Wetenskaplike artikels• Research articles
‘No Messing in Bonteheuwel’: The role of social capital and partnership building in sustainable community development
Wilmot Arendse & Zarina Patel
1. INTRODUCTION
Peer reviewed and revised The introduction of Local Agenda 21 at the Rio Earth Summit has increased the impetus and Abstract momentum for addressing the This article focuses on a community-development programme (case study) in imperative of building sustainable Bonteheuwel on the Cape Flats, viz. ‘No Messing in Bonteheuwel’. In a period of just over a decade, this community has transitioned from a degraded natural, built and communities globally. This imperative social environment to one where the community have cohered to realise a vision of has had particular purchase as a a place of which they are currently proud. This case study adds to the understanding policy objective in South Africa since of sustainable community development, by tracing the transition from a vicious to a the mid-1990s, in a context where virtuous cycle of community development. The development of social capital within addressing community development the community, coupled with the development of partnerships and the building of needs in deprived communities trust with local government, have been identified as key ingredients in this transition. The benefits derived from the current virtuous cycle for the Bonteheuwel community became a new and urgent focus of as well as local government are demonstrated. This article contributes towards local authorities across the country the understanding of how to foster sustainable communities, and is, therefore, of with the transition to democracy. relevance to local governments and policy-makers. The case study of ‘No Messing in Bonteheuwel’ is presented as ‘NO MESSING IN BONTEHEUWEL’: DIE ROL VAN MAATSKAPLIKE a positive illustration of how the KAPITAAL EN VENNOOTSKAPSBOU IN VOLHOUDBARE objective of building a sustainable community can be achieved. GEMEENSKAPSONTWIKKELING Hierdie artikel, ‘No Messing in Bonteheuwel’, fokus op ’n gemeenskapsontwikkelings Bonteheuwel was built as a new program (gevallestudie) by Bonteheuwel op die Kaapse Vlakte. In net meer as ’n township to alleviate housing dekade het daar ’n oorgang in hierdie gemeenskap plaasgevind van ’n afgeleefde shortages for the ‘Coloured natuurlike, beboude en maatskaplike omgewing na ’n gemeenskap wat verenig is communities’ after the forced om ’n visie te verwerklik om ’n plek te skep waarop die mense trots kan wees. Hierdie gevallestudie dra by tot die begrip van volhoubare gemeenskapsontwikkeling deur removals in the 1960s. The die oorgang van ’n skadelike na ’n goeie kringloop in gemeenskapsontwikkeling population is comprised of by Bonteheuwel na te speur. Die ontwikkeling van maatskaplike kapitaal in die predominantly poor Afrikaans- gemeenskap, tesame met die ontwikkeling van vennootskappe en die bou van ’n speaking residents. Although, vertrouensverhouding met die plaaslike regering, is as die sleutelelemente van initially, the area was largely formal, hierdie oorgang geïdentifiseer. Die voordele wat uit die huidige goeie kringloop vir a high housing demand means beide die gemeenskap van Bonteheuwel en vir die plaaslike regering spruit, word that living in backyard dwellings aangedui. Hierdie artikel dra by tot die begrip van hoe om die ontwikkeling van volhoubare gemeenskappe te bevorder en daarom is dit vir plaaslike regerings en is a reality for many residents vir beleidmakers van belang. (Morange, 2002; Crankshaw, Gilbert & Morris, 2000). The township grew rapidly for decades and so did ‘NO MESSING IN BONTEHEUWEL’: INDIMA YEZIMALI EZINKULU ZENTLALO crime, poverty and environmental NOKWAKHIWA KOBUHLAKANI KUPHUHLISO OLULUQILIMA LOLUNTU degradation. Whilst Local Agenda Eli phepha elithi, ‘No Messing in Bonteheuwel’, lijoliswe kwiprogramu yokuphuhlisa 21 emphasises the need for local uluntu lwaseBonteheuwel kwiiCape Flats. Kwisithuba nje seminyaka elishumi, aba bahlali baye batshintsha ukusuka ekubeni yindawo ewohlokileyo ngokwendalo, communities to work with local izakhiwo nakwintlalo yaba luluntu olumanyeneyo ekudaleni indawo olunokuzidla government to address local ngayo. Olu phando longeza kwindlela esiluqonda ngayo uphuhliso loluntu problems, this imperative is not oluqhubekayo ngokuphanda ngokuphucuka kophuhliso loluntu lwaseBonteheuwel always straightforward to achieve. lusuka kokungento lwaza lwenza inkqubela. Ukuphuhliswa kwekhapitali yentlalo kule The community’s dissatisfaction with ndawo, kunye nokuphuhliswa kwentsebenziswano nokuthembana norhulumente the environmental problems provided wengingqi, kuye kwaye kwachazwa njengondoqo kolu tshintsho. Iinzuzo ezifunyenwe a catalyst for the Bonteheuwel kule nkqubela kokubini kuluntu lwaseBonteheuwel nakurhulumente wengingqi ziyabonakala. Eli phepha linegalelo ekuqondeni kwethu indlela yokuqhuba uphuhliso community, local government kwiindawo ezinenkqubela kwaye, ngenxa yoko, libalulekile koorhulumente bengingqi and community leaders to work nakubasunguli bomgaqo-nkqubo. together towards a common goal
Mr Wilmot Arendse, City of Cape Town, Department of Social Development & Facilitation, 7th floor Standard Bank Building, Cape Town, 8000, South Africa. Phone: 021 444 0718, email:
Figure 1: The Map of Bonteheuwel and six precincts Source: Abrahams & Fine (2003: 12) 4 Arendse & Patel • ‘No Messing in Bonteheuwel’ will mean that they know who to Bonteheuwel community were part • The Bonteheuwel Environment contact, should a problem arise. In of the project and were targeted Forum became a recognised this instance, clear communication as follows: vehicle to spread the ‘No between local government and Messing in Bonteheuwel’ to local the community leads to healthy • The Bonteheheuwel School businesses. relationships and improved levels Children and teachers through • Other organisations through of trust. This, in turn, also promotes the Cleanest Schools Campaign environmental stories in the local the different community sectors and and greening. media. non-governmental organisations as • The Bonteheuwel Households • Volunteers from the streets. partners. This results in a partnership through the Door-to-Door During the 1990s, the area was that is built between community Environmental Education and plagued by numerous sources and local government, where Waste Wise Workshops. of pollution. Land pollution was communities feel that their voices • Unemployed community characterised by extreme littering are heard. Ife (1999: 191) argues residents through the various in all the streets and parks. Illegal further that sustainable community clean-up campaigns. dumping compounded the issue, development requires a common activity, for example, a recycling project that can bring people together. This common activity will strengthen local and social interactions and community bonds. The movement from a vicious cycle to a virtuous one, therefore, includes the development of partnerships between local government and communities.
4. THE CASE OF THE BONTEHEUWEL COMMUNITY Bonteheuwel, a township in South Africa, is situated 20 km on the outskirts of the Cape Town central business district and was built in the 1960s as a new neighbourhood to accommodate ‘Coloured’ families Figure 2: Illegal dumpsites near Arcadia Primary who were being forcibly removed Source: Photo taken by Wilmot Arendse from other areas of Cape Town which were demarcated as ‘White’. The development of the township was based and modelled on the Garden Cities-design approach. Chapman (1986: 20) describes it as a Garden City, with a distinct underlying hierarchy of route structure, schools and centres depending on their function (type and level of service), threshold (population numbers served and their spending power), and range (geographical area of service). The township has 16 open spaces, 19 parks, 109 roads and 4 community centres. The 2011 Census indicates a population of 32 977 with an average household size of 4.69 and a monthly household income of R3 200 or less for 50 per cent of households (City of Cape Town, 2013: 1-7). Figure 3: Illegal dumpsites near Bonteheuwel houses and a church Since the Project’s inception, the following segments of the Source: Photo taken by Wilmot Arendse 5 SSB/TRP/MDM 2014 (65) with 32 illegal dumpsites across terms of poor service delivery to the partnership between local the community (Figures 2 and 3). the township. The initial meeting government and the community The illegal dumpsites posed great was important; an understanding and the greater sense of unity that health risks for the entire community, of the environmental crisis was stemmed from this meaningful although children playing in the outlined and the need for frequent interaction with regard to pollution. vicinity were most vulnerable to interactions between the various After an evaluation, the joint task sickness and ill health from the local government departments and team decided to continue with the pollution. Air pollution, caused by the community was highlighted as a partnership, a decision that resulted illegal tyre burning in parks and requirement to deal effectively with in the birth of the ‘No Messing in open fields left toxic fumes and a the pollution crisis. In a subsequent Bonteheuwel’ partnership project.2 grey daze over the township. Water meeting between the parties, it was Dugmore (2002: 9) summarises the pollution was caused by littering in decided that a clean-up campaign project: “The project is about teaching the river (located at the far end of the would be the first step to deal with people to take control of the quality community) which caused mosquito the environmental crisis. Parker & of their lives. It’s about showing them plagues. The nature of the littering Selman (1997: 76) note that people’s that they do not need to live in an was exacerbated by the Cape Town primary environmental concerns are area choked with litter, where people weather conditions, particularly by the expressed in local terms, and results dump without any sense of their strong south-easterly wind blowing indicate that people’s trust and neighbours or the environment.” the litter across the neighbourhood. identification with local government In 2003,3 following the success and Subsequently, when the wet, rainy will need to be rebuilt partly via new growth of the project, there was a season started, blockages of storm- mechanisms, with local government need to formalise the partners into water pipes resulted in flooding. listening