15/04/2026
Planning Expert Calls for Legal and Institutional Alignment to Address Peri‑Urban Growth in Botswana
Kitwe, Zambia | 9 April 2026
Rapid peri‑urban growth in Botswana is exposing deep‑seated weaknesses in the country’s legal and institutional planning framework, according to Mr. Robert Maabong of the P**a Institute of Town Planners.
Mr. Maabong was presenting a paper titled “Interrogating the Legal and Institutional Framework for Effective Urban Management - by Robert Maabong and Nnyaladzi Tema” at the 11th National Planning Conference, held from 7–9 April 2026 at the Garden Court Hotel in Kitwe, under the theme “Transforming Development Planning: Aligning Laws, Systems, Spaces and People.”
He noted that while Botswana’s spatial planning system is grounded in the Town and Country Planning Act (Cap. 32:09), rapid urban expansion from cities such as Gaborone and Francistown has produced complex peri‑urban areas where statutory planning systems intersect with customary land administration. This interaction, he argued, has resulted in land disputes, informal land markets, fragmented development control and uneven settlement growth.
“Peri‑urban areas in Botswana exist within plural legal and governance orders. Customary and statutory systems often operate with overlapping or competing authority, creating governance challenges that current planning frameworks are not adequately equipped to resolve,” Mr. Maabong said.
Institutional Fragmentation a Key Constraint
The presentation highlighted institutional fragmentation as a major impediment to effective urban management. Planning and land management responsibilities are dispersed across multiple ministries, local authorities and semi‑autonomous bodies such as Land Boards, resulting in policy misalignment, blurred accountability and weak coordination.
Mr. Maabong pointed to Statutory Instrument No. 26 of 2024, which transferred selected planning functions to Land Boards, noting that while the reform aimed to improve efficiency, it has introduced procedural confusion (particularly in peri‑urban villages such as Mogoditshane, Tlokweng and Oodi) where subdivision and consolidation decisions are sometimes made without adequate reference to existing developments and local authority regulations.
He further noted that overlapping mandates involving institutions such as the Special Economic Zones Authority have created parallel and occasionally conflicting planning processes within the same administrative boundaries.
Limited Legal Recognition of Strategic Spatial Plans
Concerns were also raised regarding the weak legal status of key spatial policy instruments. Although the National Spatial Plan (NSP) 2036 provides a long‑term framework for balanced spatial development, it lacks explicit legal backing under the Town and Country Planning Act, reducing its effectiveness in guiding development and investment decisions.
Similarly, while the National Planning Commission, established under the National Planning Act No. 5 of 2024, has improved coordination in socio‑economic planning, spatial planning remains inadequately integrated within its core mandate.
Customary Land Governance and Inclusive Planning
Mr. Maabong underscored the continued influence of customary land administration in peri‑urban villages, noting that the coexistence of customary and statutory systems (often guided by different planning logics) has contributed to inconsistent development control and growing informality.
He further observed that existing planning legislation offers limited opportunities for meaningful public participation, undermining inclusive and people‑centred development. This gap, he noted, is increasingly significant as peri‑urban communities densify and diversify, and was evidenced by recent community resistance to proposals to upgrade Mogoditshane and Tlokweng to city status.
Pathways for Reform
Feedback from conference discussions emphasized the need for reforms that align laws, institutions, spaces and people. Proposed interventions included harmonising land and spatial planning legislation, strengthening inter‑ministerial coordination, integrating customary land governance into statutory planning, clarifying and gazetting settlement boundaries, and building planning capacity at the local level.
Concluding his presentation, Mr. Maabong stressed that sustainable and resilient peri‑urban development in Botswana will depend on deliberate legal, institutional and participatory reforms.
“Without stronger alignment between legal frameworks, institutional mandates and community needs, peri‑urban areas will continue to grow in ways that are uncoordinated, contested and socially unsustainable,” he said.
