off-site 4.4 PLDCs and the Council, 2011: 4). The companies infrastructure by PLD investors was establishment of low-cost were responsible for the construction 50% lower compared to Harare housing in Ruwa of on-site, off-site and public (Odero, 2003: 4). The serviced infrastructure in the town. In Ruwa, Mashonaland Holdings plots in Ruwa Apart from establishing industrial land was mainly privately owned mainly resulted in the establishment complexes, PLDCs played a and from the attainment of growth of the 120 industrial companies that crucial role in the development point status in 1986, many private employed over 7 000 people by the of high-density, low-cost housing landowners resorted to subdividing mid-1990s (The Herald, 2007: 6). and medium-density suburbs that their land for the purposes of urban development (Chirisa, 2013: 18). The Ruwa Local Council Board had assigned every PLDC a specific area to develop. After receiving development permits granted under the auspices of the RTCPA, the PLDCs commenced their land development projects in Ruwa and were influential in the development of both industrial sites and low- income housing infrastructure that greatly stimulated the process of urbanisation (The Herald, 2007: 6).
4.3 PLDCs and the establishment of manufacturing industries in Ruwa PLDCs such as Mashonaland Holdings and Damofalls immensely contributed to industrial development, with the former playing a leading role in developing infrastructure Figure 3: Ruwa industrial area satellite picture and subsequently handing it Source: Picture by T.T. Muzorewa using Google Earth, April 2012
56 Terence Muzorewa & Mark Nyandoro • Investment by private land developer companies and postcolonial urban growth in Ruwa generated some employment that some PLDCs went out of their way to In an interview on 10 June 2014, partly cushioned some construction provide affordable housing loans of Albert Paulo (a land development workers from the effects of the more than USD 30 000 to their clients officer) noted that 450-square ESAP and immediate post-ESAP in 2009 when the Zimbabwean metre plots in Fairview, which were eras. Because of the prominent role economy became relatively stable available after the hyper-inflation performed by the private developers, under the Government of National period, were sold in 2009 for only the naming of most of the suburbs Unity (Chirisa, 2013: 213). A case in USD 8500. This was relatively in Ruwa after the companies that point was ZB Financial Holdings that, affordable for some low-income developed them became common. from 2009 to 2012, gave loans to earners and led to the development The first company to establish a 394 clients to buy high-density plots of approximately 6 000 properties residential suburb was Mashonaland and construct houses in Springvale by PLDCs (Muzorewa, 2017: 108). Holdings (see Figure 4). A number Park. The development resulted However, the development of of companies followed Mashonaland in the provision of much-needed high- and medium-density suburbs Holdings’ example. These include shelter for lower income inhabitants by PLDCs had intrinsic problems. of the town in a manner synonymous Chipukutu Properties, responsible PLDCs found the selling of residential with the case of Houston, Texas for developing Chipukutu Park, plots in high-density suburbs so in the USA (King & Lowe, 2018). and the Zimbabwe Reinsurance profitable that this affected the Corporation (ZIMRE) which The harsh economic conditions development of other important developed ZIMRE Park. In addition, following ESAP, but cheaper land land-use schemes such as industrial ZB Bank/Wentspring Investments prices of USD 10 per m2 motivated and commercial. The development Private Limited developed Springvale settlement in Ruwa post-1996. of Cranbrook Park is an example Park; Damofalls Investments Land The end of ESAP until the 2000s of a situation where a high-density Developers developed Damofalls witnessed many people moving/ suburb was prioritised over the Park; Fairview Land Developers relocating from Harare to Ruwa, as establishment of an industrial area. developed Fairview Park; the the latter offered affordable housing In the Ruwa Development Plan, Zimbabwe Housing Company compared to the capital city (Odero, Cranbrook farm had been zoned for developed Cranbrook Park; Barochit 2003: 4). Economic inflation, which industrial plot development, but the Property Developers developed increased with the land invasions plan was changed to a residential Barochit Park, and Tawona Gardens of 2000, reached alarmingly one after the developer realised the Private Limited developed both the hyper levels of 79 600 000 000% dire need for plots for the low-income Tawona Gardens high-density suburb per annum by 2008. Inflation earners compared to industrial and Marcus Park. The emergence