to public views. The first a successful partnership project. meetings between the stakeholders In 1999, the pollution issue was of The process of formalisation of proved to be important in this such a catastrophic nature that the the partners’ frequent interactions process. community decided to pursue a between the various local solution because it posed a threat Erlank et al. (2008: 45-46), who government departments and to their quality of life. The turning wrote extensively about the project, the Bonteheuwel community was point came for the community when describe how the community and structured by the non-governmental the stench became unbearable government arrived at the decision organisation (NGO) Fairest Cape and people became sick with skin to start a clean-up campaign: “… Association. The latter held a range rashes and asthmatic conditions. the choice of the environment as a of workshops with numerous role Medical waste was found at priority [was] made at a consultation players and partners, including various illegal dumpsites, including meeting between community leaders local government officials. These dead bodies (Arendse, 2008: 5). and local government officials. It was workshops mapped out a structure Approaching local government was hoped that a cleaner town would for driving the project as well as for understood to be a fair approach in encourage civic pride and lead to the establishment of the Bonteheuwel order to devise a plan to address a reduction in crime while clean-up Environmental Forum (BEF) as the the issues related to the pollution. projects could create work and thus driving force behind it. The first interaction between the assist in the amelioration of poverty. The project is an innovative, local government departments and By addressing the environmental classic clean-up campaign that the community took place in April problems, the community hoped has accomplished much in a poor, 1999 at the Bonteheuwel Civic to have a positive impact on other crime-ridden community over a Centre (Arendse, 2008: 6). The issues of concern as well”. The decade. This resulted in clean and community was represented by clean-up campaign was driven by green streets, both literally and various community leaders from a joint task team consisting of local different organisations and concerned government officials and community figuratively, with wholesale buy-in parents. The representative representatives. The clean-up from the local community, schools, departments from local government campaign was of a basic nature the local businesses as well as local included Solid Waste, Environmental in that it encompassed picking up 2 The Project caught the eye of the regional Health and City Parks, and the papers in the streets, at community print media. The Cape Argus (Sylvester, 2002), in support of the success of the project, meeting was facilitated by the City’s centres, at schools and in 19 parks. penned the following headline: “Colourfill Community Development and Liaison The partnership had a significant Hill gets makeover” with the by line: “The Department (Erlank et al., 2008: 46). impact, as community members of all community of Bonteheuwel has banded together to brighten up this long-neglected ages participated in this campaign. It The first meeting between the suburb.” was supported by the Department of community and the local government 3 Prior to this, various activities took place Cleansing who provided refuse bags from 1999 to 2002, including a waste fashion representatives indicated the extent for the clean-up and removed the show for kids, poetry competitions, poetry of the community’s frustration and competitions for schools, the establishment of bags of litter afterwards. anger at their situation. This was the street-sweeping committees, the community environmental procession, and a ‘No Messing result of decades of marginalisation The clean-up strategy was deemed in Bonteheuwel’ community information by the apartheid government in a success, largely as a result of cassette. 6 Arendse & Patel • ‘No Messing in Bonteheuwel’ and provincial government. This The dissatisfaction of the community effectively in order to discuss provides an interesting case study was illustrated by the organised environmental issues, and targeted to explore a City-level contribution mass action of residents, marches households by way of door-to-door to the promotion of, and contribution to the rent offices, rent boycotts and campaigns, environmental opinion towards environmental citizenship, vandalisation of local government polls, newsletters, and coverage in particularly in a low-income property. This situation continued local newspapers. neighbourhood on the Cape Flats of during the early 1990s-1999 and is On 21 September 2006, a Cape Town. The following detailed summarised by Moodley (2006: 58) Bonteheuwel Environmental Indaba5 analysis was compiled with a focus as an “area where there were major was held to provide feedback to on the content and evolution of the environmental problems, political the community regarding the ‘No project. infighting, high levels of distrust in Messing in Bonteheuwel’ project. local government and bloody gang The Indaba provided feedback to wars.” 5. SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY the community on the success of DEVELOPMENT IN The premise of the project was to the project and highlighted the new BONTEHEUWEL transform the area and positively partnership between the community change the mindset of the and local government, which is In understanding the transition community, especially where living an illustration of improved social from a vicious to a virtuous cycle in such dirty conditions was viewed capital. Van Warmelo (2007: 7) in Bonteheuwel, the approach has as a normal part of life. Cavaye suggests that the project built social been to understand how social (2000: 11-14), Putnam (1993) and capital, stating that “‘No Messing capital was developed in a divided Winters & Rifkin (2003: 43) argue Bonteheuwel’ is a superb example community. The case study traces that social capital is likely to be high of generating community spirit how the development of social when people interact frequently with through environmental awareness capital has led to the development of each other. During 1999, the project and action”. It is important to partnerships beyond the community. kick-started the interaction between understand that building social The development of partnerships the community and local government capital is a continuous process over time specifically with local on every street. Sylvester (2002: with interdependent co-ordinated government, are shown to have a 10) highlights these interactions action such as frequent interaction, positive impact on the delivery of on the streets as the Bonteheuwel information-sharing between the services and a transition towards community banding together to community, local government and sustainable community development. change the “mean streets” of other partners. Bonteheuwel by tackling the “grime”. 5.1 The process of building 5.2 The importance of social capital 4 The Appreciative Inquiry (AI) process partnerships in striving for a The project helped with the process was held in 2004 to create a positive virtuous cycle of building local social capital by conversation in the community Whilst partnerships are not the only using various methods such as and developed a vision of a clean, form of collective action, they have frequent interaction, information- greener and more environmentally been shown to be an effective means sharing and coordinated actions friendly Bonteheuwel. This research of building social capital to effect for over a decade between local was conducted throughout long-term changes (Bridger & Luloff, government and the community. Bonteheuwel and focused on reimagining a better Bonteheuwel for 1999). Indeed, partnerships between It is important to understand the 2010. The vision of one respondent various actors have been found to be nature of the relationship between is summarised as follows: “I had a a key ingredient to the success of the local government and the community dream that one day in 2010 all will ‘No Messing in Bonteheuwel’. Ling prior to the implementation of the be well and everything will be green (2002: 627) argues that, in order to project and the process involved in and all my people will be happy” understand partnerships fully, there building social capital over a period (Arendse, 2005: 1-8). Esau (2009: is a need to know and understand of time. Hitner & Jenkin (1976: 50) 391) argues that this AI process who the partners in the project are. and Chapman (1986: 30) argue that, was useful in elucidating viewpoints In this case study, the partners from 1970 to the 1980s, animosity and concerns of the community, its were local government, community towards local government existed leaders and local government. The members, civil society organisations, and increased due to a lack of proper information-sharing between local and the business community. They consultation with the community. The government and the community were all assigned different roles and Bonteheuwel community showed regarding the project expanded and made their own unique contributions few signs of internal cohesion or further developed social capital. The to the project from 2003 to 2010. satisfaction with respect to their project utilised the monthly meetings The six community representatives residential area, despite the fact that represented six smaller subdivisions they had access to basic amenities 4 An Appreciate Inquiry is a method for studying and changing communities envisioning what 5 Indaba: a Zulu word meaning a meeting and were in a far better situation than might be and engaging in dialogue about what to discuss a serious topic (Free Online those in other low-income suburbs. should be (Bowling & Brahm 2002: online). Dictionary, 2014: 1). 7 SSB/TRP/MDM 2014 (65)
