COPYRIGHT AND CITATION CONSIDERATIONS FOR THIS THESIS/ DISSERTATION

o Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.

o NonCommercial — You may not use the material for commercial purposes.

o ShareAlike — If you remix, transform, or build upon the material, you must distribute your contributions under the same license as the original.

How to cite this thesis

Surname, Initial(s). (2012) Title of the thesis or dissertation. PhD. (Chemistry)/ M.Sc. (Physics)/ M.A. (Philosophy)/M.Com. (Finance) etc. [Unpublished]: University of Johannesburg. Retrieved from: https://ujcontent.uj.ac.za/vital/access/manager/Index?site_name=Research%20Output (Accessed: Date).

Forsaken Heritage: The Case of Kliptown

Genevieve Nicole Ray

School of Tourism and Hospitality, College of Business and Economics, University of Johannesburg

Supervisor: Professor C.M. Rogerson

A Dissertation submitted to the College of Business and Economics, University of Johannesburg, in fulfilment for the requirement of the degree of Master in Tourism and Hospitality

Submitted: August 2018

i Declaration

I declare that this thesis is my own and original work, conducted under the supervision of Professor Christian Rogerson. It is submitted in fulfilment for the requirement of a master’s degree in Tourism and Hospitality in the College of Business and Economics at the University of Johannesburg, Gauteng, South Africa. No part of this research has been submitted in the past, or is being submitted, for a degree or examination at any other university.

G.N Ray

______Date

_

ii

Acknowledgments

 Firstly, I’d like to thank the Lord for giving me the strength, and the courage to complete this research study.  Secondly, I’d like to thank my supervisor Professor Rogerson who had faith in my research topic from the word go. I am grateful for the support, guidance and time placed into this research.  Thank you to the School of Tourism and Hospitality for providing me with the NDT Bursary.  Thank you to the University of Johannesburg, College of Business and Economics for providing with the Supervisor Linked Bursary.  Nana, Mummy, Rae, Bree and the rest of my family thank you for your prayers, patience, support and assistance during what we called the master’s period, it does not go unappreciated  Khotso Maduna, thank you for your presence throughout this journey- you made everything okay.  Refiloe Lekgau thank you for your willingness to help every time I needed assistance.

iii

Dedication

This piece of work is dedicated to my grandfather, Harold Winston Ray (16.11.1940- 22.01.2015), born and raised in the historical township of Kliptown.

iv List of Abbreviation

ANC- African National Congress

ACTAG- Arts and Culture Task Group

BRICS- Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa

CMT- Conventional Mass Tourism

CAPEX- Capital Expenditure

CoJ- City of Johannesburg

CoP -Congress of the People

FC - Freedom Charter

FS - Freedom Square

FSPIT -Freedom Square Project Implementation Team

GJMC - Greater Johannesburg Metropolitan Chamber

GKD- Greater Kliptown Development Framework

GTA- Gauteng Tourism Authority

HASA- Heritage Association of South Africa

HMP- Heritage Monitoring Project

ICOMOS - International Council on Monuments and Sites

JPC- Johannesburg Property Company

JDA -Johannesburg Development Agency

LHR- Liberation Heritage Route

MTC- Metropolitan Trading Company

NHCTS- National Heritage and Culture Tourism Strategy

NHC - National Heritage Council

NHRA- National Heritage Resource Act

NMC- National Monument Council

NTD-National Department of Tourism (South African)

v NTSS- National Tourism Service Strategy

OPEX- Operational Expenditure

SAHRA- South African Heritage Resource Agency

SAHRIS -South African Heritage Resources Information System

SAT- South African Tourism

SIT- Special Interest Tourism

SM- StudioMas

UK- United Kingdom.

UNESCO- United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation

VRF- Visiting Friends and Relatives

WHS -World Heritage Sites

WSSD -Walter Sisulu Square of Dedication

vi Abstract

Heritage tourism is growing in importance in terms of the global tourism economy. As a result there has been an increase in academic interest and research about heritage and heritage tourism. In South Africa the promotion of heritage tourism is being undertaken and in a parallel with the international situation local research is expanding. This study adds to the existing knowledge base about heritage tourism in South Africa. The focus is on the planning and workings of Kliptown as a heritage destination. Kliptown is an important heritage site because of its hosting of the Congress of the People in 1955 and the site of the declaration of the African National Congress Freedom Charter. Using original documentary sources including planning documents as well as a series of key stakeholder interviews the study analyses the planning and establishment of Kliptown as a potential heritage tourism destination. It is argued that several criticisms can be made of the planning process and of the design of Kliptown for heritage tourism. A survey undertaken of 50 tourists visiting Kliptown reinforces the argument that improvements need to be made in order to maximise the local impacts of heritage development for local communities. The study concludes that at present Kliptown is not fulfilling its potential as a heritage tourism destination. Several recommendations are made to improve the potential of this important heritage site in South Africa to fulfil its potential for tourism development.

vii Contents Declaration ...... ii Acknowledgments ...... iii Dedication ...... iv List of Abbreviation ...... v Abstract ...... vii Chapter 1 – Forsaken Heritage the Case of Kliptown ...... 1 1.1 Context ...... 1 1.2 Aims and Objectives ...... 3 1.3 Research Methodology ...... 3 1.4 Report Structure ...... 5 Chapter 2 Heritage and Heritage Tourism ...... 6 2.1 Introduction ...... 6 2.2 Understanding Heritage and Heritage Tourism...... 6 2.3 Heritage Tourist Typologies ...... 11 2.4 Developing Heritage Attractions ...... 13 2. 5 Heritage Tourism in Developing World ...... 17 2.6 Summary ...... 21 Chapter 3 Past, Present and Future state of South African Heritage ...... 22 3.1 Introduction ...... 22 3.2 South African Heritage and Development ...... 22 3.3 Heritage Planning and Policy South Africa ...... 27 3.4 Summary ...... 33 Chapter 4 Research Methods ...... 34 4.1 Introduction ...... 34 4.2 Data Collection Methods ...... 34 4.3 Study Participant Approach ...... 36 4.4 Data Analysis ...... 36 4.5 Ethical Considerations...... 37 4.6 Limitation to study ...... 37 4.7 Conclusion ...... 37 Chapter 5 Historical Development and Planning of Kliptown as Heritage Site ...... 38 5.1 Introduction ...... 38 5.2 Contextualising Kliptown ...... 38 5.3 Congress of the People- Birthplace of Freedom Charter ...... 41 5.4 Freedom Charter- Understanding the document...... 45 5.5 The Development of Walter Sisulu Square Dedication the Heritage Site ...... 50

viii 5.6 Socio- Economic State of Kliptown...... 60 5.7 Summary ...... 63 Chapter 6 Data Analysis and Findings ...... 64 6.1 Introduction ...... 64 6.2 Stakeholder Interview Findings ...... 65 6.3 Tourist Survey Findings ...... 78 6.4 Discussion of Key Findings ...... 83 6.5 Summary ...... 85 Chapter 7 Conclusion and recommendations ...... 86 7.1 Introduction...... 86 7.2 Research Study Summary...... 86 7.3 Summary of Findings ...... 87 7.4 Recommendations ...... 88 7.5 Limitations to Study ...... 91 Reference List ...... 92 Appendix 1 Survey Questionnaire ...... 100 Appendix 2 Ethics Consent Form ...... 102

