The Geographical Approach to the African Neighbourhood

Crisis and creativity: exploring the wealth of the African neighbourhood Konings, P.J.J.; Foeken, D.W.J. Citation Konings, P. J. J., & Foeken, D. W. J. (2006). Crisis and creativity: exploring the wealth of the African neighbourhood. Leiden: Brill. Retrieved from https://hdl.handle.net/1887/14740 Version: Not Applicable (or Unknown) License: Leiden University Non-exclusive license Downloaded from: https://hdl.handle.net/1887/14740 Note: To cite this publication please use the final published version (if applicable). 1 The African neighbourhood: An introduction Piet Konings, Rijk van Dijk & Dick Foeken Introduction ‘Neighbourhood’ research goes back to the 1920s with the work of the sociolo- gists of the Chicago School. Urban space, they found, was segregated in ‘neighbourhoods’ based on the cultural background of immigrants. It was thought that this segregation would disappear as immigrants and their offspring assimilated in American culture. However, subsequent researchers found that urban space remained segregated, not based on cultural background but on class and race. Researchers found that the attachment to particular neighbourhoods also depended on various other aspects as well. They became more heterogeneous, yet their names and boundaries remained the same, thus maintaining their distinctiveness vis-à-vis other neighbourhoods. This raises the question as to what constitutes a neighbourhood. Or what defines this ‘distinctiveness’ other than just a name and a boundary? Geogra- phers have many definitions, all of which can be grouped according to explana- tions that describe neighbourhoods as (1) homogeneous areas sharing demo- graphic or housing characteristics; (2) areas that may have diverse characteristics but whose residents share some cohesive sense of identity, political organization or social organization; (3) housing sub-markets in which homes are considered close substitutes; and (4) small spatial units that do not necessarily have any of the above characteristics (Megbolugbe et al. 1996: 1787). In modern, western geography, it is particularly the second definition that has gained ground, i.e. that a neighbourhood shows a certain degree of social cohe- sion1 and is a source of social identity. Yet as social networks have increasingly become city-wide, national, inter- national and even virtual (thanks to the Internet), one would, according to 1 See Kearns & Forrest (2000) for a discussion on the various dimensions of social cohesion. 2 Konings, Van Dijk & Foeken Forrest and Kearns (2001: 2129), expect that ‘as a source of social identity the neighbourhood is being progressively eroded with the emergence of a more fluid, individualised way of life’. On the other hand, they argue that ‘as global- ising processes (…) which bear down upon us seem to be increasingly remote, local social interaction and the familiar landmarks of the neighbourhood may take on greater significance as sources of comfort and security’. Therefore the local neighbourhood remains important as a source of social identity, but ‘there are many other sources partly dependent upon our individual and collective time-geographies and action-spaces within the urban areas’ (Ibid.: 2130, see also Castells 1997: 60). Here, we are in the middle of the different views on the concept of ‘neighbourhood’ between geographers on the one hand, and anthropologists on the other. This discussion is not new. In the 1960s, the sociologist Webber (1964) made a distinction between ‘community of place’ and ‘community of interest’. Neighbourhoods were initially primarily seen as ‘communities of place’ because of their spatial boundaries. However, the existence of social networks and interactions, not being geographically bounded, allowed the possibility of looking at neighbourhoods as ‘communities of interest’. For instance, Sennet and Cobb (1972) stressed that social ties within urban neighbourhoods were declining in favour of relations within the city as a whole as urban areas became more heterogeneous and the divide between home and work increased. The two perspectives are not incompatible, and indeed most urban neighbourhood scholars adopt a more fluid understanding of neighbourhoods, synthesizing the two approaches. That is also clear from the various contributions in this book. It was not easy to group the chapters under meaningful sub- headings but a rough division into two has been made. The first concerns the chapters where the neighbourhood as a spatial unit (or ‘community of space’) is the starting point, while the perspective of the chapters in the second half of the book primarily concerns the neighbourhood in terms of social networks and interactions (or ‘community of interest’). Although most of the literature on