I sometimes think we are misled by ourselves. There is something called a ‘Fundamental Attribution Error’ and, although this isn’t the perfect application, we should think very carefully before speaking about what people want. I imagine there are a lot of people who come to the city who would prefer to stay in a rural area. There are certainly many who live in cities who would love to live in a rural setting.

One thing is for certain though, we don’t need most of the things we think we need. As U2 so aptly put it, ‘you don’t need what you haven’t got’ But I don’t think we’ll be convincing many people of that until they see scores of people giving up what they already have. It would be better for our planet.

While I think we have many crises here, I don’t think we should forget the work we can do on the human heart. It costs the least and produces the most results. I’ll work on the heart, you guys work on the development. I’ll do my best, I hope you will too.

None of which SA seems to have.

The density of urban living potetially provides a solution, to this human need, for urban dwellers provided that they have the money. Money is obtained through employment, if you can get it. The chances of obtaining employment are far greater in an urban area.

Massive investements would need to be made in rural areas to create these kind of conditions for rural dwellers and Michael recognises this. However government policy has, up until now, not looked at rural development in this way at all. I see Michael’s blog as a plea for a much needed change in the direction of government’s rural policies.

The green revolution in Asia also referred to saw the creation of more land for farming but also a consolidation of peasant farms into large business ventures. This then ‘freed’ up the poor to move to urban centres. So on paper it showed rural improvement in actual jobs and overall income but also closed down small producers. I recommend James Scott (1985) Weapons of the Weak for more information.

What the article also fails to acknowledge is that during the late 70s and early 80s many of the countries it uses as examples that were developing rural spaces were also doing massive amounts of industrialisation in the city centres.

It also misses that often the improvements in rural spaces are not shared evenly and often the benefits are very marginal for the rural poor.

I am arguing for incentives for businesses and real development beyond peasant agriculture (land reform as done now).

It is happening in developed states as businesses move to rural spaces and we see mixed areas of industry and farming. The trick is to not mess with the reserves or create rural ghettos.

alas space…

Even with AIDS and wars, most countries in Africa have their populations increasing by 3% per annum ( 30% per decade ). 50 years ago there were few sluma and few squatter camps around the colonial cities of Africa. Now they all have them.

Also a very nice theory but go and have a look at these areas then come up with practical and technically viable solutions to what you propose. Let alone finacially viable. Absolutely provide access to services but some very much more fundamental changes (land ownership, traditional leadership) have to be made first. That ain’t gonna happen anytime soon.

It means that we should spend money and resources on developing infrastructures which would support ALL FORMS OF BUSINESS in rural areas. (And rural does not necessarily mean just the wilderness, but also areas which do not fall under the geographical boundaries of our medium- and larger-sized cities).

Put in efficient road transport systems to ease and facilitate the trade in and out of these areas. Set up wireless broadband networks across our country which are fast and affordable. Build efficient and modern schools, community centres and clinics/hospitals in these areas so that people are not forced to travel far distances for what should be basic rights and services.

20 years ago our fathers worked in offices because the nature of their world required it. Today I run a business from my home because of the advent of high speed internet connectionsand laptops. The previous reliance on office infrastructure is slowly changing to self-reliance in a home office environment. And I am one of many hundreds of thousands.

So the idea is not a return to apartheid-era separate development but rather that we should consider a new way of working and living which dovetails with the world’s approach to sustainable living and development. The way things are at the moment are clearly not working and instead of climbing onto our high horses maybe we should keep an open mind to new possibilities.