Table of figures

Figure 5. 1 Invitation to the Congress of the People...... 44 Figure 5. 2 the signing of the Congress of the People (Source: Kliptown Public Environment Upgrade Phase 2) ...... 44 Figure 5. 3 Draft Freedom Charter (Source: JDA Walter Sisulu Square of Dedication – Activation Plan 15 June 2015)...... 44 Figure 5. 4 Kliptown Museum Initial Planning, (Kliptown Business Plan, Heritage, Education and Tourism, 2004:18) ...... 54 Figure 5. 5Truncated Cone in which the Freedom Charter is laid to rest (Image Naomi Roux 2009)...... 59

List of Tables

Table 5. 1 Kliptown: Project Optimum Visitors Levels...... 55

Table 6.3.1: Types of tourists visiting the site (n=52, in %) ...... 78 Table 6.3.2: Tourists knowledge of the heritage site (n=52, in %) ...... 79 Table 6.3.3: Awareness around the sites UNESCO association (n=52, in %)...... 79 Table 6.3.4: Tourist’s sources of information regarding site (n=52, in %) ...... 79 Table 6.3.5: Tourists Impression of the site (n=52, in %) ...... 80 Table 6.3.6: Emotions tourist expressed during the tour (n=52, in %) ...... 80

ix Table 6.3.7: Elements that stood out most for tourist at site (n=52, in %) ...... 81 Table 6.3.8: Tourist’s rating for the site (n=52, in %) ...... 81 Table 6.3.9: would the tourist return and recommend Kliptown (n=52, in %) ...... 82

x Chapter 1 – Forsaken Heritage the Case of Kliptown

1.1 Context

Tourism is defined and understood differently as a result of many ideas and approaches associated with it (Ivanovic, Khunou, Pawson, Tseane, Wassung, 2009). In context, the tourism definition is associated with time, distance, stakeholders and tourist needs. Matheison and Wall (2002), interpret tourism as the brief movement of individuals to destinations other than their routine places of work and residence, the activities undertaken during the period of stay at these destinations and facilities are established to cater for the needs and wants of the client. Tourism is split into two forms namely, mass tourism and alternative tourism. Mass tourism is defined as a type of tourism in which large groups of people travel together to a destination, this is the most popular and widely practiced form of tourism (Ivanovic et al, 2009). Alternative tourism also known as non-mass tourism is defined as a form of tourism that emphasises on a greater contact and understanding between host and visitor as well as the tourist (Ivanovic et al, 2009). In many instances, tourism has the ability generate revenue encourages the protection natural and cultural resources at destinations (Keyser, 2002). Alternative Tourism is divided into 2 sub group’s nature based tourism and other forms of alternative tourism in which you find heritage tourism the basis of this study.

With the emerging global curiosity in heritage, interest in cultural heritage tourism has also intensified (Jamieson, 1998). Heritage, a popular word in the 1990’s is regarded as one of the most significant and fastest growing component of tourism (Poria, Butler & Airey, 2003). Earlier definitions of heritage focuses on constituting heritage, “heritage must be broadly defined to encompass not only major historic sites and institutions, but the entire landscape of region with its geographic base”, (Cudny, 2017:62). The word heritage in its broader meaning is generally to be associated with the word inheritance, a transferal from one generation to another, (Nuryanti, 1996). Tourism on the other hand is an associated with an awareness, linked to the heritage the interpretation and reinterpretation of it (Nuryanti, 1996). In many countries greater value is placed on heritage resources with the expectation that tourism can assist in terms of the rehabilitation and protection of heritage resources, while cultivating economic success (Jamieson, 1998). Apart from the economic benefits, heritage tourism assists as a political tool (Salazar, 2010). In terms of the domestic level, cultural heritage is often used to encourage pride in terms of history and nationality or to highlight virtues around particular ideologies (Salazar, 2010). “Cultural Heritage tourism is defined as travel concerned with experiencing visual and performing arts, heritage buildings, landscapes and special lifestyles, values, traditions and events” (Jamieson, 1998:65).

1 Timothy (2018:177), observes that “heritage tourism is based on the utilization of historic resources and forms the backbone of the tourism economies of many destinations”. Elements of heritage include handcrafts, language, gastronomy, art and music, architecture, sense of place and historic sites (Jamieson, 1998).

Cultural heritage tourism has additionally been recognized as an engaging contrasting option to mass tourism, providing sustainable livelihoods to small local operators, protecting and sustaining cultural resources and creating awareness to both international tourists and locals (NWHO, 1999). With all the attributes it encompasses, heritage tourism is among one of the fastest growing niche markets (Timothy & Boyd, 2006). Nonetheless, heritage tourism is described by two opposing phenomena, the interesting and the all-inclusive. Each site has one of a kind properties, yet heritage might be challenged, reinterpreted and even reproduced limiting an advantages esteem and genuineness (Nuryanti, 1996). “Heritage commonly refers to the arts and culture in contemporary or traditional sense framed in recent historical terms rather than ancient or materialist understanding” (Meskell & Scheermeyer, 2008:157). Heritage Tourism is one of the oldest forms of tourism, most revered and most universal form of tourism worldwide (McCormick, 2011). This form of tourism is a global occurrence and has assisted with local economic and social development in different parts of the world. Heritage tourism is also identified as a tool which encourages national pride and creates a sense of togetherness. According to Timothy (2018), heritage tourism as a niche has shown a number of signs of growth within the tourism industry and has taken new direction in terms of the supply of resources and the demand thereof. Some research propose that around 80% of trips taken have a link to cultural heritage, which is mainly due to the fact that heritage is understood holistically (Timothy, 2011).

