Submitted Successfully!
To reward your contribution, here is a gift for you: A free trial for our video production service.
Thank you for your contribution! You can also upload a video entry or images related to this topic.
Version Summary Created by Modification Content Size Created at Operation
1 -- 2494 2023-06-07 08:54:00 |
2 layout Meta information modification 2494 2023-06-07 09:05:30 |

Video Upload Options

Do you have a full video?


Are you sure to Delete?
If you have any further questions, please contact Encyclopedia Editorial Office.
Moghayedi, A.; Mehmood, A.; Michell, K.; Ekpo, C.O. Neighborhood Wellbeing of Townships in South Africa. Encyclopedia. Available online: (accessed on 24 June 2024).
Moghayedi A, Mehmood A, Michell K, Ekpo CO. Neighborhood Wellbeing of Townships in South Africa. Encyclopedia. Available at: Accessed June 24, 2024.
Moghayedi, Alireza, Abid Mehmood, Kathy Michell, Christiana Okobi Ekpo. "Neighborhood Wellbeing of Townships in South Africa" Encyclopedia, (accessed June 24, 2024).
Moghayedi, A., Mehmood, A., Michell, K., & Ekpo, C.O. (2023, June 07). Neighborhood Wellbeing of Townships in South Africa. In Encyclopedia.
Moghayedi, Alireza, et al. "Neighborhood Wellbeing of Townships in South Africa." Encyclopedia. Web. 07 June, 2023.
Neighborhood Wellbeing of Townships in South Africa

Townships in South Africa are characterized by underdeveloped urban neighborhoods on the periphery of cities, where their inhabitants suffer from a poor quality of life. 

housing neighborhood township socioeconomic wellbeing

1. Introduction

Enhancing the living conditions and quality of life of a broader South African populace in the national upper poverty line around townships remains a daunting task and a huge concern to both the state, civil society, and international organizations, as efforts to improve the wellbeing of cities and citizens are prioritized and emphasized [1]. South African townships are adjudged to be semi-permanent human settlements in the form of dormitory spaces for low-income earners, found in major South African metropolises. These townships are characterized by poor, inadequate, and substandard housing that offers no tenure of security for residents and inappropriate housing that is often non-compliant with building bylaws or planning regulations [2]. Occupants regularly experience indoor air pollution, overcrowding, and inadequate access to healthcare, basic services, and public amenities [3], combined with minimal access to utilities’ infrastructure such as energy, water, education, and employment [4]. Urban density is partially attributed to these inappropriate spatial settings and insufficient property rights’ adaptations [5]. The wellbeing of the township habitants of urban communities is usually exacerbated by their exponentially unplanned growth [6]. This is partly triggered by the migration from rural to urban areas for greener pastures [7]. The micro- and macroeconomic benefits of migration have already been covered in previous studies [7].
However, the wellbeing of residents and communities in these townships remains poor, as the lack of essential reliable urban infrastructures and adequate housing is weakened by rapid and unanticipated urbanization [2]. Consequently, as the population grows, the townships become more dense, giving rise to the need for more housing [2]. This has prompted the South African government to initiate various housing intervention programs, but housing backlogs have continued to persist [8]. Furthermore, the World Health Organization’s (WHO) integrated housing approach has extended housing concerns beyond the dwelling areas to also include the communities and neighborhoods as interconnected facets that contribute to health and wellbeing [9]. Thus, the wellbeing and health of housing occupants not only depend on the infrastructural enhancement and tenure security but also on the neighborhood environment and structural design attributes [10]. There is an interdisciplinary consensus that peoples’ habitat broadly contributes to their overall health and wellbeing [11]; yet, the township inhabitants in South African cities are increasingly plagued by disproportionate economic and health burdens, exacerbated by poverty and vulnerability [12]. This reinforces the physical and mental health risks, further entrenched in the persistent disparity in health and socioeconomic opportunities [12]. The location and conditions of the townships’ infrastructure and services alone are not sufficient to address wellbeing issues. The health and wellbeing of individuals are greatly influenced by the social, structural, spatial, and environmental makeup of the area [13].
Many scholars have alluded to the fact that the resilience of cities and urban neighborhoods is strongly linked to the health and wellbeing of citizens [14][15][16]. Various scholars have used different mathematical techniques to model wellbeing in neighborhoods. 

