Are Hernando de Soto's views appropriate to South Africa?

Snakes and ladders
and because it emphasises the particularity of different rungs on the ladder in relation
to housing demand and need. However, this metaphor also begs a set of important
questions. These may prove helpful to public policy as long as the optimism inherent
in this metaphor does not divert attention attention away from the more intractable
problems lingering beneath it, and its more pessimistic association with slithering
down a snake – the well-known board game’s counterpoint to upward mobility.
How to get a foot on the first rung? What factors influence ascent? Is mobility
unidirectional (what happens to those that fall down or off?) How long should and
does it take to ascend?
In table 1, Rust et al illustrate the City of Johannesburg’s population distribution by
monthly household income as well as housing delivery, with a great deal more in
between. Strikingly, it shows that 68 per cent of households in Johannesburg earn
less than R3 500 a month (and almost half earn less than R1 500 a month). It also
shows that this category benefited from only 14 per cent of housing delivery in the
city.
This table shocks the reader into segmenting the market, and differentiating the
poor. It prompts the following questions:
• Where should policy attention and delivery effort be focused?
• How much of it should be aimed at subsidy-eligible households earning up to
R3 500 a month, and how much at households above it where the market is also
not delivering?
Table 1: Housing delivery in the City of Johannesburg
Monthly
household
income
category
% Population
Housing type
affordability
(indicative)
Number
delivered
in 2004
% of
total
delivery
Our housing
strategies need
to be far more
accurately targeted
and focused.
The category of
‘the poor’ requires
much greater
differentiation
than de Soto offers
>R10 001 15% 15% Mortgage >80m 2
Sectional title
5 207 49%
R7 001–R10 000 5%
R5 001–R7 000 6%
18%
Mortgage