On the contrary, South African Heritage is generally intangible including; performance indigenous knowledge, artistic skill music and dance (Meskell & Scheermeyer, 2008). “This heritage is proximally closest to the vast majority of people’s cultural experience and knowledge, it is greatly consumed as African exotica by international visitors” (Meskell & Scheermeyer, 2008:158). As a world class destination South Africa has a range of heritage sites inclusive of 8 UNESCO World Heritage Sites and 6 sites mentioned on the UNESCO Tentative List, however there is lack of knowledge with regards to heritage among South Africans and there is limited research done on heritage sites in South Africa by South Africans. With the focus being placed mainly on the World Heritage Sites the remaining national and provincial assets end up being endangered, neglected eventually end up being destroyed alongside its importance and priceless values. The area of focus for this research is Kliptown a township on the outskirts of Soweto, where the congress of the people was held and the

2 place where the Freedom Charter was drafted and adapted which later was unveiled as a national heritage site.

1.2 Aims and Objectives

The aim of this research is to investigate and understand why important areas rich in history and national value are neglected in terms of tourism development and promotion. With the lack of research in this specific field, the purpose of this study is to identify how such valuable assets end up being forsaken with the focus being on heritage specifically Kliptown, a township in Soweto on the outskirts of Johannesburg.

The core objectives are to:

 Understand heritage and heritage tourism in both the international and South African context. (What it its and the importance thereof).  Identify elements associated with the development of heritage sites.  Analyse why/ how these sites become neglected.  Analyse initiatives that can be implemented to develop and rejuvenate these areas, with particular reference placed on the township of Kliptown. Secondary objectives of this research are:

 To analyse and disclose the developmental history about Kliptown and highlight the important events that has taken place in this township  To investigate and identify the progress and development made in Kliptown, determine whether this Heritage Site has been a success or failure.  To identify initiatives that can be implemented to promote this township 1.3 Research Methodology

The research design is simply the structure of the research project, which includes the research questions, the research purpose, an ethical paragraph, a plan for disseminating the findings and an outline of the overall research strategy as well as the specific methods and techniques and instruments to be used (Boeije, 2010). The research design that will be used to complete the study is a mix- method approach.The thesis will be built on documentary sources which refer to data or information provided by the Johannesburg Development Agency and research findings. The study is built on existing academic literature, focusing on heritage and what it is, development of heritage tourism and policy both internationally and in South Africa. The literature continues with an introduction to the township being studied Kliptown and the events which have taken place there, these documents will cover the original

3 planning and development of Kliptown and the Walter Sisulu Square of Dedication. In addition to that, qualitative interviews will be conducted complete the thesis; the interviews will explore the challenges facing Kliptown as a potential tourism destination. In total a number of 11 stakeholder interviews were conducted and in addition to that a number of tourist surveys were conducted. Lastly I will also use participant observations to monitor what is or is not happening in Kliptown through regular visits to the site. The data will be collected in Gauteng, Johannesburg and most of the research will be obtained in Kliptown as it is the area of study while the other data will be obtained in the Johannesburg Central Business District (Johannesburg Development Agency, Gauteng Tourism Authority and Joburg Tourism) and in Rivonia, (African Eagle Tour Operator). This particular research title was accepted by the Research Committee at the University of Johannesburg in 2017 and during the same permission was given to continue with the intended study. The research will be obtained through voluntary participation and as the researcher it is my responsibility to disclose the full purpose of the study with participants and request permission to record any contribution in written form, on tape or notes taken from the interviewer should be used in accordance with the wishes of the interviewee. It is also my responsibility as the researcher to protect my sources at all times, discretion is highly important. In conclusion at the end the research one of my expectations is to create awareness around South African heritage destinations and the lack of knowledge locals have regarding neglected heritage sights. Another expectation of mine is create a platform which encourages other academics to research destinations in South Africa that have been forsaken and create a conversation that will spark interest in these destinations. Lastly, I hope that this research will get people speaking about Kliptown and giving it the recognition and attention it deserves as a national heritage site.

4

1.4 Report Structure

Chapter 1: This chapter is an introduction of the intended research study. The aims and objectives of this project, along with how the intended study will be conducted is discussed in the last section of this chapter looks at the methodological technique which will be used to obtain the necessary information to complete the research study.

Chapter 2: This chapter reviews international literature on Heritage; which includes an introduction to heritage as a concept and heritage tourism. This chapter also discusses development of this form of tourism, heritage tourist typologies, the development of heritage tourism in developing countries and Africa.

Chapter 3: Explores literature on heritage tourism within the South African context, this includes the development and policy associated with heritage tourism. This chapter also focuses on the case study area, introducing Kliptown to the reader, discussing historical events that have taken place in the area and lastly development of a national heritage site, Walter Sisulu Square of Dedication.

Chapter 4: Is the methodology chapter which simply identifies the manner in which research will be conducted and the methods used to obtain the research.

Chapter 5: Explores Kliptown, its history and heritage, the Congress of the People, the Freedom Charter, the development of the Walter Sisulu Square of Dedication open air museum and lastly the current state of the area.

Chapter 6: This chapter discusses the data analysis and findings from the research collected in Kliptown.

Chapter 7: This is the final chapter of the dissertation, which concludes the research and discusses recommendations.

5 Chapter 2 Heritage and Heritage Tourism

2.1 Introduction

The aim of this chapter is to examine the context of existing scholarship within which the study of heritage tourism development at Kliptown South Africa can be understood. Structurally, this chapter is organised as follows. The first section reviews existing literature and debates about interpreting the meaning of ‘heritage’ and the nature of heritage tourism. The second section turns attention to the theme of heritage tourists and their characteristics. The third section turns to review critical issues surrounding the development, management and conversation of heritage tourism assets. In the final section the focus shifts from broad international literature on heritage and heritage tourists-mainly written about the global North-to narrow specifically open up discussion and examine scholarship about issue relating to heritage and tourism in the global South.

2.2 Understanding Heritage and Heritage Tourism

The relationship between history and heritage has coexisted for many years. The term history has many connotations and can be used differently depending on the context (Waterton & Watson, 2015). In the book “Commemorating and Forgetting: Challenges of the New South Africa” Martin Murray (2013:203) argues that history and heritage are like “twins separated from birth” while their organs are identical, the trajectories of their distinct life course are not the same. Initially heritage was a term associated with legal and cultural disciplines, referring to assets passed down from parents to their children (Cudny, 2017). During the 18th c, in France, the term was referenced as national legacy. The following centuries saw a radical change to the understanding of heritage, as there were international organisations and legal regulations regarding heritage (Cudny, 2017). As Cudny (2017) stresses, as a result of the constant change in society, heritage and the role it played differently by different individuals.