2. Wellbeing Definitions, Interrelations, and Intersectionality

Attention has been paid to wellbeing research using various indicators for its evaluation. The term wellbeing may be popular in the scientific debate, with diverse interpretations, but it does not have a standard definition at the conceptual level [17]. However, WHO defines wellbeing as “a state of complete physical, mental and social well-being and not merely the absence of disease or infirmity”. This does not only apply to an individual’s physical health but also embodies the diverse perceptions of the urban environment and the degree of compactness and crowdedness with the associated spatial experience [18]. Urbanization and industrialization are the key factors that aggravate population growth and increase the degree of congestion in cities, with challenging spatial formations such as townships. These spatial formations are weighed on different scales ranging from the house to the general neighborhood and form a crucial part of the definition of wellbeing. Moreover, the housing composition, the psychosocial home environment, and the attributes of the neighborhood and community (low income) have a significant impact on the physical, mental, and social wellbeing of low-income neighborhoods and communities [19].
Again, density and wellbeing are viewed from the prism of sustainability and resilience concepts. There are increasing discourses that cities offer exclusive opportunities to improve resilience to the negative occurrences in cities but also to attaining sustainable development [20]. So, sustainability conceptualizations generally require that humans do not compromise the needs of the future while addressing the needs of the present generation. The concept arose from the realization that there is a need to balance economic growth and social progress with environmental concerns [1]. The United Nations reports that 68% of the global population could be living in urban areas by 2050. Moreover, in 2015, Africa had the second highest population growth in the world, with about 200 million slum dwellers, which then aggravates the challenges of housing, infrastructure and basic services, and the growth of inadequate housing and neighborhoods [21]. Therefore ecological, social, and economic tri-domain sustainability concepts are the parameters adjudged in tackling inadequate human settlements’ and townships’ sustainability challenges.
The conceptualization of urban resilience [22] can be traced to C.S. Holling’s momentous works defining resilience as “a measure of the persistence of systems and of their ability to absorb change and disturbance and still maintain the same relationships between populations or state variables” [23]. In broader evolutionary terms, urban resilience is seen as “a proactive rather than reactive view to planning, policy-making and strategic steering in which communities play a vital role for resilient place shaping through their capacity for active learning, robustness, ability to innovate and adaptability to change” [24]. Resilience has been related to the institutional ability to minimize danger and threats and to adapt, impact, and regulate urban systems after a disruptive occurrence or a challenging event [25].
Studies have also signified how psychological aspects of resilience exist as safeguarding factors in minimizing the social, economic, and environmental challenges in neighborhoods [22]. It is broadly acknowledged to be the individual or collective capability to effectively cope with stress or change [26]. It is also associated as a competing concept when incorporating the social and cultural aspects of sustainability [27] or as a measurable indicator [28]. One of the significant aspects of psychological resilience in terms of wellbeing could be associated with family resilience, defined as a household’s ability to resist and recover after stressful misfortunes or to even become stronger and more innovative, as the township dwellers appear to have adapted to similar stresses. This is manifested in a household’s cohesion, communication, understanding the challenges, and being able to remain resilient in the face of adverse situations, by being resourceful and persistent [29][30].
Subsequently, resilience can be transformed into health and social wellbeing when faced with sudden disasters. Being able to resist and cope with adversities naturally strengthens one’s mental and physical wellbeing in the townships. Zeng et al. [31] affirm that urban sustainability and resilience solicit the conservation of communal and societal health and wellbeing in the broader framework of environmental transformation. The United Nations Conference on housing and sustainable urban development (Habitat III) in Quito 2016, proposed the new urban agenda, representing the new shared vision of cities and settlements for all in their “right to the city”. The sustainable integrated urban approach aims to achieve suitable and affordable housing as a key tool for achieving an adequate standard of living and wellbeing. The principles of the agenda are to promote access to physical, social infrastructure, and services to all human beings equally and to demolish all forms of poverty. The UN’s eleventh goal aims to increase affordable housing and consider upgrading the slums and, in addition, to ensure that all people around the world have the right of access to affordable, adequate, safe housing and settlements.
In South Africa, a township is an area on the periphery of a town or city that has historically been used to uphold racially segregated living arrangements. The township system was originally put in place during apartheid, a political system that was in place from 1948 to the early 1990s. Living conditions in townships were typically poor and overcrowded. After apartheid ended, the townships in South Africa were desegregated and some have been improved to provide the development of greater wealth for their occupants, including the development of a middle-income group. However, most of the South African townships still lack essential infrastructure, and many residents of townships live in poverty with poor wellbeing conditions [32].
Hence, township dwellers encounter both social and spatial marginalization and are exposed to mental, physical, and overall wellbeing risk [3]. The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) accentuated the importance of addressing this need particularly through the universal advocacy for adequate housing and sustainable habitats in SDG 11. This goal attempts to “make cities inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable” via gaining access to safe, adequate and affordable housing for all. WHO’s Housing and Health Guidelines [33] stress the impact that an existing habitat has in shaping and influencing one’s health and wellbeing. SDG 3, on the other hand, promotes healthy living and wellbeing for everybody at all ages. The interplay between SDG 3 and SDG 11, which targets addressing the lack of habitable surroundings (SDG11), is crucial for achieving health and wellbeing for all (SDG3). Concerns on densities and the general deplorable environmental hygiene of townships are raised because they provide the work force for most cities in Sub-Saharan Africa generally. This by implication means that the higher the wellbeing associated risks, the higher the chances of infection and the transmission of infections in those settlements, which consequently poses risks for other parts of an urban precinct or the city as a whole [34].

