Key ingredients for a collaborative urban regeneration strategy in the Global South

The paper documents the development of a collaborative regeneration strategy for a marginalised community in Cape Town that was led by a Non-Profit Company (NPC). NPC’s vision for the strategy was to incorporate key inputs from the community to unlock the economic potential of the area and promote upliftment. A case study methodology was adopted which included a series of interviews and community engagement workshops. The research aimed to identify the key ingredients required to drive collaborative urban regeneration in marginalised communities in the global south. The study established that in the absence of effective leadership and service delivery from local authorities the community feel disenfranchised as their community is not seen as an immediate priority. There was a deep-rooted mistrust in the process being driven by the NPC and the visioning process was met with resistance and suspicion. The engagement process lacked depth/scope and reflected a top-down approach. It is concluded that fundamental ingredients for effective collaborative urban regeneration is trust between the key stakeholders, a diverse assortment of expertise and skills, and an in-depth engagement process. Without these factors urban regeneration is likely to only entrench the complex urban issues it seeks to reconcile.


Introduction
Cities across the world are facing rapid urbanisation (UN-Habitat, 2016;UN, 2018). More than half of the world's population presently reside in urban areas. In particular, African cities face significant challenges in terms of rapid population growth and urbanisation (UN-Habitat, 2014;OECD, 2016). The primary challenges in this regard are: high levels of poverty and inequality; spatial separation of residential areas defined by race; and growing informal settlements that lack adequate infrastructure and services (Robinson, 2008;UN-Habitat, 2014). Dawson and Edwards (2004) argue that cities of the global south 1 are strongly characterized by some of the most extreme cases of economic disparity, ecological degradation and spatial apartheid in the world. This is supported by van Dijk (2006) and UN-Habitat (2016). An additional key characteristic of cities of the global south, and in particular African and South African cities, is that of a dual approach by government where on the one hand the cities are promoted in the global economy in order to stimulate investment and development, but simultaneously have a spending policy that is aligned with the upliftment of the urban poor (Lemanski, 2007). Consequently, a tension exists between the economic opportunity in remaining globally competitive and the potential exclusion of the local populace in areas that undergo regeneration (Ding, Lai and Wang, 2012;Currie, Musango and May, 2016). This duality often results in pockets of urban regeneration occurring in parts of the city that are well resourced in terms of infrastructure relative to vast informal settlements. This in turn implies that the duality is likely to result in a continuation and steady growth in the social and spatial segregation within these cities (Lemanski, 2007;Watson, 2013). Contextually, this challenge is further exacerbated by institutional under-development on the part of state and an inability to achieve the desired outcomes in mediating the development and management of sustainable urban environments (Mchunu, 2016). In response to the unintended entrenchment of these issues by the state (both duality and institutional under-development), there has been a rapid growth in the number of nongovernmental organisations operating in the global south (Brass, 2014). Though the increasing prevalence of non-state actors as key players in service delivery mechanisms to the urban poor is not unique to the global south (Hula and Jackson-Elmoore, 2001;Marwell, 2004;Bailey, 2012;Jing and Hu, 2017). Reckhow, Downey and Sapotichne (2019:1) caution that this trend in the rise of 'nonprofit activity in urban politics' has the potential to give rise to a new form of governance that, in terms of regeneration, may not serve the interests of the majority of citizens. This form of governance could replicate historical development paradigms that often entrench complex urban issues of the global south. These urban regeneration paradigms have been identified as a significant cause of economic and social exclusion and declining quality of life in distressed urban areas (Deakin, 2009;Darchen and Ladouceur, 2013). It is further argued by Wolfram (2017;2019), that exclusionary governance and practices of urban development (which are commonplace in the global south) have been shown to be incapable of resolving the complex issues that coalesce in these cities. Hence, the need to radically reassess the vehicles of urban change is pervasive, and more comprehensive implementations of urban regeneration offer a key approach to addressing persistent problems associated with urban sustainability (Wolfram, 2019). Weingaertner and Barber (2010), Wang et al. (2014), Zheng, Shen and Wang (2014), Roberts (2017) and Toli and Murtagh (2017) describe urban regeneration as the comprehensive vision and action of rebuilding an existing urban area in order to bring about lasting improvements to the economic, physical, social and environmental condition of an area. Moreover, the process should remain cognisant of the community's specific challenges, in order to ensure the long-term sustainability of the urban area. If this can be achieved, urban regeneration offers the potential to form a strategic intervention that triggers deeper changes in cultures, structures, and practices that enable urban sustainability transformations (McCormick et al., 2013).
In achieving the goal of 'sustainable urban regeneration', Deakin (2012) makes the case for a form of socially inclusive visioning that allows communities to define the (re)development that occurs within their urban area. Blessi et al. (2012, p.1) further argue that what is needed is an active form of community participation and empowerment in order to achieve some form of 'bond' with the local community. Moreover, that without an understanding of the local context of an urban area and the associated community, it is unlikely that regeneration will leverage any form of socio-economic development. Aitken (2012) adds to this narrative by including trust as a key ingredient in any form of community participation in the process of regeneration of an urban area. In linking this narrative to the duality inherent in cities of the global south, Ferilli, Sacco and Blessi (2016) argue that in terms of urban regeneration what is required is a shift from the top-down approach ordinarily adopted by governments, to a more inclusive and participatory approach in which the voices of the urban poor are both heard and listened to. Moreover, what is required is a community-based approach to sustainable urban regeneration that highlights the pivotal role that community participation can have in uplifting an area.
Hence, the purpose of the study is to identify the key characteristics required to meaningfully drive collaborative urban regeneration and to document the development of a collaborative urban regeneration strategy for a marginalised community in the global south.