The term heritage has so many meanings which have changed over time and is linked to the past as a representation of the inheritance passed down to the next generation (Cudny, 2017). Arguably, “heritage has become increasingly politicised as recognition has been granted to previously marginalised minorities and ethnic groups and as a result of this, the Western dominated Eurocentric approach to the study of history and its interpretation as heritage is no longer acceptable in the postmodern, global environment” (Smith, 2009:19).

6 “The concept of heritage was first introduced in international law in 1907, after the construction of the 1905 legal acts by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO) and International Council on Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS)” (Cudny, 2017:62). The earliest scholarly observation of tourism, relaxation and culture was during the period of the 1930s and the 1970s which recognized the significance of social assets as recreational and instructive resources the importance of cultural resources as recreational and educational assets (Timothy, 2018:177). During the 1980’s heritage work was largely motivated by the concerns over heritage management and heritage as an industry in the West (Meskell, 2015). “As a distinct genre of tourism, heritage tourism was acknowledged, defined and researched in the mainstream as recently as the 1980s with a rise in the academic interest in the 1990s” (Timothy, 2018:177). During the early 1990s, the word heritage was associated with estates, castles and great houses from static, rather than dynamic and contested perspectives (Meskell, 2015). At the turn of the 1990s heritage research became more analytical and focused on theoretical and conceptual advancement (Timothy, 2018). With the shift in political dynamics in Europe during the mid-1990s; the fall of the Berlin Wall and the end of the Cold War resulted in a change of perspective with regards to heritage (Meskell, 2015). According to Meskell (2015:4) this period saw heritage embedded with a “political and past” approach.

Heritage studies reflect two important approaches; the first is associated with analysis and the second with interpretation. Previous research stresses that there are different ways of understanding and interpreting this discipline (Cudny, 2017). Nuryanti (1996:253), cited Herbert 1989, who states that “interpretation can create valuable outcomes for both interpreters and visitors. For visitors these outcomes include greater appreciation, awareness, understanding, self-fulfilment and enjoyment”. Ivanovic & Saayman (2013:179), is cited stating that “by facilitating learning about the core meaning cultural heritage and inducing emotional response to it, interpretation also aims to stimulate, facilitate and extend people’s understanding of place so that empathy towards heritage, conservation, culture and landscapes can be developed”. For those responsible for interpretation, the positive results include many of those outcomes enjoyed by visitors as well as increase in patronage and improvements in visitor flow. Therefore, interpretation should be seen as an integral part for marketing, managing and planning heritage tourism. Existing international scholarship indicates that the study of heritage has gained momentum, maturity and political awareness on a global platform (Meskell, 2015). As an important part of culture, heritage is an essential element in terms of national representation, creating a sense of belonging and fortifies national sovereignty (Park, 2009). Whether heritage is represented in objects or inherited skills it is argued that it is an identity marker and distinguishes different social groups (Park, 2009).

7 Tourism as a global growth industry, together with heritage, is an important element for creating awareness, attracting tourists and social and economic development (Goodall, 1997). Some heritage scholars argue that tourism awareness through globalisation has encouraged respect for both tangible, intangible and living culture (Meskell, 2015).

Heritage tourism is widely defined as the capitalization of cultural, historical and ethnic components of a society or a place used as a resource to attract tourists (Chang, 1999). In the same manner that researchers and managers differentiate different types of tourism, the same is done with Heritage Tourism. Examples include natural heritage which is associated with protected areas like national parks, living cultural heritage, built heritage, industrial heritage, personal heritage and dark heritage (Timothy & Boyd 2003). This is done in a way of presenting the complexities and understanding the distinctive characteristics’ of varying forms of heritage tourism (Timothy & Nyaupane, 2009).The evolution of heritage assets to cultural expressions and attraction is complicated as the of interaction for heritage and tourism is extremely complex (Meskell, 2015). Within the tourism setting heritage can be used or misused in a number of ways for many different reasons by various stakeholders.

Heritage tourism falls under the purview of cultural tourism and vice versa (Timothy & Boyd, 2006: 2). Timothy (2011), explains that there is an overlap between cultural tourism and heritage tourism. Associations often are made between culture and heritage; because of the link that heritage has with cultural landscapes associated with past and present (Timothy & Boyd 2003). Today cultural heritage tourism has become widespread and a very powerful tool in the industry. Indeed, it has been labelled as the ‘holy grail’ of quality tourism as it cares for culture it consumes and reshapes the tourist through their consumption and experience (Richards, 2007).

The concept and definition of ‘Cultural Heritage’ used by UNESCO (United Nations Educational Scientific Cultural Organisation) World Heritage Committee (WHC) is very broad. The concept of heritage is intentionally large as it incorporates characteristics of cultural landscapes, researchers including UNESCO broaden the scope to natural forms of heritage (Boyd & Butler 2000; Thorsell & Sigaty 2001). It also hosts landscapes, historic places, sites and built environments, biodiversity sites, past and continuing cultural practices and lastly knowledge and living experiences (Ivanovic, 2008). This definition has changed a number of times since the adaption of the convention concerning the protection of world culture and heritage in 1972 and currently includes tangible and intangible resources (Bialostocka, 2014). UNESCO promotes cultural heritage tourism as a means of preserving world heritage, (Richards, 2007).The initial objective of the UNESCO World Heritage List was to preserve the

8 legacy inherited from past societies for future generations and to protect it against risks associated with development and tourism (Bialostocka, 2014). Globally cultural tourism has played an important role in policy and efforts to promote cultural development (Ivanovic, 2008). One example of this is the UNESCO World Decade for Cultural Development (1988-1997), which emphasised the importance of conservation in terms of cultural heritage not only as a means of stimulation for the economy but also to promote identity and cultural conservation, (Richards, 2001). The UNESCO report identified similarities in cultural and natural heritage, particularly the endangerment of these monuments (Richards, 2001).