3. Wellbeing Attributes

The latest study of the relationship between health and building conditions has recognized that the enhancement of air ventilation, water use, and refurbishment are affiliated with positive impacts on mental and physical health and consequently the quality of life of individuals and families [35]. However, it was difficult to verify the causal connections due to the lack of empirical data and methodological rigor in the studies employed for the review. This is the crux of the issue. The limited empirical evidence due to the complexity and constant flux of townships presents a fundamental challenge for researchers [36]. The need to address most of the deficits enumerated here is stressed in the SDGs as synchronized expectations worldwide to attain sustainable development by 2030, in particular, via the provision of adequate livable healthy environments, which seek to create safe, inclusive, resilient, and sustainable cities. The risks of density in townships appear to be embodied in the tri-domain socioeconomic and environmental parameters of sustainability which affect the epidemiological aspects of the townships. The ‘new normal’ should involve adopting a more socioeconomic and environmentally responsive lifestyle for a better community. Sustainability, which promotes community resilience, in socioeconomic–environmental terms, should be the watchword in designing and planning for health. Therefore, the built environment should play that transformative role through innovative and creative thinking in planning and ensuring the environmentally responsive and friendly design of houses when the upgrading and restructuring of townships are allowed.
Many authors have agreed that a spatially incorporated development is meant to reduce urban integration and alleviate climate change [6][37]. This is almost impossible in townships as greenhouse gas emissions from crowded townships and informal settlement dwellings pollute the environment. The poor housing configurations are characterized by increased in-house gas emissions and environmental pollution. The inhabitants of these neighborhoods share some environmental risks that emanate from inadequate planning that lead to insufficient access to healthy sanitation and urban amenities [1]. This presents the perception of neighborhood effects, characterized by factors that impact health that are independent from household levels. These factors include geographic factors, social interactions, institutional factors, and the physical environment that people live in [38][39]. It is important to comprehend the complicated dynamic of the local context and conditions of the settlement’s surroundings while evaluating wellbeing.
From a spatial planning lens, Shekhar et al. [40] agree that wellbeing can be viewed as a subjective (individual) term, while Atkinson et al. [41] assert it from a collective (community) dimension, comprising shared culture and economy. The implications, the area for participation, access, and security are aspects to consider. Planning and policy practices have an impact on these aspects, and because of their interdependencies, a change in one element can either increase or decrease one’s sense of total wellbeing [40]

