Differentiations in post-colonial urban spatial planning in Zimbabwe and Zambia

Abstract

This study investigates and compares the colonial spatial planning legacies of Zimbabwe and Zambia. It examines how and why the legacies of two countries with a seemingly common colonial background would produce different developmental outcomes. The research’s ultimate objective is that of proposing a sustainable framework and guidelines for addressing the spatial planning problems in urban areas of both countries. Zimbabwe and Zambia were chosen as the foci of the study since they demonstrate the problem of inherited British spatial planning legislation and urban sprawl in Southern Africa. The research employed a mixed methods approach involving several case studies of local authorities in Zimbabwe and Zambia. The thesis obtained data from 2842 (1424 in Zimbabwe and 1418 in Zambia) questionnaires, 65 key informant interviews, 10 focus group discussions, observations and extensive documents reviews were analysed. Spatial differentiations in both countries were elaborated through indicators of the adopted comparative framework. The spatial planning system inherited from the British colonialists does little to address urban challenges in Zimbabwe and Zambia. This spatial planning legislation was designed under the assumption that the population in towns and cities would always be controlled. However, post-independence rural to urban migration has increased at an alarming rate, leading to a corresponding upsurge in urbanisation of major cities. Urbanisation has resulted in a system overload and poor service provision, with demand exceeding supply in Zimbabwe and Zambia. Both countries face urban development challenges, including urban land management, acute housing shortage, economic and political constraints, aging urban infrastructure, increased corruption and lack of transparency in the management of funds by local authorities. The Zambian government has begun to tackle urban transport problems in the capital city through shopping mall development, traffic safety measures and investment in an advanced road network. Zimbabwe still follows the rigid master planning approach, while Zambia has migrated to the flexible and sustainable integrated development planning approach. The research put forth the contribution that legislation, such as the Housing Act in Zambia played a major role in the provision of low-income housing and regularisation of informal settlements. The other contribution the research made is that urban challenges vary in terms of local context and dynamics exist in managing them. Urbanisation problems could be effectively controlled if local planning authorities in both countries adopt appropriate, flexible and sustainable spatial planning systems. The study recommends the adoption of a sustainable framework to guide spatial planning and urban development. Finally, the study recommends further research into resilient cities, sustainable urban infrastructure maintenance and financing.