Arguably, heritage tourism is associated with the interpretation and the representation of the past (Smith, 2009). Timothy & Nyaupane (2009:3-4) define heritage tourism “as something that is dependent on living and built elements of culture and folkways of today, as they are also inheritance from the past”. Elements of immaterial heritage include, inter alia, food, music, dance, language, religion and festivals. “Cultural heritage tourism has been acknowledged as an attractive alternative to mass tourism providing sustainable livelihoods to small local operators, protecting and sustaining the resources and at the same time educating tourist” (Salazar, 2010: 130-131). For some observers he roots of cultural heritage or heritage tourism can be traced back to the European Grand Tour during the 17th and 18th century (Ivanovic, 2011). Indeed, even in the ancient days heritage tourism existed and it is traced as one of the oldest forms of tourism (Timothy and Boyd 2003). Initially the tour was undertaken for educational purposes by English aristocrats across Europe but subsequently the newly empowered bourgeoisie began to travel for reasons other than education (Ivanovic, 2011: 29- 30). In the 19th century this form of tourism became established and its popularity increased drastically in the second half of the 20th century to what it is today (Waterton, 2015).The globalisation of cultural tourism coincides with the evolution of tourism, which shifted the focus away from the Grand Tour to the broader scope of heritage. Defining heritage tourism is as difficult as defining heritage, as it has different meaning in different part of the world and different societies (Waterton, 2015).

Overall it has been argued that defining heritage tourism is as difficult as defining heritage as it has different meanings in different parts of the world and different societies (Waterton, 2015).These different perspectives on heritage usually are based on individual cultural values which attribute to the physical relics of the past; however, some values are less tangible and are related to emotions and have more of a spiritual meaning (Jamal & Robinson, 2009). In the United Kingdom and northern parts of Europe, heritage tourism is defined as visiting historic buildings, towns and monuments, in USA it refers to natural landscapes and in many other parts of the world is associated with indigenous cultures and traditions (Waterton, 2015). Many countries have embraced heritage tourism successfully for tourism development; the

9 UK is a good example. Between 1971 and 1981 the numbers of museums doubled in England and by the 1980’s museums were reportedly opening every fortnight (Waterton, 2015). Many reasons have been identified for the “heritage boom”. For some individuals heritage was a reaction to a global post war identity crisis which created a sombre environment, sing heritage as a means to increase moral and for nostalgic purposes (Waterton, 2015). As a whole Nyaupane, White & Budruk (2006), classified heritage tourists in three categories, based on motivations: culture-focused, culture-attentive and culture-appreciation the motives associated with these categories create a range of heritage types.

For years there have been two major misconceptions in terms of heritage tourism, the first is the idea that heritage is something old, indicating a lack of understanding with regards to the past as cultural resources. Tunbridge and Ashworth (1996:6), states “the present selects an inheritance from an imagined past for current user and decides what should be passed on to an imagined future”. This indicates that heritage is not history, but produced in the present and connected to our current experience (Meskell, 2015). The second misconception is that heritage must be tangible which is an incorrect assumption as cultural heritage also focuses on elements including music, dance, language, religion and art forms which are all categorised as intangible elements, which need to be conserved as well (Timothy, 2014) Currently, heritage tourism is a representation of how history and the past can be commodified for economic gain in contemporary societies and is a major economic activity in many countries. Heritage tourism is not just a means of entertainment, but is an association of personal discovery, nostalgia and education; it is also labelled as edutainment (Van der Merwe, 2016). Heritage tourism can be seen as a sentimental experience encounter allowing tourists the freedom to experience, understand and feel, different customs and the histories associated with it (Khumalo, Sebatlelo & Van der Merwe, 2014). This form of tourism continues to grow within a global scale, as the demand for the experience associated with it is increasing along the expansion of market creating new consumer interest in this product (Waterton & Watson, 2015).

Heritage tourism also plays a very important role in justifying the relevance of archaeological digs, museums, interpretive centres and other cultural establishments (Timothy, & Nyaupane, 2009). Every place on the globe has heritage, and many regions have utilized the cultural past to capitalise on economic development through tourism. Heritage tourism is an omnipresent form of tourism, and estimations indicates that between 50 and 80% of all domestic and international travel involves some element of culture such as visiting museums and historic sites, enjoying music and arts, or being immersed in the living culture of the destination (Timothy, 2011). Cultural tourism represents between 30 and 45 % of all forms of tourism and continues to grow about 15% per annum, this is three times the rate of growth of general

10 tourism (Orbasli & Woodward, 2009). The World Tourism Organisation (WTO), made a statement that cultural heritage tourism accounts for 37% of global tourism and is predicted to grow annually, however the growth rate estimates have not been backed up with verified research (Richards, 2001). The significant growth of cultural heritage tourism has been driven by a shift in production and consumption from Fordist economies of scale associated with Conventional Mass Tourism (CMT) to Post –Fordist economies of scope, also known as the experience economy (Butler & Ivanovic 2016). The new experience economy gave rise to individually orientated production in the form of niche tourism or Special Interest Tourism, (SIT) (Butler & Ivanovic, 2016). Nuryanti (1996), mentioned cultural and heritage tourism can be interpreted as a form of Special Interest Tourism and within the USA it is a $192 billion industry according to one cultural and heritage study (McCormick, 2011).

Cultural heritage tourism is actually ranked 3rdin terms of the top travel activities in the United States following shopping and dining tourism activities (McCormick 2011). The European Commission supports cultural tourism and the development thereof as it is a constantly growing industry (Richards, 2007).Globally, heritage tourism continues to grow and has even gained new affluent consumers, particularly those from BRICS countries (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa) who seek to establish heritage places beyond their borders (Waterson, 2015). Many countries have already successfully employed cultural heritage as both a vehicle for urban renewal and economic growth and as a tool of regional economic development in terms of both generated revenues and employment (Butler & Ivanovic 2016). Due to the fact that culture and cultural heritage tourism has varied definitions it is for researchers on the topic to provide detailed statistics on the levels of this form of tourism in different countries (Jamal & Robinson, 2009).

2.3 Heritage Tourist Typologies

It has been observed that heritage tourists usually stay longer in a destination and tend to spend more money than other types of travelers (McCormick, 2011). Heritage is experienced by a wide range of tourist types: from special interest groups, that may be visiting archeological sites, or tourists who are on a leisure trip but take time out to visit monuments and museums in the town, for many tourists cultural heritage may not be the ultimate purpose to the journey but adds value to the experience (Jamal & Robinson, 2009).

The World Tourism Organization suggests that about half of all international trips yearly involve visits to cultural heritage sites (Timothy, 2011). “The fact remains heritage resources are widely spread across the globe, acknowledging that it is one of the most significant forms

11 of tourism in terms of visitors and attractions, involving hundreds of millions of people each year” (Timothy & Boyd, 2006:2). Longitudinal research findings confirm that cultural heritage attractions dominate tourists’ consumption patterns with museums rated ‘the most important’ tourist attractions by 65% of visitors worldwide, followed by historical sites (52%) and monuments (48%) (Butler & Ivanovic, 2016). Global heritage tourist flows have been increasing around 10% annually on average revenue with many properties (not all) doubling or tripling in visitation and revenue every 10 years (UNWTO 2009, 2013). In recent decades heritage has been regarded as one of the most significant and fastest growing components of tourism some even refer to it as the “essence of tourism” (Timothy, 1997:751). Indeed, it is argued by some observers that heritage and tourism have become impossible to separate from one another and are mutually dependent on one another globally (Meskell, 2015). Both natural and cultural heritage have the capacity to develop a basis of growth in tourism and the power to generate funds that make preservation possible (NWHO, 1999).