4. Township Situation in South Africa

South Africa is recognized as one of Africa’s most urbanized countries (68% compared to 44% average urbanization rate of Africa), with overwhelming post-apartheid rapid urbanization transcending the state’s capacity to provide adequate urban infrastructures and services. This has prompted the proliferation of formal and informal settlements in the townships with profound disparities and a warped urban landscape [4]. Apartheid spatial planning and the neglect of black urban residential areas remain evident in the planning system. These townships are often located at the urban periphery far away from the city’s core and are characterized by penurious housing and infrastructural absence, intense poverty, and multiple health and social challenges.
Aside from the apartheid planning laws that encouraged racial segregation, the housing formation challenge is partly attributed to South Africa’s planning and building laws commonly shared by all former British colonies in Africa inherited from Great Britain. The colonial regulations served partly to put in place a system of urban racial segregation between the colonizers and the colonized [42], and this was replicated in South African cities. This has largely impacted housing patterns in most South African cities. Although apartheid ended in 1994, it left a legacy of housing inequity, informality, and inadequacy throughout the country [43]. Apartheid laws restricted black South Africans in terms of property rights, justified the forcible relocation of thousands of black South Africans to the outskirts of the city, and left segregated neighborhoods. So, South Africa’s planning was based on these racial lines, whose structure served as a plan for apartheid’s spatial ideology, separating white and racially defined black communities [44].
There have been conscious attempts by the post-apartheid government to improve townships and housing brought about the introduction of township and housing policies, such as the Comprehensive Housing Plan and Breaking New Ground strategy, etc.; yet, little has been achieved to change the township situation in South Africa. The post-apartheid new constitution has defined the new South Africa to be deracialized and not limited to social and spatial potency for everyone [45]; however, the reality is different; a kind of “neo-apartheid has emerged, particularly in the socio-spatial distinction mechanisms and race-oriented seclusion procedures that are in place in the South Africa’s urban areas” [45], even though the policies were within a framework of a paradigm shift towards a complete integrated social change in which townships were identified as “a manifestation of structural social change, the resolution of which requires a multi-sectoral partnership, long-term commitment and political endurance” with emphasis on economic development and sustainability [4]. However, the wellbeing challenges in townships still persist, and little has been achieved in addressing the problems. The problems identified in the case studies are similar in nature.


