Malixole Sikhungo, an independent researcher from Cape Town whose work is based on both personal experience living on the streets and professional practice in non-profit and corporate law sectors, conducts research combining deep constitutional analysis with the dynamics of street survival. His goal is to advocate for systemic housing reforms.
Ahead of upcoming local government elections, the public discourse fails to address a critically important question: why do existing funding models inevitably perpetuate the cycle of homelessness? A natural question arises as to whether service providers themselves are caught in the same system trap as the homeless individuals.
The author shares his experience staying in Cape Town shelters, using substance abuse as a coping mechanism. Due to the lack of formal rehabilitation, he managed to overcome these habits, return to his studies, and earn an LL.B. degree with high marks. This experience, supported by his work in legal fields, allows him to analyze the crisis from a unique perspective.
The Funding System Trap
Despite frontline workers providing vital assistance, the financial system in which they operate has fundamental flaws. When government departments tie funding directly to the number of nights spent in beds, human trauma is unintentionally commodified. Over-reliance on such funding forces non-profit organizations to prioritize metric-based indicators rather than genuine human empowerment.
If a service provider completely eliminates homelessness in its area of responsibility, its operational metrics drop to zero, leading to the cessation of institutional funding. Consequently, the homeless resident becomes raw material necessary to justify the budget for the following year. This creates a perverse economic incentive where the institution's survival depends on the persistence of the problem. As a result, service providers become just as dependent on the system as the homeless residents themselves.
Skewed Power Structure
It is often observed that service providers occupy an intermediary position between donors and residents. Formally, they are accountable to both parties, but in practice, this situation deprives homeless residents of the ability to negotiate. Power follows aid: donors hold absolute influence over non-profit organizations, which in turn have unchecked dominance over the homeless. The author compares this scheme to a scientific pH scale: service providers are in a neutral position (7), while donors and residents are at opposite poles. The donor and the resident never sit at the same table.
The homeless community lacks bargaining power. Accountability flows exclusively upwards, to the board of directors' ledgers, while people on the streets remain passive recipients of aid.
Rights Versus Commodities
This approach, which treats housing as a commodity, violates the socio-economic foundation of South Africa. The Constitution guarantees the right to adequate housing under Section 26(1), and Section 26(2) obligates the state to take reasonable measures for its progressive realization. The Constitutional Court has made it clear that this obligation cannot be met through short-term outsourced management. In the case of Government of the Republic of South Africa v Grootboom, the court ruled that housing programs must cater to those in desperate need.
Furthermore, as established in City of Johannesburg v Blue Moonlight Properties, the state cannot cite budgetary constraints or outsourcing core constitutional duties to evade its obligations. Transferring emergency housing to a market governed by metrics effectively absolves the state of these responsibilities. This approach views temporary beds as a substitute for permanent housing, turning a constitutional right into a competitive line item.
Cape Town Mayor Geordie Hill-Lewis recently renewed a loud campaign promise, pledging to increase the release of urban land for social housing if re-elected. This is commendable. However, the critical question remains unanswered: when will authorities realize that current grant models supporting multi-million rand 'safe spaces,' alongside inherently flawed shelter funding systems, are inadvertently sustaining a vicious cycle of homelessness?
Accountability on the Sidewalk
To break this vicious cycle, accountability must flow downwards, to the sidewalk itself. As World Homeless Day approaches on October 10th, South Africa must move beyond symbolic awareness and undertake a complete system reorganization. On behalf of homeless communities, the author calls upon President Cyril Ramaphosa and municipal leadership to immediately implement three structural changes:
- Results-Based Funding: The 'per bed, per night' system must be abolished. Funds should be redistributed to encourage long-term exit from homelessness, tracking placement in permanent housing and sustained independent income over several years.
- Mandatory Democratic Representation: Supported service providers must be required to reserve at least 20% of board seats for residents who are currently or have previously been homeless, granting them voting rights. No strategy should be developed without considering their input.
- Joint National Homelessness Strategy: An immediate, mandatory interdepartmental strategy must be introduced between the Departments of Social Development and Settlements. This structure must consolidate budgets, shifting fiscal priorities from managing temporary shelters to pathways to permanent housing, specifically promoting scalable, community-controlled models such as Community Land Trusts (CLTs) and micro-rental subsidies.
True security begins with a key to the front door, not an outsourced mattress. True accountability should be measured not by how many beds are occupied today, but by how many people have permanently left the sidewalk. Only such a structural shift can dissolve the impasse of homelessness. It is time to act decisively and de-commodify homelessness forever.