As mentioned in the previous section it is difficult to differentiate heritage tourist from other cultural tourists due to the lack of conceptual clarity in the difference between heritage and cultural tourism (Timothy, 2011). Indeed, it has been observed that heritage tourism has seen “a shift from homogenizing portrayals of the tourists as a general type to pluralizing depictions that capture the multiplicity of the experience” (Uriely, 2005:200). Tourists are classified based on the motivations, and research has indicated that visitors to heritage sites usually are better educated, bigger spenders, travel in groups and have average or higher than average incomes (Meskell, 2015). The characteristics of visitors of heritage sites has been a great interest for researchers and academics in this field (Sigala & Leslie, 2005). Four categories of cultural tourists have been identified, as accidental, adjunct, partly motivated and greatly motivated (Timothy, 2011). With the identification of this model, it was identified that 15% of the general population would not visit a heritage site and events under any circumstance, which leaves about 85% of the travelling public who would attend or visit if the conditions were right, they are classified as potential cultural/ heritage tourists (Timothy, 2011).

It is argued that those individuals identified as hard-core heritage enthusiasts are referred to as ‘greatly motivated’ visitors; this group is the smallest group within of the cultural market, estimated to be about 15%. This group of people travel specifically to a destination to experience the culture and heritage of the region. Partly-motivated is the second group of cultural tourists, these are motivated to travel because of the heritage appeal for the destination and other reasons like playing golf or visiting friends and relatives this group represents the largest market segments representing 30% of the market (Timothy, 2011). The third group represents some 20% of heritage demand and identified as the ‘adjunct’ visitors’. These are individuals who are motivated primarily by other factors such as trekking in a

12 rainforest or relaxing at a beach resort or attending a sporting event, but will also plan a side- visit to a cultural site while they are in the area (Timothy, 2011). Finally, the group of ‘accidental’ cultural tourist is the last tourist in the model and represents 20 % of heritage tourists. For Timothy (2011), these are people who have no plans on visiting historic or cultural sites, but might stumble on them or accompany friends and relatives who are keen on going.

Overall, research on the character and behaviour of heritage tourists has disclosed many patterns over the years. Heritage tourists are younger and middle aged, with the majority being between 30 and 50 years of age. This said, the trend differs in different areas (Timothy, 2011). Education is a common denominator in the characteristics of heritage tourists. Generally, they are college or university graduates, with a number of them holding post graduate qualifications (Timothy, 2011). Furthermore, serious heritage tourists have great personal interests in various aspects of history and culture.

2.4 Developing Heritage Attractions

The environment plays a very important role in terms of the development of tourism attractions and often is the primary reason for individuals being attracted to the area (Keyser, 2002). These environmental resources the natural (sea, mountains, lakes and forests) and man- made resources (historic buildings, cities and monuments). The tourism environment can play the role of a setting, a pleasant backdrop and as the focus. As a setting the environment serves merely as a setting for an activity and is not directly relevant to the activity (Keyser, 2002). As a pleasant backdrop the qualities of the environment exert a general effect on the activity, the quality of the destination is critical to it success. Environment as a focus simply refers to the physical environment as the focus, in this case many tourist want to experience and engage in activities in the area (Keyser, 2002).

Heritage Tourism is driven by its attractions, which are demand generators that convince individuals to visit a specific destination; these attractions should be experiential, unique, exciting, one-of kind encounters that appeal to target a specific market (McKercher & du Cros, 2002:101). According to Goodall (1997), the future success of heritage attractions will reflect product innovation based on technological developments, more sophisticated marketing approaches, the introduction of standards of performance and the monitoring of achievements and the evolution of visitor management into customer care.

13 A heritage destination cannot succeed without a suitable breadth and depth of attraction, firstly attracting tourists and secondly retaining them in the region for longer periods. “Without attraction, the development of tourism will be limited as these attractions serve as a catalyst providing other tourism products and services in the area” (McKercher & du Cros 2002:101). “Heritage and cultural tourism assets ideally are suitable to be developed as tourism demand generators due to the fact that they hold features that reflect culture, history and environments which promote richness of cultural traditions ethnic backgrounds and landscapes” (McKercher & du Cros 2002:101). Jamieson (1998), states that cultural heritage tourism merge the recognised execution of the research site development design planning, construction perseveration technology, interpretation and visitors services connected, by marketing, research, product development and promotion. A challenge associated with heritage sites is to provide a participatory tourist experience which will to job generation and economic development. The realisation of a potential heritage site should consider planning and management, coordination, cooperation, impact assessment and monitoring, establishment of guidelines for tourism operation, education and training and lastly marketing and promotion (Jamieson, 1998).

There are two steps involved in evaluating a potential heritage/ cultural destination; the first and very important step is cataloguing and areas’ cultural and heritage assets. The second step is to transform step is transform these assets into products that can be consumed by tourists, a unique asset, culture or building is not a tourist attraction without tourism potential being recognised, actualised and consumed (McKercher & du Cros 2002:101). This is a controversial step as it has been resisted by many cultural heritage managers as it is believed that this transformation might compromise the assets being conserved, this threat is real however, it can be minimized through proper management (McKercher & du Cros 2002). Along with the steps mentioned above there are a number of strategies that exist in terms of developing cultural heritage assets into cultural attractions. These include; building a primary attraction bundling lesser attractions together to create a themed set of attractions touring routes of heritage networks and lastly using events (McKercher & du Cros 2002). Purpose- built primary cultural attractions are usually based on two themes; tourismificaction of previously underdeveloped heritage assets or building of purpose- built cultural heritage theme parks, this strategy has been used to great effect in many parts of the world (McKercher & du Cros 2002:111). Bundling is a more realistic and cost-effective option available to communities, it is defined as the provision of separate products and services to buyers as a package or bundle (McKercher & du Cros 2002). In the cultural tourism context bundling involves combining a variety of similarly themed products and experiences promoting a collective consumption to tourist, which ultimately creates a stronger destination. Precincts are

14 simply extreme forms of bundling which includes theatres, museums, historical and ethnic districts. Linear or circular tours/ heritage networks simply refers to the linking of different communities in a tour route which provides a low-cost options for many destinations (McKercher & du Cros 2002). Each itinerary targets a different theme including routes that highlight various ethnic themes. The last strategy used is festivals, which serve to concentrate a wide range of activities into a condensed time frame, creating a critical mass of products for tourist consumption (McKercher & du Cros 2002). Ivanovic (2011:143) mentions that the assessment of cultural attractions play an import role in whether the destination will be interesting to tourists, the assessment is also identified as the 4A’s attributes, authenticity, activities and attractiveness.

