MAIN IMAGE: Karabelo Pooe – general manager of the National Association of Social Housing, Simnikiwe Mbekushe – deputy director of Human Settlements at George municipality, François Viruly – emeritus professor
Senior writer
A new social housing development is announced nearby, and the objections start almost immediately. Property values will drop. The neighbourhood will change for the worse. It is a reaction so common it has its own acronym: NIMBY, short for ‘Not in my Back Yard’. Yet for all the noise these announcements generate, the fear behind them is rooted far more in perception than in evidence.
That fear did not come from nowhere. For decades, high-density housing in South Africa was deliberately pushed to the margins, far from jobs and economic activity, a planning legacy that bred isolation, higher crime and chronically underfunded infrastructure. It is little wonder the association stuck. But the model has moved on considerably since then. Social housing today is increasingly built close to economic hubs, well located and well integrated. Public perception, it seems, has been slower to catch up.
Estate agents do not market social housing units or place tenants in them. Still, they are increasingly expected to field questions about how such developments affect neighbourhood desirability, crime, congestion, buyer demand, and future property values. The honest answer is that social housing can have both positive and negative impacts on surrounding markets, depending heavily on how well it is run.
One distinction matters above all else: social housing is not the same as Breaking New Ground (BNG) projects, formerly known as RDP housing.
What is social housing?
Social housing is regulated rental-only accommodation for low- to medium-income households earning between R1 850 and R22 000 a month. It is provided by accredited Social Housing Institutions (SHIs) or Other Delivery Agents (ODAs), which are regulated by the Social Housing Regulatory Authority (SHRA). It is built through partnerships between government bodies and accredited non-profit organisations or private developers.
Traditionally isolated on city outskirts alongside RDP housing, social housing is now increasingly being brought into cities as part of mixed-use, well-located urban regeneration. This is a deliberate policy shift. The SHRA’s 2025 to 2030 strategic plan notes that over 56,700 people were identified as homeless in 2024, with Gauteng and the Western Cape expected to absorb the largest share of internal migration ahead. Well-located rental stock close to jobs and transport is one direct response to that pressure.
A real-world example
The George Local Municipality recently released prime land for the George Crocodile Farm Social Housing Project, valued at around R1 billion and set to deliver 400 to 500 units, social housing rather than BNG stock, into “the heart of the local economy,” says the National Association of Social Housing Organisations (NASHO), which calls it a “critical victory for spatial justice.”
“By leveraging municipal-owned land, George is providing a clear roadmap for how local government can use municipal assets to dismantle the legacy of spatial apartheid,” says Karabelo Pooe, general manager of NASHO. “This is how you bridge the gap between a housing backlog and a thriving, integrated city.”
Simnikiwe Mbekushe, deputy director of Human Settlements at George municipality, adds: “We believe developments like this are important for building a more inclusive and sustainable future for our community.”
George is not unique. Similar projects exist around the country, including Steenvilla by SOHCO in the Western Cape, a YG Properties development in Gauteng, and JOSHCO’s projects within Johannesburg. Not every project runs smoothly, though. The sector has also faced rental boycotts and recent public scrutiny of SHRA-funded projects delivered by the Instratin Group, a reminder that outcomes depend heavily on the developer and institution involved.
Does social housing affect property values?
The assumption that social housing automatically reduces property values is not clearly supported either way. According to emeritus professor François Viruly, a respected South African property economist, there is no straightforward answer, but academic research points to consistent factors of influence.
“These include:
1) the socio-economic characteristics of the neighbourhood concerned;
2) the typology considered, including the compatibility with the neighbourhood;
3) the size of the development compared with the units in the neighbourhood; and
4) The quality of the management of the development.”
Management, Viruly says, is critical. “A well-managed development reduces possible negative impacts that such developments have on market values. This includes both the management of the development itself and the management of the urban environment in proximity.” That extends to schools, employment opportunities, parks and, notably, transport. “The costs associated with getting to and from a place of work and the delivery of infrastructure like transport play a role in the location of social housing and improving overall housing affordability in the region.”
Social housing can also support urban regeneration. “This can include the upgrading of existing buildings and the development of underutilised land and facilities. Alongside that, an improvement in densities associated with social housing developments creates an asset class that is attractive to larger investors, which indirectly brings new sources of investment into a neighbourhood,” says the prof.
A future source of buyers?
Viruly believes that well-located, high-density affordable housing allows households to move up the housing ladder within the neighbourhoods where they already live. “It is important that municipalities adopt pro-housing policies that encourage well-located, high-density affordable housing units in lower-income neighbourhoods. This makes it possible for households to move up the housing ladder in neighbourhoods where they reside.”
As residents improve their financial position, some may choose to buy in nearby suburbs rather than relocate entirely, a longer-term effect that is harder to measure than property value movements but creates potential future demand from households already invested in the local community. Viruly also notes that the management dynamics of social housing are not unique to the sector. They mirror those of any high-density residential development, such as a sectional title estate, with the ownership structure being the main point of difference.
What this means for agents
Much of a social housing development’s success comes down to location, design, scale, management quality and integration into the existing community. None of this is visible from a planning notice alone, which is why blanket assumptions, in either direction, tend to fall short. A few practical steps can help agents respond with confidence rather than guesswork.
Confirm what is actually being built. Establish whether the development is genuinely social housing (regulated, rental-only, SHRA-overseen) or BNG and RDP stock, since the two are often conflated and carry different implications.
Check who the delivery agent is. A quick look at the SHRA’s accredited institutions, or at how those institutions’ other projects have performed, gives a more grounded answer than speculation.
Ask about location and integration. Proximity to schools, transport and employment is one of the strongest predictors of a development’s success.
Avoid promising outcomes either way. Even academic research offers no universal answer, so explaining the factors at play serves clients better than reassurance or alarm.
Keep a longer view. Some tenants will, over time, become buyers in the surrounding area themselves, a point worth raising with sceptical clients.
Ultimately, the NIMBY response to social housing is rarely about the development itself. It is about uncertainty, and agents who have done the homework beforehand are best placed to manage it.
