Rethinking informal settlement upgrading: Are title deeds really the answer?

Across Namibia, local authorities are under increasing pressure to address the rapid growth of informal settlements.

The conventional response has been to pursue what is often referred to as “formal upgrading” — a process rooted in transforming these areas into fully proclaimed townships with registered freehold ownership.

At first glance, this approach appears logical and progressive.

However, a closer look reveals a costly, and in many cases impractical, system that fails to respond to the realities of the people it is meant to serve.

The urgency of addressing informal settlements cannot be overstated.

According to discussions at the recent Urban Forum held in Swakopmund, supported by data released by the Namibia Statistics Agency (NSA), Namibia currently has approximately 419 informal settlements, accommodating an estimated 600 000 people across 171 000 households.

These figures highlight not only the scale of the challenge but also the need for solutions that are financially sustainable and socially responsive.

Informal settlements, by definition, lack a formally approved cadastral layout.

They are not proclaimed townships, and the land is typically still registered as part of municipal townlands under the ownership of the local authority. The absence of formal planning and land registration is what classifies them as “informal.”

To address this, local authorities initiate a structured upgrading process. This involves appointing a professional town planner to prepare a layout plan, a land surveyor to peg individual erven, a civil engineer to design bulk and internal services, and a conveyancer to facilitate the registration of each erf at the Deeds Office.

While technically sound, this process comes at a high cost. Professional fees alone can reach approximately N$3 million per project — a substantial financial burden for already constrained municipal budgets.

Security of tenure through ownership

The driving force behind this model is the belief that issuing title deeds provides security of tenure and unlocks access to financial opportunities. In theory, ownership empowers residents and integrates them into the formal property market.

But this assumption does not always hold in practice.

Most residents in informal settlements fall within the ultra-low-income bracket. Many earn less than N$1 000 per month, often through informal or unstable employment. For these households, daily survival takes precedence over long-term asset ownership.

Even when erven are offered at heavily subsidised rates — typically between N$5 000 and N$25 000 — uptake remains low. This is not due to a lack of ownership interest, but rather an inability to afford the associated costs.

In addition to the purchase price, residents must pay conveyancing fees of around N$8 000 to transfer ownership. Once registered, they are also liable for municipal rates and taxes, which can increase their monthly accounts to N$500-N$800.

For households that already struggle to pay basic service fees—or who rely on neighbours for access to water—these costs are simply unaffordable.

The result is predictable: local authorities invest millions into formalisation processes, only to see low levels of registration and limited impact on residents’ quality of life.

An unintended consequence

In many northern towns, an even more concerning pattern has emerged.

Once erven are formally registered, ultra-low-income beneficiaries often find themselves under financial pressure.

This creates an opportunity for local housing developers to step in. In some cases, these developers even cover the purchase price and transfer costs on behalf of the resident, only to acquire the property at a fraction of its real value.

Residents are typically paid between N$50 000 and N$80 000, an amount that may seem significant in the short term but is far below the land's long-term value. The result is that original occupants are effectively displaced from their own communities.

With limited alternatives, many of these individuals then move to new informal areas and resort to illegal land occupation, restarting the very cycle that upgrading initiatives are meant to resolve.

This raises serious concerns about whether the current model is inadvertently facilitating land dispossession rather than empowerment.

A Misalignment of Priorities

This raises a fundamental question: Are we solving the right problem?

For many informal settlement residents, the immediate need is not a title deed — it is access to basic services such as water, sanitation, electricity, and roads. These are the factors that directly improve health, dignity, and daily living conditions.

The reality is simple: title deeds are not a priority for residents of informal settlements. What they urgently need is access to water, sanitation, electricity, and a well-demarcated township layout with clear erf boundaries—not the financial burden of ownership.

By prioritising formal ownership, local authorities may be overlooking more practical and impactful interventions.

Upgrading informal settlements does not have to mean full formalisation.

A more cost-effective and context-sensitive approach would involve appointing a town planner to prepare a functional layout, followed by a surveyor and engineer to guide the installation of essential services.

This allows municipalities to deliver infrastructure without incurring the high costs associated with conveyancing and land registration.

Importantly, it also avoids placing an additional financial burden on residents who are least able to bear it.

Such an approach recognises that tenure security can exist in forms other than freehold ownership.

Occupancy rights, incremental upgrading, or alternative tenure systems may offer more appropriate and sustainable solutions.

Title deeds remain an important component of urban development — particularly for middle- and high-income groups who can leverage property ownership to advance their economic prospects.

However, applying the same model to ultra-low-income informal settlement residents risks creating a system that is not only financially unsustainable but also socially regressive.

If the goal of upgrading is to improve lives, then policies must align with the lived realities of the people they are intended to benefit. In many cases, this means shifting the focus from ownership to access — from formalisation to functionality.

Only then can informal settlement upgrading become truly inclusive, practical, and impactful.

*Wilhelm Shepya, Professional Town Planning, MBA Candidate in Management Strategies at the University of Namibia -NBS