neighbourhoods relates to western urban areas (particularly the United Kingdom and the United States), the general processes described above, and hence the distinction between the two perspectives, are applicable to any urban situation including those in Sub-Saharan Africa. The next two sections of this introduc- tory chapter deal with the two approaches, respectively, even though the various contributions in this volume are linked to a number of theoretical reflections. Introduction 3 The geographical approach to the African neighbourhood Like many other researchers of African city life, a number of the contributors to this volume have tended to perceive the neighbourhood as a geographical domain in which people are engaged in a variety of socio-cultural, economic and political activities to advance their material and immaterial well-being. They have been inclined to focus on disadvantaged African neighbourhoods and to examine how the residents are coping with the current economic crisis and the processes of economic and political liberalization. They argue in particular that the urban poor have been among those most seriously affected by the economic crisis and structural adjustment, as evidenced by massive retrench- ments, job insecurity and falling real wages in the formal sector, rising costs of living, a serious deterioration in urban infrastructure and basic services, and the painful withdrawal of public welfare provision (cf. Rakodi 1997, Tripp 1997, Zeleza & Kalipeni 1999, Simone 2004). What is most striking in the geographical approach to urban space is its emphasis on the fact that the majority of the residents in disadvantaged African neighbourhoods have not passively watched conditions deteriorate. On the contrary, they appear to behave as active agents, devising alternative strategies to shape their livelihoods and, in some cases, even to accumulate capital. Since the start of the economic crisis and economic liberalization, they have been more or less obliged to find a livelihood within the rapidly expanding informal sector. Informality, in fact, has become a vital facet of African urban life in the sense that it is predominantly driven by informal practices in such areas as work, housing, land use, transportation and a variety of social services (cf. Tripp 1997, Lourenço-Lindell 2002, Hansen & Vaa 2004, Simone 2004). Residents of urban neighbourhoods often display a remarkable degree of creativity and imaginative innovation in eking out an existence in the informal sector, while taking advantage of the ‘opportunities’, ‘resources’, ‘assets’ or ‘capitals’ available (Rakodi 2002, de Haan & Zoomers 2005). Besides conven- tional assets such as land, livestock and equipment, capital includes various elements of human and social capital. Several authors have highlighted the importance of creating social networks based on class, occupation, gender, kinship and generation (cf. Lourenço-Lindell 2002). The current growth of associational initiatives have been well documented, even if some of these initiatives are induced and driven by external agents such as NGOs (Tostensen et al. 2001, Leimdorfer & Marie 2003). Less visible forms of collaboration, albeit less documented, are of no lesser importance for survival in the city. These refer to networks of personal ties that people construct for mutual sup- port, for accessing resources and for the exchange goods and services (Hansen & Vaa 2004). 4 Konings, Van Dijk & Foeken While the geographical approach has a tendency to concentrate on urban life within the more or less well-defined boundaries of the neighbourhood, it mostly acknowledges that the explicit activities and networks of its residents are not confined to this urban space. More than ever before, links with the wider world stretch to other parts of the city, the rural areas, across the nation’s borders and even the global world. Obviously, these links tend to maximize sites of opportunities and resources (Tostensen et al. 2001, Simone 2004). In line with this geographical approach and on the basis of intensive empiri- cal research, several contributions in this volume explore the creativity of residents in different African neighbourhoods during the current crisis and the processes of economic and political liberalization. In their contribution, Owuor and Foeken (Chapter 2) examine the livelihood sources of residents in three neighbourhoods in the Kenyan town of Nakuru. Their findings appear to be relevant to coping strategies in most other disadvantaged neighbourhoods in Africa (cf. Zack-Williams 1993, Bangura 1994, Meagher 1995, Potts 1999, Lourenço-Lindell 2002). Using five detailed case studies, they show that low- income households in Nakuru are engaged in multiple livelihood activities, seizing any opportunity

Load more