  1. Moghayedi, A.; Mehmood, A.; Vassilev, V.; Aburamadan, R.; Blay, K.; Nguyen, D. Interrelationships between sustainability and wellbeing: Three cases from the Global South. In Proceedings of the 7th International SEEDS Conference Sustainable Ecological Engineering Design for Society (SEEDS 2021), Virtual/Leeds, UK, 1–3 September 2021.
  2. Ekpo, C.; Moghayedi, A. Rethinking Density: Design and Planning for Healthy Informal Settlements Post COVID-19 in Sub Saharan Africa. In Towards a Sustainable Construction Industry: The Role of Innovation and Digitalisation: Proceedings of 12th Construction Industry Development Board (CIDB) Postgraduate Research Conference, East London, South Africa, 10–12 July 2022; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2023; pp. 508–517.
  3. UN-Habitat. Habitat III Issue Paper 22—Informal Settlements; New York UN-Habitat: New York, NY, USA, 2015.
  4. Rogerson, C.M. The economic development of South Africa’s townships. In The Geography of South Africa; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2019; pp. 187–194.
  5. Lennon, M. Green space and the compact city: Planning issues for a ‘new normal’. Cities Health 2021, 5 (Suppl. S1), S212–S215.
  6. UN-Habitat. United Nations Human Settlements Programme World Cities Report 2020: The Value of Sustainable Urbanization; UN-Habitat: Nairobi, Kenya, 2020.
  7. Szaboova, L.; Safra de Campos, R.; Adger, W.N.; Abu, M.; Codjoe, S.N.A.; Franco Gavonel, M.; Das, S.; Siddiqui, T.; Rocky, M.H.; Hazra, S. Urban sustainability and the subjective well-being of migrants: The role of risks, place attachment, and aspirations. Popul. Space Place 2022, 28, e2505.
  8. Ekpo, C. Impact of Planning and Building Regulations on Affordable Housing Development by the Private Sector in South Africa. Master’s Thesis, Faculty of Engineering and the Built Environment, School of Engineering and Built Environment, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa, 2019.
  9. Rudnicka, E.; Napierała, P.; Podfigurna, A.; Męczekalski, B.; Smolarczyk, R.; Grymowicz, M. The World Health Organization (WHO) approach to healthy ageing. Maturitas 2020, 139, 6–11.
  10. Jana, A.; Sarkar, A.; Bardhan, R. Evaluating well-being in low-income mass housing in India with specific reference to natural ventilation. Area Dev. Policy 2022, 7, 267–292.
  11. Christodoulou, J.; Rotheram-Borus, M.J.; Rezvan, P.H.; Comulada, W.S.; Stewart, J.; Almirol, E.; Tomlinson, M. Where you live matters: Township neighborhood factors important to resilience among south African children from birth to 5 years of age. Prev. Med. 2022, 157, 106966.
  12. Shortt, N.K.; Hammett, D. Housing and health in an informal settlement upgrade in Cape Town, South Africa. J. Hous. Built. Environ. 2013, 28, 615–627.
  13. Reyes-Riveros, R.; Altamirano, A.; De La Barrera, F.; Rozas-Vásquez, D.; Vieli, L.; Meli, P. Linking public urban green spaces and human well-being: A systematic review. Urban For. Urban Green. 2021, 61, 127105.
  14. Panno, A.; Carrus, G.; Lafortezza, R.; Mariani, L.; Sanesi, G. Nature-based solutions to promote human resilience and wellbeing in cities during increasingly hot summers. Environ. Res. 2017, 159, 249–256.
  15. Mouratidis, K. Compact city, urban sprawl, and subjective well-being. Cities 2019, 92, 261–272.
  16. Litman, T. Pandemic-Resilient Community Planning; Victoria Transport Policy Institute: Victoria, BC, Canada, 2020.
  17. Ciziceno, M. The conceptions of quality of life, wellness and well-being: A literature review. In Sport and Quality of Life. Social Indicators Research Series; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2022; pp. 11–27.
  18. Meng, L.; Wen, K.H.; Zeng, Z.; Brewin, R.; Fan, X.; Wu, Q. The impact of street space perception factors on elderly health in high-density cities in Macau—Analysis based on street view images and deep learning technology. Sustainability 2020, 12, 1799.
  19. Weimann, A.; Oni, T. A systematised review of the health impact of urban informal settlements and implications for upgrading interventions in South Africa, a rapidly urbanising middle-income country. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public. Health 2019, 16, 3608.
  20. UN-Habitat. World Cities Report 2022: Envisaging the Future of Cities; United Nations Human Settlements Programme: Nairobi, Kenya, 2022.
  21. Marutlulle, N.K. A critical analysis of housing inadequacy in South Africa and its ramifications. Afr. Public Serv. Deliv. Perform. Rev. 2021, 9, 16.
  22. Serbanica, C.; Constantin, D.L. Misfortunes never come singly. A holistic approach to urban resilience and sustainability challenges. Cities 2023, 134, 104177.