of motivated brisk business in the facilities (Palmer Associates Private these relatively low-cost residential buying of land perceived to be Limited, 1996: 2). However, changing areas near Harare was of immense cheap on the low-income market. the Local Development Plan left benefit to many property-seeking people in a time of economic crisis. The development of high- and medium-density suburbs, in particular, benefited the low- and medium-income earning groups in Ruwa and other surrounding places such as Chitungwiza, Goromonzi and Harare. The Ruwa Local Authority tried to ensure that the low-income earning groups benefited first by giving them preference over plots and built housing in every high- density suburb. The Local Authority did this by recommending people employed in Ruwa and those on the Council housing waiting list to be prioritised by the PLDCs in the allocation of plots and houses. The Ruwa housing waiting list is a list of local home seekers who paid annual subscriptions to be top priority beneficiaries of low-cost housing. Because Ruwa mainly comprised Figure 4: Ruwa location medium-/high-density residential park local low-income home seekers, Source: Picture by T.T. Muzorewa using Google Earth, April 2012
57 SSB/TRP/MDM 2019 (74) the town with less land for the of community amenities such as 4.6 The development of expansion of manufacturing industry. churches and beer halls. In Zimre educational and health Figure 4 is a satellite view of Ruwa Park, the developer reserved land facilities in Ruwa: A PLDC location residential suburb. The for a beer garden, a tavern and a responsibility picture shows the southern part of community beer hall (Ruwa Town The developer companies also the suburb, which is a medium-/ Council, 2006a). Mashonaland facilitated the establishment of high-density residential area. Holdings also constructed educational institutions in Ruwa. Medium- to high-density suburbs Mavambo Beer Hall (Ruwa Colonial urban development was were prioritised over industrial Town Council, 2006a). Religious characterised by State monopoly sites, as illustrated in Figure 5. denominations such as the Anglican in the development of pro-White Figure 5 shows how Ruwa had Church, the United Methodist, the educational facilities. White schools, developed by 2015. In only Methodist Church in Zimbabwe, the the so-called Group A schools, were relatively well equipped three decades from 1986, the Seventh Day Adventist, His People with state-of-the-art classrooms PLDCs developed Ruwa from a Ministries, the Salvation Army and commercial rural farming area to an and sporting amenities. In Ruwa, Maranatha benefited from the land Mashonaland Holdings was one urban centre. This map of spatial that Mashonaland Holdings reserved development in Ruwa illuminates of the first companies to develop a for community purposes (Ruwa Town different land uses and zoning of secondary school for Africans and Council, 2011: 12). There were, for the industrial and residential areas. provided land for the construction instance, eight church plots reserved of Chiremba Primary School for 4.5 The development of for faith-based organisations in the African pupils. In 1997, the PLDC public recreational and Damofalls area and all of the plots (Mashonaland Holdings), through social amenities in Ruwa: were occupied by the end of 2001 its subsidiary construction company, A PLDC responsibility (Ruwa Town Council, 2001a). In all Club Construction, constructed the suburbs, at least one plot was the T C Hardy Secondary School PLDCs played a leading role in the (The Herald, 2007: 6). The school reserved for a church. Churches development of public and social primarily served the low- and catered for the religious, spiritual amenities in Ruwa, as they left medium-income earning groups and social needs of the community. open spaces for public recreational who constituted the majority of purposes. Sporting activities such as Nearly every member of a household the residents of Ruwa location. tennis, rugby, golf, cricket, hockey, in the Ruwa community went to From 1996 to 2000, the ZIMRE basketball and swimming, regarded church (Muzorewa, 2007: 120), developer company reserved land as European and affluent people’s and PLDCs played a huge role in for the establishment of two primary sports, were hitherto not culturally providing such cherished facilities. schools, a secondary school and common among African communities (Cheater, 1986: 133). Recreational and sporting facilities were thus created considering that the larger part of the African population in Ruwa was not interested in them. Culturally, the Ruwa community was quite interested in soccer (football) and this influenced the private company-led development of soccer facilities in the town. This is why, in the Ruwa location, four residential park plots were turned into a vast sporting field used by residents for various sporting and cultural activities such as soccer, netball and traditional dance groups (Ruwa Town Council, 1996b: 2). PLDCs, therefore, provided an essential service and played an important role in establishing sporting arenas, which were part of public recreational facilities in the town. In addition to recreational facilities, the companies also provided Figure 5: Ruwa in 2015 additional land for the construction Source: H.A. Cartography, 2019