(geographical precincts) of The Bonteheuwel Community News cleaning of gutters and storm-water Bonteheuwel, namely Bergsig/Cedar, and Athlone News assisted with pipes and upgrading of pavements in Bluegum, Arcadia, Bramble Way, local media coverage and reported Bonteheuwel. The Ward Councillor Metropolitan, and Prunus. The six on environmental issues and the assisted with funding for the project. precincts are sub-areas with clear activities of the BEF. This helped The Department of Community boundaries around schools, churches create awareness of the events and Development and Liaison-West and community centres. promoted the partnership to the assisted with providing the necessary broader community. The 19 schools administrative support for the project The Bonteheuwel Multipurpose participated in highly successful and the facilitation of monthly Centre (MPC) provided the venue Cleanest School Campaign as well meetings, workshops and the writing (at no cost) for events, monthly as all other environmental events, of all the reports. meetings, and workshops. In activities and workshops. Students addition, they also provided land from the then Peninsula Technikon 5.3. Why did this partnership for a food garden project in 2004; (now Cape Peninsula University of succeed? incidentally, the vacant land behind Technology) assisted with events Different types of partnership, the MPC was the worst illegal and formed part of the exchange as put forward by Pretty & dumpsite in Bonteheuwel prior to the of learning. Ward (2001: 212), include local project. The food garden was initiated connections, local-local connections by the Bonteheuwel Environment The Provincial Department of and local-external connections. Forum (BEF) and City of Cape Community Safety - Cape Renewal These categories are useful in Town City Parks Department, who Strategy assisted with funding for establishing the types of relationships proposed the food garden project environmental education workshops. that were built and nurtured through after various meetings with the MPC. The first group of 27 participants and the ‘No Messing in Bonteheuwel’ The BEF included representation a second group of 30 participants received Environmental Education project. from each of the six precincts, and training in February 2002 and in the agreement for the use of the The local connections refer to March 2002, respectively, at the MPC included a requirement for the strong relationships between Kristo Pienaar Environmental Centre. BEF to be central in taking ownership and within the group. The BEF These 57 community members were of the food garden. Urban Green is comprised of male and female actively involved in the ‘No Messing File (2008: online) explains that “the community representatives from in Bonteheuwel’ project from its forum worked closely with the council different religious backgrounds inception. These trained participants and together they made significant and political affiliations. However, became monitors in their respective changes in the community. The illegal the representatives moved beyond streets, encouraging neighbours to dumping sites were transformed into their backgrounds and personal keep streets tidy and clean. These food gardens, children’s play areas beliefs, focused on the project and participants were also involved worked together toward a common and parks. The produce from the in both drafting the Bonteheuwel goal. Problems were solved by food garden is donated to feeding Environment Plan and electing means of open-ended discussions schemes, sold to the community precinct leaders to interact with in monthly meetings. The forum at below market prices and used local government departments at matured and evolved as partners to supplement the incomes of the meetings. and community representatives community members who keep worked together; as new needs and Bonteheuwel clean. Seedlings The City of Cape Town’s Department challenges were identified, they from the garden are also given of Cleansing-West assisted with all the activities regarding the addressed these as a unit. The to community members that are various community representatives involved in the project.” The garden cleaning of the community (such as litter picking - providing black bags had their own precinct to work in and is a sustainable project, because it is this helped tremendously with project currently (2014) still in operation and and brooms). The Department of City Parks-West assisted with all implementation, because the local is run by one of the BEF community people could take ownership. representatives. the activities related to greening (including providing grass, trees, The local-local connections between The Fairest Cape Association NGO and plants). The Department of partners had strong connections with facilitated the training of 60 volunteers Environmental Health assisted with all the project partners, especially in environmental education and educating the community and other the schools and the MPC. This was thereafter assisted with the facilitation partners in environmental health evident, because the MPC provided of Community Waste Wise Workshops issues and reported any potential venues as meeting space for a in Bonteheuwel. In addition, they problematic environmental issues whole decade, at no cost, as well trained 22 educators in Bonteheuwel in the community. The role and as venues for all activities, including primary schools in environmental contribution of the Department of environmental days. Furthermore, education. The Bonteheuwel business Storm Water and Roads-West was the project had a strong connection sector assisted with donations for all core to the implementation of the with local community newspapers the environmental events. flood-prevention project and the that provided publicity for