  23. Mehmood, A. Of resilient places: Planning for urban resilience. Eur. Plan. Stud. 2016, 24, 407–419.
  24. Meerow, S.; Newell, J.P.; Stults, M. Defining urban resilience: A review. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2016, 147, 38–49.
  25. Marchese, D.; Reynolds, E.; Bates, M.E.; Morgan, H.; Clark, S.S.; Linkov, I. Resilience and sustainability: Similarities and differences in environmental management applications. Sci. Total Environ. 2018, 613, 1275–1283.
  26. Cleary, M.; Jackson, D.; Hungerford, C.L. Mental health nursing in Australia: Resilience as a means of sustaining the specialty. Issues Ment. Health Nurs. 2014, 35, 33–40.
  27. Olsson, L.; Jerneck, A.; Thoren, H.; Persson, J.; O’Byrne, D. Why resilience is unappealing to social science: Theoretical and empirical investigations of the scientific use of resilience. Sci. Adv. 2015, 1, e1400217.
  28. Connor, K.M.; Davidson, J.R.T. Development of a new resilience scale: The Connor-Davidson resilience scale (CD-RISC). Depress. Anxiety 2003, 18, 76–82.
  29. Qiu, Y.; Huang, Y.; Wang, Y.; Ren, L.; Jiang, H.; Zhang, L.; Dong, C. The role of socioeconomic status, family resilience, and social support in predicting psychological resilience among Chinese maintenance hemodialysis patients. Front. Psychiatry 2021, 12, 723344.
  30. Moghayedi, A.; Awuzie, B.; Omotayo, T.; Le Jeune, K.; Massyn, M.; Ekpo, C.O.; Braune, M.; Byron, P. A critical success factor framework for implementing sustainable innovative and affordable housing: A systematic review and bibliometric analysis. Buildings 2021, 11, 317.
  31. Zeng, X.; Yu, Y.; Yang, S.; Lv, Y.; Sarker, M.N.I. Urban resilience for urban sustainability: Concepts, dimensions, and perspectives. Sustainability 2022, 14, 2481.
  32. Muzindutsi, P.F.; Sekhu, T.J. Determinants of wellbeing in a South African township. Int. J. Soc. Sci. Humanit. Stud. 2014, 6, 47–57.
  33. WHO. WHO Housing and Health Guidelines; WHO: Geneva, Switzerland, 2018.
  34. Guégan, J.F.; Suzán, G.; Kati-Coulibaly, S.; Bonpamgue, D.N.; Moatti, J.P. Sustainable Development Goal# 3,“health and well-being”, and the need for more integrative thinking. Vet. México OA 2018, 5, 2.
  35. Ige, J.; Pilkington, P.; Orme, J.; Williams, B.; Prestwood, E.; Black, D.; Carmichael, L.; Scally, G. The relationship between buildings and health: A systematic review. J. Public Health 2019, 41, e121–e132.
  36. Friesen, J.; Friesen, V.; Dietrich, I.; Pelz, P.F. Slums, space, and state of health—A link between settlement morphology and health data. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 2022.
  37. Yang, H.; Huang, J.; Liu, D. Linking climate change and socioeconomic development to urban land use simulation: Analysis of their concurrent effects on carbon storage. Appl. Geogr. 2020, 115, 102135.
  38. Liu, Y.; Wang, R.; Lu, Y.; Li, Z.; Chen, H.; Cao, M.; Zhang, Y.; Song, Y. Natural outdoor environment, neighbourhood social cohesion and mental health: Using multilevel structural equation modelling, streetscape and remote-sensing metrics. Urban For. Urban Green. 2020, 48, 126576.
  39. Kwan, M.P. The limits of the neighborhood effect: Contextual uncertainties in geographic, environmental health, and social science research. Ann. Am. Assoc. Geogr. 2018, 108, 1482–1490.
  40. Shekhar, H.; Schmidt, A.J.; Wehling, H.W. Exploring wellbeing in human settlements—A spatial planning perspective. Habitat Int. 2019, 87, 66–74.
  41. Atkinson, S.; Bagnall, A.M.; Corcoran, R.; South, J.; Curtis, S. Being well together: Individual subjective and community wellbeing. J. Happiness Stud. 2020, 21, 1903–1921.
  42. Watson, V. Changing planning law in Africa: An introduction to the issue. In Urban Forum; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2011; pp. 203–208.
  43. Clark, N.J.; Umulisa, I.; Ruberanziza, E.; Owada, K.; Colley, D.G.; Ortu, G.; Campbell, C.H., Jr.; Ruzindana, E.; Lancaster, W.; Mbonigaba, J.B. Mapping Schistosoma mansoni endemicity in Rwanda: A critical assessment of geographical disparities arising from circulating cathodic antigen versus Kato-Katz diagnostics. PLoS Negl. Trop. Dis. 2019, 13, e0007723.
  44. Eidelman, T.A. Reclaiming Cape Town: Spatial Justice and the (Post) Apartheid City. Ph.D. Thesis, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, USA, 2021.
  45. Jürgens, U.; Donaldson, R.; Rule, S.; Bähr, J. Townships in South African cities—Literature review and research perspectives. Habitat Int. 2013, 39, 256–260.
Subjects: Urban Studies
Contributors MDPI registered users' name will be linked to their SciProfiles pages. To register with us, please refer to : , , ,
View Times: 420
Revisions: 2 times (View History)
Update Date: 07 Jun 2023
Video Production Service