Keeping Pace - Household Growth and Municipal Service Delivery in South Africa's Metros (2011–2022)
How access to basic municipal services changed as South Africa added households between the 2011 and 2022 censuses.
Extension 7
August 2026
Introduction
Between 2011 and 2022, South Africa added 3.38 million households, increasing the national total from 14.4 million to 17.8 million—an increase of 23.4%. Over the same period, household growth varied considerably across South Africa's eight metropolitan municipalities, ranging from rapid growth in some cities to declining household numbers in others, as shown in Table 1.
Together, South Africa's metropolitan municipalities were home to 7.96 million households in 2022, up from 6.18 million in 2011. They therefore account for a substantial share of the households requiring municipal services, making their ability to accommodate household growth an important measure of local government performance.
This report examines how South Africa's metropolitan municipalities responded to household growth between the 2011 and 2022 censuses. It compares changes in the number of households with changes in access to weekly refuse collection, piped water inside the dwelling, flush toilets connected to sewerage and electricity for lighting to assess how effectively each metropolitan municipality expanded service delivery over the period.
Table 1
Household growth in South Africa's metropolitan municipalities, 2011–2022
| Metro | 2011 | 2022 | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| City of Tshwane | 911,498 | 1,322,252 | 45.1% |
| Ekurhuleni | 1,015,398 | 1,421,003 | 39.9% |
| City of Cape Town | 1,068,515 | 1,452,845 | 36.0% |
| City of Johannesburg | 1,434,715 | 1,841,917 | 28.4% |
| eThekwini | 963,011 | 1,122,738 | 16.6% |
| Buffalo City | 230,764 | 268,438 | 16.3% |
| Mangaung | 240,700 | 229,426 | −4.7% |
| Nelson Mandela Bay | 324,279 | 307,931 | −5.0% |
Source: Statistics South Africa, Census 2011 and Census 2022.
Methodology
Data
This report uses data from the 2011 and 2022 South African Censuses to compare household growth with changes in access to selected municipal services across South Africa's eight metropolitan municipalities.
Calculation
For each metro, additional households were calculated as the difference between the number of households recorded in 2022 and 2011. The number of households receiving each service was estimated by applying the published Census service coverage percentage to the corresponding number of households in each census year. The difference between these estimates gives the number of additional households receiving each service.
Measuring service expansion
Municipal performance is expressed as the number of additional households receiving a service for every 100 additional households created between 2011 and 2022. A score of 100 means service access expanded at the same pace as household growth. A score above 100 means access expanded faster than household growth, while a score below 100 means it did not keep pace.
Exclusions
Metros that recorded a decline in the number of households between 2011 and 2022 are excluded from this measure because it is designed specifically to assess service expansion in response to household growth.
Weekly refuse collection
Weekly refuse collection did not expand at the same rate as household growth across South Africa's growing metropolitan municipalities between 2011 and 2022. Table 2 ranks the six metros that recorded household growth according to the number of additional households receiving weekly refuse collection for every 100 additional households.
Table 2
Weekly refuse collection relative to household growth, 2011–2022
| Rank | Metro | 2011 | 2022 | New households | Per 100 new households |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Buffalo City | 68.2% | 71.3% | 37,674 | 90 |
| 2 | Ekurhuleni | 88.4% | 88.6% | 405,605 | 89 |
| 3 | City of Tshwane | 80.7% | 81.0% | 410,754 | 82 |
| 4 | City of Cape Town | 94.3% | 90.2% | 384,330 | 79 |
| 5 | City of Johannesburg | 95.3% | 90.5% | 407,202 | 74 |
| 6 | eThekwini | 85.6% | 80.7% | 159,727 | 51 |
Source: Extension 7 calculations using Statistics South Africa, Census 2011 and Census 2022.
Buffalo City ranked first, adding weekly refuse collection for approximately 90 households for every 100 additional households recorded between 2011 and 2022. Ekurhuleni followed at 89, while Tshwane ranked third at 82.
Cape Town ranked fourth at 79 households for every 100 additional households, followed by Johannesburg at 74. eThekwini recorded the lowest result among the six growing metros, adding weekly refuse collection for approximately 51 households for every 100 additional households.
Electricity for lighting
Access to electricity for lighting expanded alongside household growth across all six growing metropolitan municipalities between 2011 and 2022. Table 3 ranks the metros according to the number of additional households using electricity for lighting for every 100 additional households.
Table 3
Electricity for lighting relative to household growth, 2011–2022
| Rank | Metro | 2011 | 2022 | New households | Per 100 new households |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Buffalo City | 80.9% | 94.6% | 37,674 | 179 |
| 2 | eThekwini | 89.9% | 98.5% | 159,727 | 150 |
| 3 | Ekurhuleni | 82.2% | 93.1% | 405,605 | 120 |
| 4 | City of Johannesburg | 90.8% | 94.1% | 407,202 | 106 |
| 5 | City of Cape Town | 94.0% | 96.7% | 384,330 | 104 |
| 6 | City of Tshwane | 88.6% | 91.8% | 410,754 | 99 |
Source: Extension 7 calculations using Statistics South Africa, Census 2011 and Census 2022.
Buffalo City ranked first, adding electricity for lighting for approximately 179 households for every 100 additional households recorded between 2011 and 2022. eThekwini ranked second at 150, followed by Ekurhuleni at 120.
Johannesburg ranked fourth at 106 households for every 100 additional households, followed by Cape Town at 104. Tshwane ranked sixth at 99, the only growing metro where the increase in households using electricity for lighting was slightly below the increase in total households.