Research method
Given the unique nature of the community and the regeneration project, the research adopted a single case study approach. The marginalised nature of the community meant that the study community and the organisations involved in the development of the strategy have been kept anonymous. Interviews and a focus group were the primary source of collected data. In addition, documentation and procedures involved in the development of the strategy and the subsequent regeneration document were reviewed and studied in depth. This secondary data was used to complement the primary data. The interviews comprised of open-ended questions designed to establish how the development of the regeneration strategy took place. Interviewees were selected based on their involvement in the project and the community. There were three individual interviews; one with the stakeholder relations manager from the Non-Profit Company that initiated the regeneration (for the purposes of this study they are referred to as NPC-X), one with an urban planner from the City of Cape Town (CoCT), and a youth worker and member of NPC-X's social development foundation. The focus group was held with four longstanding residents and community leaders. The researchers were unable to interview anyone from the organisation responsible for designing the strategy. All data gathered was explored using thematic analysis.

LOCATION/CONTEXT
The community under study is well-located and situated between the region's largest and second largest business districts. It is also adjacent to the railway line that connects these two nodes. The community has access to other transit links and is well located between two national highways. The CoCT has earmarked the area for focused investment and catalytic projects to stimulate spatial transformation and development. The community is adjacent to industrial, retail and commercial centres offering a range of employment opportunities. It is speculated that, due to the above factors and the continued growth of Cape Town, the community will experience gentrification where many of the low-income residents may, as a result, be priced out of the area. The exact population of the community is unknown, but it is estimated that there are more than 12,000 residents. The community comprises of a diverse mix of ages, races, and religious backgrounds. The majority of the community members have been longstanding residents and have lived in the area for generations. The community has always been characterised by poverty, low rates of education and high unemployment, and this persists today. Petty crime, such as house break-ins and muggings are a persistent issue, but the community has been able to avoid the more serious socio-economic issues experienced by neighbouring communities. The community is marginalised in the sense that it has been 'left behind' by many of the economic opportunities that supported development of Cape Town and the industrial areas that surround the community. In addition, it is not seen as a priority area for the delivery of services by local government. The community has many engaged citizens which is evident by the number of organisations and initiatives present in the area.