58 Terence Muzorewa & Mark Nyandoro • Investment by private land developer companies and postcolonial urban growth in Ruwa a number of crèches, pre-schools water reticulation systems. In 2007, their construction underscored the or Early Childhood Development PLDCs operating in the northern Authority’s long-standing partnership Centres (ECDCs) in Zimre Park. part of Ruwa joined in creating the with private land developers ZIMRE discounted the RLB 23% for Ruwa River Consortium (RRC) (Nyandoro & Muzorewa, 2017: 1-10). the purchase of three school sites or water development syndicate. The amalgamation of PLDCs into a (Ruwa Town Council, 2006a). This This consortium had a mandate of consortium that collaborated with the prevented private investors such improving water infrastructure in Local Authority played a crucial role in as Winwood from taking over land the town. The members of the RRC developing the water system in Ruwa. reserved for school development. included prominent PLDCs such In Chipukutu Park, the private land as ZB Financial Holdings, Fairview PLDCs did not only work through developer provided land for the Land Developers, Barochit Land consortiums in providing water establishment of a primary school Developers, and Tawona Gardens. infrastructure, but individual and two crèches (Ruwa Town To facilitate water provision to developers were involved in many Council, 2004: 2). In 2001, when meet the rising demand, the RRC different water infrastructure development of Damofalls Park entered into a memorandum of projects in the town. Damofalls started, the Damofalls PLDC, in an understanding with the RLB in 2007 Land Developers, for example, attempt to expand social services, to construct a water reservoir (Ruwa constructed a water treatment plant facilitated the establishment of Town Council, 2006b). The water in Ventusburg, 74 km from Ruwa, to five primary schools and four plots reservoir, measuring 6.8m in height secure water supply for Damofalls for pre-school institutions (Ruwa from its base, was constructed Park. According to Mhiti, Financial Town Council, 2003a: 2). Land and elevated on Rambuko Ranch Director of RTC, in an interview on for school development was not in Springvale (see Figure 6). 9 March 2012, the water plant not easy for PLDCs to sell compared According to Bakaris, Director of only supplied Damofalls Park, but to residential plots which were in Tawona Gardens, in an interview on also supplemented Ruwa Town’s high demand. Therefore, the Ruwa 11 January 2015, the RRC is credited water supply from Harare City. Harare local authorities ensured that the with constructing 60% of the main had served as the major water developer companies contributed water system for the northern Ruwa supplier for Ruwa since the town’s towards school development by suburbs, while the Local Authority inception as a growth point in 1986 making it mandatory for PLDCs put up the remainder of 40%. After (Nyandoro & Muzorewa, 2017: 3). to set aside land for educational constructing the reservoir, the Because of the high population facilities. This helped avoid a Consortium also established a water growth in the town, which reached shortage of schools in the town. pumping station and other water over 25 000 people in 1991 (Central reservoirs at the Chiremba Road and Statistics, 2014), it was failing to meet To cater for the health needs of the Harare-Mutare Road intersections the daily water requirements that town, PLDCs further facilitated the (Muzorewa, 2017: 120). These were over 1 900m3 per day in 1990 establishment of health facilities such reservoirs were part of the main water after Ruwa was given urban status as clinics. In 1995, Mashonaland infrastructure financed by PLDCs, (Davison, 2005: 89). The granting of Holdings constructed a clinic in Ruwa but owned by the Local Authority, and town status had effectively reclused location. According to Chidhakwa, the Ruwa Town Planner, in an interview on 5 June 2014, the clinic provided health services to residents from all low-income earning groups in the residential suburb. The clinic and polyclinics established by private developers had a bigger mandate, as they served a broad catchment. These health centres serviced not only Ruwa residents, but also the adjacent urban and peri-urban areas such as Epworth and Goromonzi.
