Land Use Policy 36 (2014) 500–509 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Land Use Policy jou rn al hom epage : www.elsevier.com/locate/landus epol Low-cost housing developments in South Africa miss the opportunities for household level urban greening C.M. Shackleton a,∗ , P. Hebinck b , H. Kaoma a , M. Chishaleshale a , A. Chinyimba a , S.E. Shackleton a , J. Gambiza a , D. Gumbo c a Department of Environmental Science, Rhodes University, Grahamstown 6140, South Africa b Department of Rural Development Sociology, Wageningen University, The Netherlands c CIFOR, Southern Africa Regional Office, Zambia a r t i c l e i n f o Article history: Received 12 June 2013 Received in revised form 27 August 2013 Accepted 1 October 2013 Keywords: Appreciation Gardens Planting Policy Trees Tree products a b s t r a c t Most developing countries of the world are experiencing large-scale migration from rural to urban areas. Many new migrants end up in low-cost or informal areas and slums with attendant environmental con- cerns. One dimension of improved urban sustainability is the provision of green spaces and trees. Whilst many countries have urban greening programmes for public spaces and streets, few have considered the status and potential contribution of trees from resident’s own gardens. This paper reports firstly on the policy environment for urban forestry and greening in South Africa and secondly on the maintenance, use and appreciation of trees on private homesteads of residents of new and older low-income suburbs as well as informal housing areas from three small towns in South Africa. In particular we examine if the most recent centrally planned and built low-income housing schemes (called RDP suburbs in South Africa) have considered and incorporated plans or spaces for urban greenery in peoples’ homesteads. We found that broad environmental and sustainability concerns and statements are common in urban development and housing policies, but specific guidelines for implementation are generally absent. More specifically, urban forestry and tree planting are rarely mentioned in the broader land use and environmental policies other than the national forest act and subsequent regulations, but even there it is relatively superficial. In the study towns the prevalence, density and number of species of trees was lowest in the new RDP suburbs relative to the township and informal areas. Consequently, the contribution of tree products to local livelihoods was also lower in the RDP areas. Yet there were no differences in the level of apprecia- tion of the value and intangible benefits of trees between residents from the three different suburbs. This shows that the failure to plan for and accommodate trees in new low-cost housing developments is miss- ing an opportunity to improve overall urban sustainability and liveability and constraining the potential flows of tangible and intangible benefits to urban residents. Making opportunities for such in older sub- urbs is challenging because of space limitations and cost implications of retrospective provisions, but incorporation into plans for new low-cost housing development should be possible. © 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Introduction More people now reside in urban areas than rural ones, and the difference will continue to grow (UN Habitat 2006). It is esti- mated that by 2050 more than 70% of the world’s population will be urban (Montgomery, 2008). The numerical, economic and polit- ical dominance by urban populations has already been a feature of the developed world for several decades. The greatest changes are now being experienced in developing countries (Montgomery, 2008; Angel et al., 2011). Whilst many developing countries still have a preponderance of rural citizens, this will change within the ∗ Corresponding author. Tel.: +27 46 603 7001. E-mail address: c.shackleton@ru.ac.za (C.M. Shackleton). next generation or two. Consequently, there is a growing need for understanding land use and sustainability issues in urban settings in developing countries. Urban sustainability considers many dimensions of how people live, work and relax in towns and cities. Aspects receiving the most attention include energy efficiency in buildings and of transporta- tion, waste disposal and sanitation, air quality, urban liveability and quality of life. In terms of the last, access to and use of public and pri- vate green spaces are deemed a crucial strategy (Sundaram, 2011). For example, the European Environment Agency (EEA), as cited in Barbosa et al. (2007), recommends that people should have access to public green space within a 15 min walking distance of their homes, a standard which many European cities meet. Similarly, English Nature (EN), a UK government agency, recommends that urban residents should have an accessible public green space less 0264-8377/$ – see front matter © 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2013.10.002