Overall, according to McKercher & du Cros (2002:122) successful heritage tourism sites have a few features in common; they depict a story, bring life to the asset, make the experience participatory; make the experience relevant to the tourist and lastly focusing on quality and authenticity. Cultural and heritage tourism destinations have been identified as destinations with a story as cultural tourism is described as a process of storytelling. This story can be told in many ways and at many different levels allowing the consumer to decide their level of engagement McKercher & du Cros (2002). On its own cultural assets have little meaning however, the story associated with the asset creates a sense of meaning and relevance to the tourist? Telling a story makes the asset come alive which makes the discovery more exciting for the tourist (McKercher & du Cros 2002). Telling is selling and, in the context of new experience economy the tourists experience cannot exist independently from the attraction (Ivanovic & Saayman, 2013).The next element discussed is making the attraction a participatory experience; this simply refers to tourists’ participation at attractions. Although experience has been welled researched in psychology, anthropology and other disciplines, Wang (2006:65) maintains that literature on the tourist experience remains understudied. The tourist experience explores the wholeness of the experience and the main principle of perception which includes mindfulness and insightfulness (Ivanovic & Saayman, 2013). Mosacrdo (1996:380) simply explains “mindfulness as the way in which people think and learn in an everyday setting, it is argued that mindfulness can influence the tourist’s experience”. Insightfulness is the second element, which is more extensive and includes the affective aspects a tourist’s experience (McIntosh & Prentice 1999). Insightfulness is defined as the search for authenticity, perception and insight.

Insightfulness represents the attainment of emotionally- charged and value laden personal insights and associations (McIntosh & Prentice 1999:608). “Heritage attractions rely on the role of mindfulness, insightfulness and interpretation to unlock the intrinsic meaning and the historical value of cultural heritage tourism” (Ivanovic & Saayman, 2013:178).

15 Tourism itself is a participatory experience same applies for cultural heritage tourism as tourists are encouraged to participate through visits to museums, festivals, historic sites, art centres and cultural sites. Making the attractions relevant to the tourist simply refers to the connection the tourist will have with the asset, the tourist will be able to relate with the information received on site. The last focus is quality and authenticity, which refers to the quality of the experience being real. “The uniqueness of a cultural attraction is a guarantee of there being no other the same, having the same significance or revealing the same characteristics anywhere else in the world”(Ivanovic, 2011:122).Tourism is selling the experience, it embodies the essence of the paradigm leap from consumerist to experiential economy. “In experience economy the experiential value of the cultural heritage is embedded in genuine and authenticity of the site/object and triggered by means of insightful interpretation which is the only point of sale for cultural heritage tourism” (Ivanovic & Saayman, 2013:175). Besides entertainment heritage tourists are interested in personal discovery and nostalgia, studies show that this is one of the most common reasons these tourists visit destinations (Masilo & Van der Merwe, 2014). “These cultural offerings can include anything from natural, built and cultural landmarks, clothing items, food, values, language expressions, story-telling and other practices considered as unique and cultural” (Masilo & Van der Merwe, 2014:1).

Conserving cultural heritage is as important as conserving the natural environment, however most tourism scholars have emphasised the discussion of sustainability and tourism on the natural world (Timothy & Nyaupane, 2009). While some natural elements can recover from the impacts of development and regenerate organically the same cannot be said about cultural heritage assets that have been damaged or destroyed (Timothy & Nyaupane, 2009). Built environment is a great example of a non-renewable resource that cannot be saved once destroyed. Urban heritage is an example of an extended field of research on both public and academic policy sectors, across all regions in the world, issues related to urban heritage conversation and regeneration has been a problem in architectural and planning professionals (UNESCO, 2016). The term endangered is defined as something that may die out soon and the term forsaken is associated with neglect. Many heritage sites are endangered and experience neglect and unchecked deterioration, as a result of man-made threats. Nationally sites are being cleared from modern development, while other sites are suffering from mismanagement and damage as a result of mass tourism. Since heritage is about preserving and recreating the past, Ashworth (2008:27) argues that the pasts can neither be preserved nor created; heritage is about now, not then, and heritage which is not activated in present does not exist.

16 Recent planning models have proposed a more striking and sustainable method to manage heritage sites with the regard it has been identified that inter- sectoral coloration is very important. Particularly the collaboration between public, private and non-profit sectors, as well as destinations as their role is important in achieving and promoting the principles of sustainable development (Boyd & Timothy, 2001, McKercher & du Cros, 2002). Another aspect of inclusive management is stakeholder participation, the management of heritage tourism is an increasingly professionalised activity supported by a number of special training courses which has resulted in new generation heritage managers (Waterton & Watson, 2015). “In South African context heritage resources have recently been under threat because people wanted to see transformation of the country’s cultural heritage landscape, this led to the removal and unlawful defacing of statues indicating the conflicting perceptions inherited with heritage” (Masilo & Van der Merwe, 2014:5).

2. 5 Heritage Tourism in Developing World

Globally, there are more than 500 major archaeological and cultural heritage sites in developing countries and regions where the per capita income is less than 3-5 Dollars a day (Saving Our Vanishing Heritage, 2010). Less than 80 of these heritage sites are designated to UNESCO World Heritage Sites, leaving a number of sites without international support and recognition (Saving Our Vanishing Heritage, 2010). In this section the focus narrows to examine debates around heritage tourism specifically in the context of the developing world or global South with special attention to Africa. At the outset it is argued that whilst heritage is recognised in developing countries, the language that is associated with heritage reflects a western biased (Timothy & Nyaupane, 2009). Although this form of tourism has been in practice for thousands of years in the form of pilgrimage, but the challenge faced in developing countries is the fact that literature is dominated by experiences of westerners in the host communities (Timothy & Nyaupane, 2009). Despite the variety and uniqueness of heritage resources in the developing countries, the framework around heritage tourism is influenced by western-centric models (Timothy & Nyaupane, 2009).