HISTORY
The community was first established in the 1930's to provide affordable housing for poor 'white' people. The land was developed by NPC-X who received a state grant to establish the community. They owned and operated all the land, houses, streets, public buildings and open spaces in the community and played the role of local government, providing social facilities and services. NPC-X remained owner and operator of the public infrastructure and open spaces until 1996 when it was handed over to the CoCT. Nevertheless, the organisation still plays a large role in the community. This is most notably demonstrated by the social development programmes they run for residents and the broader community.
NPC-X is a non-profit property company that uses market-related property sales and rentals to cross-subsidise social housing and discounted rentals for lower income tenants. NPC-X's footprint in the study community is a mix of market rentals and discounted rentals. No government assistance is received for these properties. However, up until the 1970s NPC-X received extensive support from government. NPC-X owns a little over 200 properties in the community and is the primary landlord in the area.
Cape Town is in the midst of a housing affordability crisis with one outcome being that many residents are being displaced from historically low-income areas. The community in question is in danger of experiencing this displacement. Given the large footprint NPC-X has in the community it has the potential to stem the tide of gentrification in the area. As such, the organisation intends to leverage its assets in the area to create opportunities to redevelop and sell properties and keep rentals low for their lower-income tenants. In addition, through a process of collaborative design with the community, the organisation intended to initiate the development of a regeneration strategy for the area. NPC-X have commissioned a local urban design firm to carry out the engagement and development of the strategy.
The case is unique in the sense that this type of project is historically carried out by local government and not a non-state actor. However due to the marginalised nature of the community and the under-resourced nature of local government, NPC-X believe that they are in a better position to mobilise resources to develop and implement an urban regeneration strategy for the community. This research followed the development of this urban regeneration strategy.

Findings
Three themes emerged from the data. Each of these are discussed below.

Community are marginalized and feel disenfranchised
All of the respondents highlighted the issue of service delivery failure in the area which has left the community feeling marginalised. This sense of being neglected, according to respondents, extends to the NPC-X. It is felt that NPC-X has not adequately maintained their properties and has decreased their community involvement in areas that they may have historically fulfilled. Additionally, the local government does not perceive the community as being in crisis and is therefore unable to allocate sufficient resources to the community. While the study community does experience a smaller degree of socio-economic issues by comparison to some surrounding neighbourhoods, there are a number of pervading problems that need to be addressed. One recurrent issue is that the police services are preoccupied with the surrounding areas which have a greater need for policing, thus leaving the community increasingly vulnerable to crime. The participant from the CoCT stressed that they have limited resources and are unable to carry out a regeneration process for the community as there are other areas that are prioritised over the community:

"We've got more places in need than people to run projects…we are under-resourced, completely under-resourced"
This has exacerbated the feelings of neglect and in response to the lack of external support, the community has cultivated a culture of distrust towards outside organisations. As a result, outside intervention is typically met with scepticism and resistance.

Mobilised community
Service delivery failure has led to community members taking matters into their own hands as they feel they cannot trust outside institutions to fulfil their service delivery requirements:

"…I think it is a case of no one is standing up for us so we have to stand up for ourselves"
All the other respondents highlighted the devotion and commitment that the residents have towards their community. This stems from two factors: firstly, the length of residence that most of the tenants have resided in the community, thereby instilling a deep-sense of connection to their community. Respondents highlighted that many residents had been living in the community and have been tenants of NPC-X for generations. Secondly, the community members do not believe their concerns will be answered by local government or any external parties. Thus, a number of community-based initiatives and organisations have come into existence to fill the gap left by service delivery failures. These include a number of neighbourhood watch entities, after school homework programmes, and initiatives providing meals for impoverished senior citizens.

Communities within communities
One challenging consequence of the community being so active and mobilised is that factions within the community have begun to emerge. Accordingly, it is difficult for the community to form a united front on a clear vision for the area. This was highlighted by all of the respondents. Community members place far more trust in community leaders than they do outside political processes or the promises made by NPC-X. However, there is little cohesion and coordination between the community-based organisations and other external organisations, leading to a lack of communication about activities and initiatives that may at times have the same overarching goals. One respondent highlighted how this makes it difficult for NPC-X to engage with the community as there is rarely a gathering that represents a united concern. Not only does this make it difficult and labour intensive for NPC-X to engage with the community, it also makes it difficult for the community to get a coherent message across. It was highlighted by participants that there needs to be greater cohesion among the community members so that they can mobilise around common objectives.
EMERGENT THEME 2: SENTIMENT TOWARD NPC-X The findings uncovered a deep-seated resentment of NPC-X by the community. During interviews community members retold stories relating to neglect of the elderly as well as unlawful evictions. The accuracy of these accusations cannot be confirmed but what is clear is that there is a negative depiction of the organisation in the community. Many community members feel NPC-X do not care about the residents and are only concerned about rental income. This has been exacerbated by recent rental increases. In addition, a scandal that exposed the extortion of tenants and other fraudulent practices by a group of employees of NPC-X has worsened the perception of the organisation of being dishonest and unlawful. Respondents noted that NPC-X often experiences challenges engaging with residents about the regeneration process because a lot of the aggrievances that residents have with the organisation overshadow dialogue around the regeneration. These aggrievances are most notably around the lack of maintenance performed on their properties, evictions, the perceived disinvestment in the community, and the recent increase in rentals. Subsequently residents cannot separate the organisation (and the issues they have with NPC-X) from the regeneration process.