the project, 8 Arendse & Patel • ‘No Messing in Bonteheuwel’ at no cost. The local-external Bonteheuwel local businesses thus enabling the community to call connections were clearly illustrated continued their involvement (1999- on the officials when they needed when community representatives 2010). The Bonteheuwel Community assistance with matters with which served as the eyes and ears on News (1999-2010) was a consistent the local government officials could any environmental issues in their partner and the 19 local schools’ help. The semi-formal and informal respective areas, while the local involvement also remained consistent interactions also occurred during government officials were proactive, throughout the project. This continuity the implementation of the clean-up using their expertise and skills to plan of membership helped with the campaigns and frequently during all and implement activities to prevent success of the project and, in turn, joint activities. possible pollution. built the social capital that resulted in The ‘No Messing in Bonteheuwel’ a virtuous development cycle. Cavaye (2000: 23) proposes that project’s success was largely built the desired outcome/result of any In addition to consistency, Davies on partnerships. A local magazine partnership should be government (2002: 194) points out that a reported that “The project has helped sharing decisions with the community second important tool with which to forge a close working relationship and this can be measured via all joint measure success in partnerships is between the community, community activities involving local government that of structured interactions as a leaders, various City of Cape Town and community partners on a measure of sustainable community Departments, provincial government particular project. The ‘No Messing partnerships. In the ‘No Messing and other NGOs. The Partnership in Bonteheuwel’ project illustrates in Bonteheuwel’ project, structured between community and government this from its inception, as decision- interaction between partners took the was a learning experience for all and making was shared between the form of monthly meetings. The BEF also helped a great deal with trust various partners at planning and held a total of 96 monthly meetings and relationship building” (Moodley, implementation levels, and can be between 1999 and 2010, which had 2006: 58). Cavaye (2000: 8) and further demonstrated by the number the purpose of planning activities, Hibbitt, Jones & Meegan (2002: 141) of joint activities (32) that took place sharing information, interacting with state that trust and mistrust also from 2002 to 2010. partners, and reporting back on exist in partnerships between local progress/feedback. The meetings government and the community. This One key lesson that can be drawn also functioned as decision-making is true for the Bonteheuwel case when tracing the joint activities of spaces, for example, deciding on study. Prior to the implementation the project (1999-2010) is to start dates for activities to take place, of the ‘No Messing in Bonteheuwel’ on a small scale with manageable which streets and schools to target, project, the community mistrusted activities so that improvement should as well as which ‘hotspots’ should local government, because they be noticeable over time. The second be tackled. The local government inappropriately delivered services lesson that can be gleaned from officials took a listening stance at without community engagement or these activities is that the project the meetings, and rather focused buy-in. It was common to hear the focused on vulnerable sectors of the on implementation of the decisions community say, “We never see local community, including youth, women, made by the stakeholders present at government”, “local government the unemployed, the disabled, and the monthly meetings. This process does not work for us”, and/or “local seniors, thus reinforcing a sense helped the partners gain experience government is useless...” The ‘No of total inclusivity to the community in meeting procedures, planning Messing in Bonteheuwel’ project’s projects. The project created 999 skills, relationship-building skills, challenge after 1999 was to temporary jobs for unemployed project management skills, and acknowledge the mistrust that existed residents; 329 of these jobs were negotiation skills. This also formed and to manage it effectively, while occupied by females. part of capacity-building for the establishing the new partnership Furthermore, Davies (2002: 198) members to enable them to function between local government and argues that consistency is crucial for more effectively in their roles. the Bonteheuwel community. Over the success of any partnership. The Moreover, Davies (2002: 195-196) the course of the project, trust was ‘No Messing in Bonteheuwel’ project points out that the semi-formal built through sharing information at was blessed with the consistency and informal interactions between the meetings; providing a platform of its partners and members. The the partners is an additional way for direct interaction between the people who initiated the project to evaluate partnerships. In this community and local government remained involved for at least eight instance, these