4.7 Installation of water development systems Apart from contributing towards the development of recreational, health and educational facilities, Ruwa PLDCs played an important part in Figure 6: Water reservoir/tank in Springvale: An RRC venture the installation of water supply and Source: Image by T.T. Muzorewa, 20 November 2014
59 SSB/TRP/MDM 2019 (74) it from dependency or existing the cost of sewer piping by using 4.9 Installation of electricity virtually as a ‘foster child’ of Harare. septic tanks (Chirisa, 2013: 109). development systems Ultimately, no action was taken The drilling of boreholes further Besides road construction, PLDCs against the developer, because boosted water from the treatment were responsible for the installation ZIMRE received its permit in the plant. PLDCs such as Mashonaland of electricity supply infrastructure early 1990s when there were no Holdings, Springvale and ZB in Ruwa. Every industrial complex strict regulations for the protection also sank boreholes used as was connected to the electricity of the environment in the country. water supplements in times of supply system, while most of the Environmental issues were only water shortages, that is, when residential areas had electricity seriously considered after the the Council failed to supply water installed. The developers, through enactment of the Environment (Chirisa, 2013: 232). Mashonaland the government’s utility company, the Management Act (Chapter 20: 17) Holdings Limited worked in Zimbabwe Electricity Supply Authority of 2002, which established the partnership with the Town Council (ZESA), installed electricity in the Environment Management Agency in sinking six boreholes near town. ZESA Holdings carried out the (EMA) to oversee the sustainable residential areas in the Ruwa establishment of ZESA substations management and protection of the location (Davison, 2005: 25). The in the residential suburbs, while environment (Nyandoro, 2018). boreholes became very important the developer financed the process Therefore, it can be noted that, when the Council failed to provide (Muzorewa, 2017: 126). The power although PLDCs played a vital role clean tap water because of limited utility company carried out electricity in the establishment of sewerage water sources for the Local Authority. installations and re-routed power systems in Ruwa, they often did not Hence, whenever there were lines. Damofalls Land Developers consider environmental issues. water shortages, people queued provided seven plots for the erection for water at the boreholes. of ZESA substations (Ruwa Town 4.8 Installation of road systems Council, 2003b: 2). This marked an In addition to boreholes, sewerage PLDCs constructed the road important phase in the installation of systems were established. Each system in Ruwa town to improve electricity by PLDCs in Ruwa, which PLDC was responsible for the transportation efficiency. Developer greatly assisted the Local Authority. construction of sewerage systems companies graded and tarred all as well as connecting the sewerage Although PLDCs were hailed for roads in the Ruwa industrial area, pipes to the main pipes owned electricity infrastructure, some Ruwa location, Chipukutu, Windsor, by the Local Authority. Ruwa’s suburbs lagged behind in terms of and Zimre Park. Nevertheless, in main sewerage infrastructure electricity installations just as in the certain suburbs, some developers was put in place by PLDCs as construction of roads. An example such as Fairview and Barochit did part of the terms of their permits can be given of Fairview Park not finish the construction of roads, (Muzorewa, 2017: 125; Nyandoro where, in phases one and two of the while others such as Damofalls & Muzorewa, 2017: 9). While the development project, the installation were very slow in completing the RRC constructed the main sewer process was incomplete, with only road-construction process (Ruwa system for the northern suburbs poles and wiring in place. There Town Council, 2006c: 4-5). The (Chirisa, 2013: 232), not all plots were no electricity transformers companies attributed their failure to in Ruwa were serviced by piped by 2015 (Muzorewa, 2017: 28). complete the construction of road sewerage systems. Some larger Notwithstanding this, PLDCs still infrastructure and their slow pace plots (over 1 000m2) especially in had a role to improve service to the fact that the residential plots the low-density and industrial areas delivery, given a local economy they were supposed to service were were serviced by septic tanks. that was not performing. sold during the national economic Some septic tanks in parts of Ruwa, crisis, which was characterised by 4.10 Private land developers and nevertheless, posed pollution hyperinflation. In 2008, inflation the Ruwa local economy dangers to the Ruwa river that flows reached a record daily rate of 98% underneath suburbs such as Zimre (Economics Help, 2018). Inflation Apart from providing housing and Park. According to the Ruwa Town made it difficult for the developer public infrastructure, PLDCs were Planner, soil samples from Zimre companies to invest the proceeds involved in improving the local Park proved that the soil type was from the sales of plots in road economy through establishing some sandy and loose. This soil allowed construction, because it eroded commercial areas and shopping sewerage to contaminate the river. profits. However, inflation cannot malls in the town (see Figure 5). Sewerage contamination led the vindicate them from their failure Mashonaland Holdings, for example, Local Authority to warn the ZIMRE to put in place road infrastructure, constructed a commercial centre developer company against the since it was their mandate to do to service both industrial and environmental danger of using septic so, as required by the development residential areas. In these areas, tanks in some parts of Zimre Park, permit and their contractual services such as banking, shopping but the PLDC was determined to cut agreement with the RLB. facilities and market places for
60 Terence Muzorewa & Mark Nyandoro • Investment by private land developer companies and postcolonial urban growth in Ruwa locally produced agricultural Some cash endowments were also improved the aesthetic value of the and industrial commodities were given to the Council. The Council area while simultaneously preserving provided. Club Construction, a received an average of 10% from the the ecological environment. The subsidiary of Mashonaland Holdings proceeds of the sale of high-density town being established by private Company, built the Maha Shopping suburbs by Mashonaland Holdings, entities, therefore, became exclusive. Centre, which housed restaurants, ZIMRE and Chipukutu Properties beer outlets, banks, and shops. (Ruwa Town Council, 1996a: C14). 5. CONCLUSION The Ruwa community benefited The endowment ranged between 7% from the business centre, which and 13% (depending on the size of The article concludes that the offered shopping facilities and the plots) of the proceeds from the contribution and role played by tertiary services such as health sales of the plots in the development PLDCs in urban development surgeries and banking halls. scheme. The endowment fees in postcolonial Zimbabwe with paid by the PLDCs became a reference to Ruwa town was Damofalls Land Developers major revenue source for the Local immense. It finds that, apart from complemented the efforts of Authority, and without money from facilitating the establishment of Mashonaland Holdings in providing endowments, the operations of the low- and high-density residential public market places. In April 2000, Local Authority were not viable. suburbs, developer companies these developers established a green contributed to the development of market in Damofalls Residential To improve the aesthetic value of industrial and commercial areas, in Park for fruit and vegetable the area, PLDCs in Ruwa played spite of the ravages of an unremitting “vending”. Fruit and vegetable an important role in protecting the economic crisis in Zimbabwe that “vending” came to characterise natural environment – a concept had the deleterious impact of Damofalls Residential Park. that attracts investors. This is hindering the industrialisation of contrary to the view of the critics Fresh produce such as vegetables the country. It provides a useful of the private-public partnership and fruits from farmers in Ruwa’s insight into these development approach in urban development that agricultural hinterland was sold issues in a unique situation. Some the private sector does not consider at the market. This reduced the developers significantly facilitated the the environment in the urbanisation farmers’ transport costs usually development of the built environment process because of their greed for incurred when delivering produce during the independence era by profit-making (Mifaftab, 2004: 93; to the traditional Mbare Musika building residential suburbs in Nyandoro and Muzorewa, 2017: 6). Market in Harare. The Green Market the town, while others developed In Ruwa, the indigenous Musasa supported locals’ livelihood. Most industrial and commercial areas. trees, preserved in most of the of the women, in particular, were It is evident that all the PLDCs, suburbs in open spaces, demarcated “vendors” (informal traders). in a unique Zimbabwean case of different land uses. The development non-direct government investment in As part of their contribution to the of the plots in Springvale was postcolonial urban growth, developed local economy, all PLDCs paid undertaken after the developer off-site and supporting infrastructure endowments to the Local Authority received positive recommendation which included roads, sewerage and for property development in Ruwa. from the Environment Impact water reticulation systems. In order The endowments benefited the Management Report prepared by the to satisfy all the public infrastructure Council, as they constituted its land Director-General of EMA (Ruwa Town needs of the town, the PLDCs and revenue bases. One per cent Council, 2011: 2). The PLDC had, reserved land for the development of the land owned by the Local in fact, employed security guards to of public and community amenities Authority was acquired through land guard the Springvale area against the such as education, health institutions, development endowments from illegal extraction of pit and river sand and recreational facilities, which Mashonaland Holdings (Ruwa Town by local builders (Chirisa, 2013: 232). filled an important social role. Council, 2011: 4). In Damofalls Park, In the process, ZB Financial Holdings the Damofalls Company gave part (developers of Springvale residential In a country beset by an un-abating of the endowment to the RLB in the park) saved the Ruwa river from economic crisis, the