Misunderstanding of the role NPC-X in the community
There is a lot of misplaced expectation on NPC-X's role in the community and in a manner the organisation is viewed as an extension/proxy for local government. This was confirmed by the respondent from NPC-X who highlighted their legacy in the community. Its close workings with various sectors of government has spread an expectation that they are not merely landlords but are also responsible for providing public services. This expectation is reinforced by the level of involvement that the organisation has had in the community since it was established. As a result, there is a belief among some residents that the organisation is responsible for providing affordable housing and a host of other services to the community. Indeed, the organisation has far more involvement in the broader community than a typical landlord. In this way, some of the negative sentiment towards the organisation is perhaps unreasonable. In reality, NPC-X provides no regulated social housing in the community and are merely landlords. Ultimately, this misunderstanding relates to poor communication between NPC-X and the residents of the community regarding its business model and the roles and responsibilities of the organisation. Many still believe that the organisation is funded by the government or is a government entity because of the reasons mentioned above. The respondent from NPC-X explained that much of their communication with the residents involves "…spreading correct information and correcting misconceptions…". This lack of communication also extends to the engagement process, where many residents were unaware of the process or unclear about what was being planned. This exacerbated the sentiments of mistrust directed towards NPC-X.

Rental increases
By far the greatest barrier to creating meaningful dialogue with the community was the increase in rent which coincided with the development of the regeneration strategy. Shortly after the process began, NPC-X announced that it was creating a more robust structure around its market-related portfolio. This meant widespread rent increases for tenants, generating a significant amount of resentment towards the organisation, particularly around increases for vulnerable members of the community, such as senior citizens. There was also a lack of transparency around how the restructuring was to be implemented and hence was perceived to be deeply unethical. The details around this restructuring remain unclear.
What followed was a complete breakdown in communication between the community and the organisation, despite efforts from NPC-X to engage with residents through multiple channels. The situation escalated to the point where the organisation had to relocate their satellite office from the community following fears for staff safety. The regeneration strategy has been put on hold whilst NPC-X re-evaluates their plans for the community. Unfortunately, the noise created by the rental increases drowned out the potential development of the engagement process.

Time, depth and scope of the process
The intention of the project was to develop a co-produced strategy to regenerate the area. However, there were a number of key shortcomings with the engagement process. First, as pointed out by the respondent from NPC-X, was that the process required more depth and needed to incorporate a broader assortment of stakeholders. Secondly, it was conducted in a very short period of time (three months) and contained only two engagement workshops with residents before a draft strategy was produced. The development of a collaborative urban regeneration strategy does not follow a conventional design timeline. Hence an unrealistic timeframe for the public engagement and subsequent strategy development was set. The participant from the CoCT who is involved in the regeneration of marginalised communities in Cape Town highlighted their concern about this and stressed that it takes years of engagement to truly understand the dynamics of a community and develop meaningful solutions to their issues. The above brings into question the credibility of the engagement process.

Attendance of the workshops
Another key shortcoming in the engagement process is the small number of residents that were involved in the co-design of the strategy. The first workshop was the best attended workshop with 12 community members being present. The second workshop had 7 residents present. In a community of over 12,000 residents, this level of attendance is concerning. Participants highlighted that many community members were unaware of the engagement workshops. Another possible reason for the poor attendance is that residents extended very little trust in the regeneration process and the subsequent outcome. This may be linked to the marginalised nature of the community and the issues raised in emergent theme 2. In the end there were only two engagement workshops with the community that informed the strategy. All participants highlighted the necessity for a broad spectrum of the community's members to be involved in the development of the strategy in order to make it a success.

GENERAL CRITIQUE OF THE REGENERATION STRATEGY
The findings in this section are based on the various regeneration documents associated with the development of the strategy. These findings are also supplemented by data collected via interviews. It is worth mentioning that the study is based on the draft strategy documents and there may be plans to revise and further develop this strategy, though none have been released to date. The process of developing the regeneration strategy was to define a series of interventions that would respond to issues that all stakeholders could agree were relevant and important to the community's upliftment. Four key shortcomings emerge from the review of the strategy document, these are discussed below.

Spatially-oriented nature of the strategy
Architects and urban designers were tasked with carrying out the community engagement and collating the regeneration strategy. Thus, they come from a very spatial/design oriented school of thought. As a result, many of the proposed solutions in the draft strategy rely on spatial/ design elements. This concern was stressed by the respondent from the CoCT who cautioned how certain issues would be provided with a spatial solution, when the required solution is something 'softer'. In places the strategy seems to find problems in order to justify spatial solutions, as opposed to a spatial intervention developing out of a meaningful interrogation of the issues at hand. For example, the team put forward many design-oriented solutions to issues around safety without investigating other solutions that may seek to address the core issue making the community unsafe for residents. Interestingly, the representative from NPC-X mentioned that they have identified, through the engagement process, a number of potential solutions to some of the resident's concerns that are not spatially/design related. This reiterates how the community may not necessarily need this type of solution. It was also mentioned by the representative from NPC-X that developing non-spatial interventions could better demonstrate their commitment to the community and build "…trust from a basis of support services and not our key purpose [providing rental accommodation]". This would demonstrate an intention to attend to the community's needs from a social well-being perspective rather than a place-making perspective.

Absence of substantive delivery mechanisms for the strategy
A common thread of the regeneration report is the lack of substantive and demonstrated ways to execute what is proposed. The document is clear that it "should be guided by a vision that leads to collaborative action" but does not provide any concrete mechanisms from which this could be realised. Much of what is put forward is vague and needs to be properly linked to the context and stakeholders in the community. Further, the strategy document contains a number of urban planning and development terms and best practices from around the world. It provides considerable depth to these concepts but shows little evidence of how these have been translated into a strategy for regenerating the study community and much less on how the strategy will be implemented. For example, many solutions put forward in the document borrow from the work completed by the Violence Protection through Urban Upgrading (VPUU) initiative which, over a number of years, have demonstrated successes in impoverished communities in South Africa through an in-depth methodology centred around establishing strong commuity partnerships, building trust, and active participation and engagement. However, the document fails to articulate how they intend to replicate the work of VPUU in the study community. To this end it is argued that these principles contained in the strategy need to be grounded in the realities of the community and the principles should be thoroughly interrogated to evaluate their efficacy in a given context. A further example relates to the proposed solution of optimising residential plots by adding a second dwelling. There are no details pertaining to how the development of these dwellings will be funded, the local planning and land use policies governing this, and what the implications of having a 'blanket consent use' for certain properties would be.
The report puts forward 13 proposals or "Seeds of Regeneration" as part of the overarching strategy for the community. The document outlines an action plan for each seed of regeneration, the role-players involved in delivering those seeds and the expected timeframe of delivery. The action plan itself is vague and offers very little additional information that supports the timeframes and the implementation of the seeds. Furthermore, the action plan lists the various actors that will implement the initiatives yet most of these actors were not consulted or involved in the development of the strategy, thus their involvement is based purely on assumption.
The result is that the document looks less like a blueprint to regenerate the area but more of a series of concepts and ideas that loosely form a guiding framework from which the community could consider more concrete and actionable strategies.

