Hegemonic Global Influences on Service Delivery: A Theoretical Retreat

  • Hangwelani Hope MagidimishaEmail author
  • Lovemore Chipungu


This chapter presents and analyses key concepts and theories that contribute to the understanding of spatial inequality in human settlements. The concepts and theories used apply to both urban and rural environments since dynamics of inequality in South Africa prevail at and in different spatial levels—but more so, how they respond to global forces. Key theories that are considered in this chapter include theories of regional disequilibrium which argue that problems of inequality manifest themselves demographically and spatially, in some instances showing this diversity over regions. In this regard, spatial inequality can be analysed as a regional problem as well as a global problem. In addition, developmentalism theory and world system theory are also considered. They are also supported by theories of public service provision which in essence consider service provision from the perspective of the government. Theories of deprivation wrap up this chapter by bringing on boards deprivation as a major component associated with equality. Hence this chapter provides a comprehensive conceptualisation of service delivery thereby setting the stage for understanding dynamics in the South African context.


  1. Batley, R. (2001). Public-private partnerships for urban services. In The challenge of urban government (pp. 199–214). Washington, DC: World Bank Institute. Google Scholar
  2. Booth, D., & Cammack, D. (2013). Governance for development in Africa: Solving collective action problems. London and New York: Zed Books.Google Scholar
  3. Buchanan, J. M. (1954). Individual choice in voting and the market. Journal of Political Economy, 62, 334–343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Buchanan, J. M. (1990). The domain of constitutional economics. Constitutional Political Economy, 1, 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Castells, M., & Sheridan, A. (1977). The urban question: A Marxish approach. Social Structure and Social Change. Macmillan. Google Scholar
  6. Cowen, T. (1992). Public goods and market failures: A critical examinations. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.Google Scholar
  7. Douglass, M. (1998). A regional network strategy for reciprocal rural-urban linkages: an agenda for policy research with reference to Indonesia. Third World Planning Review, 20(1), 1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Felkins, L. (1999). Introduction to public choice theory. Faith & Economics, 34(Fall), 1–10. Google Scholar
  9. Friedmann, J. (1963). Regional planning as a field of study. American Journal of Planning, 29(3), 168–175. Google Scholar
  10. Friedmann, J. (1983). Life space and economic space: Contradictions in regional development. In The crises of the European regions. Berlin: Springer. Google Scholar
  11. Gildenhuys, J. S. H., & Knipe, A. (2000). The organisation of governments: An introduction. Pretoria, South Africa: Van Schaik Publishers.Google Scholar
  12. Glasson, J. (1974). An introduction to regional planning: Concepts, theory and practice. London, UK: Hutchinson Educational.Google Scholar
  13. Gore, C. (1984). Regions in question: Space development theory and regional policy. New York: Methuen.Google Scholar
  14. Haralambos, M., & Holborn, M. (2008). Sociology: Themes and perspectives. London, UK: HarperCollins.Google Scholar
  15. Hill, P. J. (1999). Public choice: A review. Faith & Economics, 34, 1–10.Google Scholar
  16. Hogwood, B. W., Gunn, L. A., & Archibald, S. (1984). Policy analysis for the real world. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Jakobson, L. (1980). Regional planning: The reality of demand and its consequences for training. Madison: University of Wisconsin. Google Scholar
  18. Keating, M., & Loughling, J. (Eds.). (1997). Political economy of regionalism. London, UK: Francass.Google Scholar
  19. Keeble, L. (1969). Principles and practice of town and country planning (4th ed.). London, UK: Estates Gazette.Google Scholar
  20. Keivani, R. (2009). Utilities. Corporate social responsibility and urban development. Berlin: Springer. Google Scholar
  21. Kivell, N. (2018). Reframing the role of size in transformation: A participatory theory development study with community organizers and activists.Google Scholar
  22. Lal, D. (1997). Private provision of public goods and services. In Privatization at the end of the century. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  23. Lall, S. V., & Chakravorty, S. (2005). Industrial location and spatial inequality: Theory and evidence from India. Review of Development Economics, 9, 47–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Lipsey, M. W. (1983). A scheme for assessing measurement sensitivity in program evaluation and other applied research. Psychological Bulletin, 94(1), 152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Lipton, M. (1977). Why poor people stay poor: A study of urban bias in world development. London and Canberra: Temple Smith; Australian National University Press.Google Scholar
  26. Moseley, M. J. (1973). The impact of growth centres in rural regions—I. An analysis of spatial “patterns” in Brittany. Regional Studies, 7, 57–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Pacione, M. (2001). Urban geography: A global perspective. London, UK: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Perroux, F. (1970). Note on the concept of growth poles. In Regional economics: Theory and practice (pp. 93–103). New York: Free press.Google Scholar
  29. Rondinelli, D. A. (1985). Equity, growth, and development: Regional analysis in developing countries. Journal of the American Planning Association, 51, 434–448.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Townsend, P. (1979). Poverty in the United Kingdom: A survey of household resources and standards of living. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  31. Tullock, G. (2003). The origin rent-seeking concept. International Journal of Business and Economics, 2(1), 1.Google Scholar
  32. UN-Habitat. (2010). The state of African cities 2010: Governance, inequality and urban land markets. United Nations Environment Programme, United Nations.Google Scholar
  33. Wekwete, K. H. (1988). Rural Growth Points in Zimbabwe—prospects for the future. Journal of Social Development in Africa, 3(2), 5–16.Google Scholar
  34. Wekwete, K. H. (2001). The impact of national policy on urban settlements in Zimbabwe. In C. De Wet & R. Fox (Eds.), Transforming settlement in Southern Africa. International African Seminars. Google Scholar
  35. World Bank. (2012). South Africa economic update: Focus on inequality of opportunity (Issue 3). Washington, DC.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hangwelani Hope Magidimisha
    • 1
    Email author
  • Lovemore Chipungu
    • 1
  1. 1.University of Kwazulu-NatalDurbanSouth Africa

Personalised recommendations