endowment form of a plot (Ruwa Town Council, pollution by preserving and protecting fees paid by the private developers 2001b). Clearly, the Local Authority an open space along its edges became one of the Local had no land prior to the involvement (Muzorewa, 2017: 131). The open Authority’s major revenue sources. of the PLDCs in the town, as all the space left by ZB preserved the Ruwa Endowments, which were paid land was privately owned by these river’s ecological system by keeping in the form of land, significantly companies, after purchasing it from human activities that caused pollution eliminated the Council’s land commercial farmers and individual away from the river. Ruwa was scarcity predicament by providing plot holders in the area (Nyandoro & also squatter free. Private security the required land. The endowments Muzorewa, 2017: 5). Therefore, land together with the Town Council that were paid in cash to a certain endowments gave the Local Authority security made the town impenetrable extent allayed the cash woes of the the opportunity to own land in Ruwa. by squatters on private property. This Ruwa Town Council – a factor that
61 SSB/TRP/MDM 2019 (74) eased the administrative costs of the CHEATER, A.P. 1986. Social MIFAFTAB, F. 2004. Private-public Council during the crisis. Invariably, anthropology: An alternative partnerships: The Trojan horse of the permit system guaranteed urban introduction. Gweru: Mambo Press. neo-liberal development. Journal of Planning Education and Research, council administration and control. CHIGARA, B., MAGWARO-NDIWENI, 24(1), pp. 89-101. DOI: https://doi. For example, it was only after the L., MUDZENGERERE, F. & NCUBE, org/10.1177/0739456X04267173 issuing of a certificate of compliance A. 2013. An analysis of the effects of to the PLDCs that the Local Authority piecemeal planning on development MLAMBO, A.S. 1997. The economic took over the administration of of small urban centres in Zimbabwe: structural adjustment programme: The off-site infrastructure and public Case study of Plumtree. Journal of case of Zimbabwe. Harare: University amenities such as toilets, market Sustainable Development in Africa, of Zimbabwe Publications. 15(2), pp. 27-40. places, open spaces, buffer zones, MOSZORO, M. & KRZYZANOWSKA, and sporting fields. This increased CHIRISA, I. 2013. Housing and M. 2011. Implementing public-private council-owned premises in the stewardship in peri-urban settlements partnership in municipalities. Spain: area, since the Council could not in Zimbabwe: A case study of Ruwa IESE Business School, University afford to build the facilities itself, and Epworth. Ph.D. thesis. University of Navarra. DOI: https://doi. of Zimbabwe. org/10.2139/ssrn.1679995 because it did not have the money. DAVISON, C.A. 2005. Urban MUZOREWA, T.T. 2017. The role However, although the PLDCs’ role governance and the effective delivery of private land developers in urban in developing Ruwa was remarkable, and management of infrastructure development in Zimbabwe: The case of the article demonstrated that it was services in urban areas in Zimbabwe. Ruwa town, 1980-2015. Unpublished not always positive as in some (An appraisal of water and sewerage Ph.D. thesis. Zimbabwe: Midlands suburbs such as Tawona Park, services delivered in Ruwa, Harare). State University. Fairview Park, Cranbrook and ECONOMICS HELP. 2018. NAZ (NATIONAL ARCHIVES OF Barochit, the development of off-site Hyperinflation in Zimbabwe. [online]. ZIMBABWE), 38971. 1995. Ministry of infrastructure was slow and, in other Available at:
62 Terence Muzorewa & Mark Nyandoro • Investment by private land developer companies and postcolonial urban growth in Ruwa
RUWA TOWN COUNCIL. 2001a. Permit for the subdivision of land: J and H Enterprises. Unpublished manuscript. RUWA TOWN COUNCIL. 2001b. File CAA. Subdivision of Inverangus of Sebastopol. Letter from RLB to the Provincial Officer Department of Physical Planning, 2 May. RUWA TOWN COUNCIL. 2003a. File CPP. Certificate of Compliance to Zimre from Ruwa Local Board. Unpublished manuscript. RUWA TOWN COUNCIL. 2003b. Certificate of Compliance to J and H Enterprises Private Limited from Ruwa Local Board. Unpublished manuscript. RUWA TOWN COUNCIL. 2004. File 1CII. Certificate of compliance to Chipukutu Properties (Pvt) Ltd. Unpublished manuscript. RUWA TOWN COUNCIL. 2006a. File CPP. Zimre institutional development. Unpublished manuscript. RUWA TOWN COUNCIL. 2006b. Correspondence letter from Intermarket to A. Mujuru of Ruwa Local Board, 19 April. RUWA TOWN COUNCIL. 2006c. File C/17. Information used at a meeting held between the Permanent Secretary for Local Government, Public Works and Urban Development, Ruwa Local Board and three developers: Tawona portion of Galway Estate, Lot 1 of Cranbrook, Sebassa and their respective beneficiaries’ representatives, February. RUWA TOWN COUNCIL. 2011. Ruwa Town Council at a glimpse. Report from the Town Secretary. THE HERALD. 2007. Ruwa Local Board turns 16. The Herald, 23 October. VAN DER VEEN, M. 2009. Contracting for better places: A relational analysis of development agreements in urban development projects. Amsterdam: IOS Press. WEI, C., TAUBENBOCK, H. & BLASCHKE, T. 2017. Measuring urban agglomeration using a city-scale dasymetric population map: A study in the Pearl River Delta, China. Habitat International, 59, pp. 32-43. DOI: https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2016.11.007
63