Little evidence of a co-designed strategy
The term 'co-creation' was used to describe how the regeneration strategy was to be developed, however, it would be more accurately described as a strategy that was developed with input from community members as there was no evidence that community members devised any solutions included in the document. Apart from notes and attendance registries from the engagement workshops there was no detail in the draft strategy regarding how the engagement process took place or how the strategy was co-created. As a result, there is little linking the proposed strategy and the engagement. This brings into question the coproduction of the strategy and suggests that the process followed no clear plan centred around participation and collaboration. The above supports previous findings that the engagement process was inadequate.
The workshops uncovered the key concerns of the attending members of the community. These were primarily related to housing, the affordability of housing, safety and security in the neighbourhood, care for and safety of senior citizens in the community, and recreational facilities for the community's youths. While the strategy does speak to some of these issues raised, given the shortcomings of the engagement process outlined earlier in this section, it is questionable whether the proposed interventions have appropriately addressed the concerns the residents have.
The strategy was underpinned by three themes: Inclusive, Thriving and Resilient. This was based on local legislation, best practice internationally, and the limited engagements with the community. However, it is unclear how these themes emerged from the community engagement workshops. In addition, it appears that there was a preconceived idea of where the regeneration strategy was going prior to the completion of the engagement process. This is evidenced by some respondents who mentioned that there was already a working draft strategy after the first engagement workshop. There are further examples of interventions that were in the strategy that were not related to issues raised in the workshops. Conversely, there were issues, such as housing for the elderly, that emerged from the engagements but not addressed in the strategy. This highlights the lack of meaningful engagement and bottom-up dialogue that took place via the engagements.
Identifying key ingredients for the development of a successful collaborative regeneration strategy The analysis of the urban regeneration strategy together with the emergent themes allowed for a rich contextual understanding of the complexities of developing a collaborative urban regeneration strategy. Through this, three key ingredients for the development of a successful collaborative regeneration strategy were identified. These are outlined below.

THE NEED FOR A DIVERSE MIX OF PROFESSIONALS IN STRATEGY DEVELOPMENT
The regeneration strategy would benefit from having a multi-disciplinary team, where there is a variety of input from a number of different disciplines and skillsets. Commissioning urban designers and architects to develop a strategy without a thorough understanding of the community's needs will likely lead to the development of inappropriate solutions to poorly understood problems. Whilst urban designers offer invaluable skills in terms of planning policies and innovative design aspects of urban regeneration, Lawson (2018) highlights that the over-emphasis of design aspects of regeneration can mask less democratic planning processes. Furthermore, this entrenches a mindset of superficial intervention where design processes are less about problem-solving and more about design. This was confirmed to be the case in this study. It is argued that the spatially-derived nature of the strategy meant that the proposed interventions placed preference on placemaking rather than improving the quality of life of the residents. Thus, the findings support Deakin's (2009) approach for community-based regeneration that is underpinned by improving quality of life.
The above highlights the importance of having a diverse mix of skills when attempting these types of projects and supports the work of Wolfram (2019) who argued that diversity of knowledge and expertise involved in regeneration projects offers significant potential to guide stakeholders toward the most appropriate and effective interventions.

APPROACHES NEED TO BE GROUNDED IN EMPOWERMENT AND A MEANINGFUL PROCESS OF ENGAGEMENT
Despite the shortcomings of NPC-X, their intentions for the community; providing opportunities for low-income earners and uplifting the community, appear to be genuine. However, these intentions mean very little unless a well-devised engagement process is carried out in a meaningful way. This takes time, effort, commitment and trust. The process was carried out within a paradigm of strongly defined deadlines and deliverables which limited the ability of the urban designers to properly engage with the dynamics and issues of the community. This reduced the co-design of the regeneration strategy to a tick-box exercise. This made NPC-X's approach more top-down than collaborative. Hartley (2018) highlights that urban planning tactics often favour top-down intervention over multi-sectoral collaboration. Furthermore, this results in marginalising and displacing the politically weaker constituencies that give neighbourhoods their authenticity. The findings of this study support this notion as residents felt further marginalised by the process which reinforced the lack of trust from residents.
The inability of NPC-X to meaningfully engage with the community has been greatly hindered by the poor channels of communication between the organisation and the residents. It is clear that the residents are willing and able to take on an active role in the regeneration of the area, however, what appears to be missing are strong mechanisms for the organisation to open-up conversation and create meaningful dialogue with the community around certain issues. NPC-X should have undertaken the engagement themselves, providing the community with the opportunity to develop solutions. This would have helped develop a unified vision for the community which unfortunately was not achieved through the process.
One proposed reason for the poor attendance of the engagement workshops is the lack of trust in the process. The organisation has been involved in the community for decades and has historically worked on the basis of making decisions without community input. This top-down approach has left residents feeling disempowered and has entrenched the idea that the organisation can still operate as it has done for generations, making changes without need for consideration or collaboration. This approach is somewhat outdated and has proven unsuccessful in achieving an effective regeneration process. The organisation has a lack of trust in the community's ability to make effective decisions and has cultivated this culture of disempowerment instead of enablement. Darchen and Ladoceur (2013) highlight that topdown regeneration processes have had negative impacts on community empowerment and that active public engagement with the community is central to successful urban regeneration processes. In many ways NPC-X adopted the dominant development paradigm typically illustrated by state entities where little agency is extended to communities. This confirms the sentiments of Wolfram (2019). Wolfram (2019) further calls for more polycentric leadership in urban regeneration that enables deeper involvement of NGOs and academia that mediate norms and link local and layman knowledge to policy.