interactions can be officials; opening up the lines of years. Community representatives’ illustrated by the fact that officials communication and providing ways membership remained consistent from the different departments for officials to be contactable at from 1999 to 2010, as did the local involved in the project informally reasonable times; time was taken government officials. Although visited the homes of community to inform the community of the the Peninsula Technikon left the representatives serving on the forum. mandates and roles of various project in 2005 and the Fairest In turn, community representatives local government departments, Cape Association NGO exited the were given access to the officials’ and resources were shared by project in 2006, the MPC and the private cellular telephone numbers, various partners, e.g., the City 9 SSB/TRP/MDM 2014 (65) provided refuse bags, trees, not a single event that led to the and knowledge centre in sustainable plants and training for the project. development of social capital and urban development, funded Furthermore, the success of the partnerships, but rather, that ongoing by the Swedish International project both at grassroots level and events provided a continuous Development Agency (SIDA) and as acknowledged through a national momentum for the development of the Mistra Foundation for Strategic award conferred by the Sowetan, social cohesion within the community Development. The authors would Old Mutual and South African and between the community and like to thank Saskia Greyling and Broadcasting Corporation (SABC) local government. Pippin Anderson for their support in Community Builder of the Year Group Blaxter, Farnell & Watts (2003: 134) producing this article. 2004 in the Western Cape reinforced prescribe that building trust between levels of trust, and contributed local government and the community to building and strengthening REFERENCES LIST and other partners requires time, relationships between all the ABRAHAMS, M. & FINE, N. 2003. resources, imagination and skill. stakeholders involved in the project. Cooking up community. Cape Town: The partners working together on Change Moves. the ‘No Messing in Bonteheuwel’ 6. LESSONS FOR project improved and developed ARENDSE, W. 2005. Bonteheuwel FOSTERING VIRTUOUS trust over time, using resources, beyond 2010. Cape Town: City of Cape Town. CYCLES OF COMMUNITY imagination and skill. Maloney, Smith DEVELOPMENT & Stoker (2000: 817) summarise ARENDSE, W. 2008. Towards a the key lessons of this project, as sustainable future: The Bonteheuwel The Bonteheuwel community was documented in this article. They note case study. In: Proceedings of the 11th under siege by environmental that “[w]here local authorities develop Winelands International Conference on degradation and, as such, trapped new partnerships, they are not only Public and Development Management, in a vicious cycle. The vicious cycle creating opportunities for developing 16-18 April, Stellenbosch, South Africa, had distinctive features which were new forms of relationships with pp.1-13. reinforced by poor relationships both other local actors, but will also affect BLAXTER, L., FARNELL, R. & WATTS, within the community and between previous social capital relationships J. 2003. Difference, ambiguity and the community and local government. with associations.” the potential for learning – local The implementation of the ‘No communities working in partnership Messing in Bonteheuwel’ project The endorsement and ongoing with local government. Community started a transition from a vicious to support from local government Development Journal, 38(2), a virtuous cycle for the community. led to the development of other pp. 130-139. The key role players in this transition partnerships which further BOWLING, C. & BRAHM, B.A. strengthened the community effort. were the City of Cape Town and 2002. Shaping communities through the Bonteheuwel community. The This combination of a shared extension programmes. Journal of project’s successes are highlighted long-term vision, consistency, Extension, 40(3). Available from: through partnerships and members commitment and ongoing support
CHAPMAN, R.A. 1986. Analysis IFE, J. 1999. Community development: VAN WARMELO, W. 2007. of schooling and its provision for Creating community alternatives: Environmental awards winners give the coloured population group in Vision, analysis and practice. Australia: hope for the future. Cape Times, 7 Cape Town with particular reference Longman. November, p. 7. to Bonteheuwel as an urban LING, T. 2002. Delivering joined-up WINTERS, D. & RIFKIN, M. 2003. The neighbourhood: Urban education government in the UK: Dimensions, social state? Report of the Minnesota project on Cape Town submitted to the issues and problems. Public Social Capital Research Project. Human Sciences Research Council. Administration, 80(4), pp. 615-642. Carleton College: Department of Cape Town, School of Architecture Political Science. and Planning: University of Cape Town MALONEY, W., SMITH, G. & (UCT). STOKER, G. 2000. Social capital and urban governance: Adding a more CITY OF CAPE TOWN. 2013. 2011 contextualized ‘top-down’ perspective. Census Suburb Bonteheuwel. Available Political Studies, 48(4), pp. 802-820. from: