The political transition in 1994 in South Africa ushered in not only an era of nonracial democracy but also a commitment to a developmental State that would reduce inequality and poverty. This paper highlights three aspects of policy that merit attention if government is to meaningfully facilitate the developmental vision of post-apartheid democracy: first, the general reluctance of government and policymakers to acknowledge urban rather than rural poverty, thereby facing the realities of the urbanization of poverty and the demands on urban local government. Second, the oversimplified perception that racial inequality is the exclusive driver of social polarization in cities has masked other critical lines of social and economic cleavage and will hinder implementation of any serious urban development programme. Third, the tardiness in building an appropriate institutional foundation from which to run a developmental local State that is capable of responding to current and future urban development imperatives means that a large section of the urban population experiences institutional poverty. The institutional exclusion that reinforces the poverty of the unemployed, poorly serviced and badly educated population of cities is embedded in the social, environmental and economic functions of city government that flow from the mandate of developmental local government. Bibliogr., notes, ref. [ASC Leiden abstract]