DEVELOPMENT OF THE STRATEGY NEEDS TO BE FOUNDED ON TRUST
There are a number of unsettled aggrievances between NPC-X (those administering the regeneration strategy) and the community (those required to play a significant role developing the strategy). This is undoubtedly a poor platform to base a collaborative urban regeneration strategy on. Successful dialogue and engagement necessitates a degree of reciprocal commitment and trust between the stakeholders, which requires active and honest communication of intentions. This finding confirms the work of Hibbitt, Jones, and Meegan (2001) who proposed that central to the process of regeneration is the active development of trust and the social relationships surrounding it. Further, they argue that the presence of strong networks of public engagement fosters generalised reciprocity, which inherently results in trust. Purdue (2001) explains that ambivalence over trust between individuals and organisations in both partnerships and community creates difficulties in building social capital. Similarly, this study confirms that trust needs to be extended beyond just between the implementing actor (in this case NPC-X) and the community, but also to the various private and community-based actors within the community. The study found that the lack of trust within the community created barriers to increased social capital.
There is also the issue of poor timing. Attempting to conduct community engagement for a regeneration strategy at the same time as implementing a rental increase has created significant tension and distrust. The negative sentiments surrounding the rental increase greatly overshadowed any good intentions of the organisation's regeneration strategy. The reality is that all of the other shortcomings of the development of the regeneration strategy became inconsequential in light of the issues around the rental increases which saw a massive rift develop between the community and NPC-X. The breakdown of communication and trust fundamentally side-lined the project. It is evident that the community won't support such a strategy in light of a poorly handled engagement process and a pervading sentiment of deep mistrust.

Conclusion
Cities of the global south are characterised by established independent municipal governments, thereby expanding the scope and significance of urban governance in the process (Auerbach et al., 2018). The result is increased responsibilities on municipal governments in a context where they are least equipped to manage them and an ever-growing reliance on nonstate actors to fulfil the gap left by ineffective urban governance. This has seen an increased role of non-state actors in urban regeneration in South Africa. However, this reliance can often result in undemocratic processes that reinforce urban issues they seek to repair. This calls for the application of urban regeneration processes that are founded upon principles of collaborative governance.
The study documented the development of a collaborative urban regeneration strategy for a marginalised community in Cape Town, South Africa. The findings revealed that the process of developing the regeneration strategy lacked meaningful engagement with the host community, there was a sense of mistrust in the implementing actor and the regeneration process, and the nature of the strategy was dominated by spatial/design related interventions. To this end, the study identified three key ingredients for developing a collaborative urban regeneration strategy for the global south. These are: a multi-disciplinary mix of expertise; a process of engagement that empowers and includes the commuity; and a degree of trust in and between the various stakeholders involved in the regeneration process. Failure to incorporate these ingredients will likely lead to a situation where marginalised community members feel further disenfranchised thereby having serious implications for the social sustainability of a regeneration project and indeed the urban area itself.
The outcome of this study is that it provides deeper insights and contributes to the limited literature on the challenges of developing a collaborative urban regeneration strategy in the global south.