Flush toilets connected to sewerage
Access to flush toilets connected to sewerage expanded at different rates across South Africa's growing metropolitan municipalities between 2011 and 2022. Table 4 ranks the metros according to the number of additional households with access to a flush toilet connected to sewerage for every 100 additional households.
Table 4
Flush toilets connected to sewerage relative to household growth, 2011–2022
| Rank | Metro | 2011 | 2022 | New households | Per 100 new households |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | eThekwini | 67.8% | 80.4% | 159,727 | 156 |
| 2 | Buffalo City | 69.1% | 80.7% | 37,674 | 152 |
| 3 | City of Johannesburg | 89.3% | 93.0% | 407,202 | 106 |
| 4 | Ekurhuleni | 86.3% | 91.2% | 405,605 | 103 |
| 5 | City of Cape Town | 90.2% | 93.4% | 384,330 | 102 |
| 6 | City of Tshwane | 78.7% | 81.5% | 410,754 | 88 |
Source: Extension 7 calculations using Statistics South Africa, Census 2011 and Census 2022.
eThekwini ranked first, adding access to a flush toilet connected to sewerage for approximately 156 households for every 100 additional households recorded between 2011 and 2022. Buffalo City followed at 152.
Johannesburg ranked third at 106, followed by Ekurhuleni at 103 and Cape Town at 102. Tshwane ranked sixth, adding access to a flush toilet connected to sewerage for approximately 88 households for every 100 additional households.
Overall municipal performance
Table 5 brings together the rankings across the three municipal service measures. The average rank is the mean of each metro's position across weekly refuse collection, flush toilets connected to sewerage and electricity for lighting.
Table 5
Metropolitan municipality rankings across service measures, 2011–2022
| Metro | Refuse | Sewer | Electricity | Average rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Buffalo City | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1.3 |
| Ekurhuleni | 2 | 4 | 3 | 3.0 |
| eThekwini | 6 | 1 | 2 | 3.0 |
| City of Johannesburg | 5 | 3 | 4 | 4.0 |
| City of Cape Town | 4 | 5 | 5 | 4.7 |
| City of Tshwane | 3 | 6 | 6 | 5.0 |
Source: Extension 7 calculations using Statistics South Africa, Census 2011 and Census 2022.
Buffalo City recorded the highest average position across the three measures, with an average rank of 1.3. Ekurhuleni and eThekwini both recorded an average rank of 3.0.
Johannesburg recorded an average rank of 4.0, followed by Cape Town at 4.7 and Tshwane at 5.0.
What the Data Suggests
Performance varied considerably across both metropolitan municipalities and services. Buffalo City ranked first for weekly refuse collection and electricity for lighting, and second for flush toilets connected to sewerage, giving it the highest average ranking across the three measures.
The rankings also differed by type of service. eThekwini ranked first for flush toilets connected to sewerage and second for electricity for lighting, but sixth for weekly refuse collection. Cape Town ranked fourth for refuse collection and fifth for both sewerage and electricity.
Across the six growing metros, electricity and sewerage generally kept pace with or exceeded household growth more often than weekly refuse collection. Five of the six metros recorded an electricity measure close to or above 100, while five recorded a sewerage measure above 100. None recorded a refuse collection measure of 100 or more.
Household growth also differed substantially between the metros. Tshwane, Ekurhuleni, Cape Town and Johannesburg each added more than 380,000 households between 2011 and 2022, while Buffalo City added 37,674 and eThekwini added 159,727. The service rankings therefore occurred alongside substantially different levels of household growth.
Limitations
Two-point comparison
The measure compares the 2011 and 2022 censuses and does not describe changes that occurred between them. Household service counts are also estimates, calculated by applying published Census coverage percentages to household totals rather than using direct household counts.
What the measure captures
The measure does not distinguish between services extended to newly created households and services extended to households that already existed in 2011. A result above 100 can therefore reflect increased access among existing households as well as service expansion alongside household growth.
Service quality
The measure captures reported access to a service, not its quality, reliability or frequency beyond the definitions used by the Census. It should not be read as a complete measure of municipal service delivery performance.
Ceiling effects
Metros entered the period with different levels of service coverage. Those already close to universal coverage in 2011 had less scope to expand access among existing households than metros starting from lower levels. The rankings should therefore be read alongside each metro's 2011 coverage and as measures of change relative to household growth, rather than comparisons from identical starting positions.
Conclusion
Between 2011 and 2022, South Africa added 3.38 million households, while its metropolitan municipalities grew from 6.18 million to 7.96 million households. Among the six metros that recorded household growth, the expansion of municipal services did not occur at the same rate across services or municipalities.
Buffalo City recorded the highest average ranking across the three measures examined, ranking first for weekly refuse collection and electricity for lighting and second for flush toilets connected to sewerage. Ekurhuleni and eThekwini shared the next-highest average ranking, although their positions varied considerably between individual services.
The largest differences were recorded in weekly refuse collection. None of the six growing metros added weekly refuse collection for 100 households for every 100 additional households. Electricity for lighting and flush toilets connected to sewerage more frequently kept pace with or exceeded household growth over the period.
These results describe changes in reported service access relative to household growth between the two censuses. They do not measure the quality or reliability of those services, and the rankings should be read alongside differences in each metro's starting level of service coverage.
Sources
Statistics South Africa, Census 2011 and Census 2022.