In developing countries it must be understood that many heritage structures are found in the centre of living communities such as cities, towns and villages (Nuryanti, 1996). Indeed, living culture is an important part of heritage tourism in the developing world, elements of agricultural landscapes, agrarian lifestyles, arts and crafts, villages, languages, music and other elements create an interest of tourism in the developing countries (Kunwar, 2015). The local people interact with these structures directly as it as a part of their daily lives.

17 It is important to be aware of the dependency relationship between the local communities and the heritage structure or area (Nuryanti, 1996). Community members play a very important role as ‘heritage locus’ as they contribute actively to the host area assisting with the maintenance of the atmosphere and a favourable environment for tourism, promoting rehabilitation of historic areas improving the lives of members of the community (Nuryanti, 1996). For many developing countries, the development of heritage tourism involves more than the reconstruction of the past it is also part of the reconstruction of the economy. However, the relationship between heritage tourism and locals involves more than jobs and incomes. This relationship involves understanding of land ownership, competition between old and new and adjustments to changing lifestyles (Nuryanti, 1996). Another challenge of heritage tourism is the sensitive questions surrounding what to preserve from a former colonial era, property rights, and the interaction between the tourist and the host communities with their different social structures and expectations that can lead to misunderstandings and even conflict (Nuryanti, 1996). Accompanied with these factors in developing countries, problems can arise concerning community relocation, compensation and planning. Developing countries have a high probability of being challenged in terms sufficiency of funds and adequate planning and management capacities to maintain heritage assets and further their development (Nuryanti, 1996).

Whereas in developed countries heritage conservation and preservation are high priority in the developing world this is not always the case (Timothy & Boyd, 2006). As Timothy & Nyaupane (2009), document in developing parts of the world many magnificent heritage assets are located in areas where ideology of protection is weak. While efforts to protect heritage is worthy of praise often there are challenges that cannot be solved immediately with human impacts on heritage resources being one of the greatest challenges (Timothy & Boyd, 2006). Human impact has a number of elements with many heritage places are congested with human occupancy and economic activity (Timothy & Nyaupane, 2009). Depreciation of is a serious problem, predominantly sites that are visited by mass groups (Timothy & Boyd, 2006). Another great concern is lack of funds which ultimately results in lack of protection, interpretation and adequate visitor management which is a core problem in developing countries (Timothy & Boyd, 2006). As financial constraints play a massive role in preservation, due to the fact public funding is generally short in supply in public agencies responsible for overseeing heritage sites resulting in efforts to conserve and manage sites blocked (Timothy & Nyaupane, 2009). The list of factors challenging conservation and protection efforts continues with crime, vandalism, improper conservation and wars and conflict (Timothy & Nyaupane, 2009).

18 Arguably, the continent of Africa has a diverse range of heritage resources unique to each country and culture and contributing to opportunities for economic development. An inventory of heritage assets includes 4 different historical periods; the pre-historical elements based on Africa as the Cradle of Humankind, relics of traditional African kingdoms and civilizations, exogenous cultural elements derived from Arab adventurism and European colonisation and lastly of elements since the late 1950’s post-colonial and revolutionary periods (Timothy & Nyaupane, 2009). Africa is also very popular for the natural heritage including, fauna and flora, national parks and maritime and aquatic resources. From the 1052 World Heritage sites 90 of them are found in Africa, 48 of them being cultural, 37 natural and 5 being mixed heritage sites (UNESCO, 2016). Timothy & Nyaupane, (2009:167), mentions that, “the geographical, historical, and cultural diversity of Africa makes it an area with great potential for economic development using tourism as a means for diversification beyond the principal traditional economic activities”.

Early forms of heritage tourism in Africa can be traced back to the Roman occupation of Egypt beginning around 30 BCE, during this period the Romans explored the ruins of Thebes and tombs in the Valley of the Kings (Timothy & Nyaupane, 2009). The colonial period laid the foundation for nature based tourism, however cultural tourism was also popular even though that niche market was smaller in comparison to the other niche markets (Timothy & Nyaupane, 2009). Within the African context history that creates heritage is homogenous; most African countries lean toward thanatourism. Thanatourism is tourism motivated by a desire to visit places of death, atrocity, disaster and other human forms suffering, this is also known as dark tourism (Timothy & Boyd, 2006). Timothy (2018:178), suggests that for some individuals, visiting sites of human pain and suffering satisfies a sense curiosity about a specific event or person. The continent is popular amongst international tourists because of its dark history which includes; colonialism, slavery and civil war with recent dark tourism examples including the Hutsi and Tusti fallout in Rwanda, and apartheid atrocities in South Africa. During the late 1970’s, heritage tourism expanded in activities associated with it. In terms of the African continent, Africans from around the world play a very important role in the growth of this segment as they visit for nostalgia reasons (Timothy & Nyaupane, 2009). Urban heritage is also popular on the continent of Africa as early urban settlements developed throughout the continent at the beginning of the eighth century (Culture Urban Future, 2016). At the turn of the twenty first century Africa has experienced a new urban revolution (Culture Urban Future, 2016). The continent of Africa is judiciously and richly endowed with diverse resources; natural, human, religious, and cultural (Mawere & Mubaya, 2015).

19 While cultural heritage in Africa as elsewhere in the world is a vehicle for both development and sustainability some forms of heritage remain untapped in terms of propelling the loci of development and sustainability on the continent (Mawere & Mubaya, 2015).

Heritage sites in the developing world, however, are ‘endangered’ as mentioned earlier. Within the South African context the loss of heritage sites means that a part of the history and culture is lost as well as the opportunity of learning something new (Heritage Portal, 2016). South Africa’s most endangered sites indicate the reality in terms of how fragile the nations heritage really is, be it precious archaeological sites, living cultural landscapes, early commercial industrial sites, colonial edifices and working class residential areas. The Heritage Monitoring Project (HMP) alongside the Heritage Association of South Africa (HASA) started an initiative called the “The Most Endangered Cultural Heritage Sites” campaign. The mandate of the campaign to identify and create awareness around heritage sites that is at risk. In 2016 the HMP issued a call to the South African public to nominate sites of concern, between June and August more than 46 heritage sites were submitted (Heritage Portal, 2016).The response to this call was great as various sites reported however, HMP mentioned that their concern is the struggle heritage sites as they were the high profile cases making headlines.

According to Jacques Stoltz, one of the founding members of the HMP,most of the endangered sites are threatened by a combination of poor heritage law enforcement, mining licenses being issued in complete disregard of our heritage, urbanisation, under investment, poor state asset management and the endless delays in resolving land claims and the limbo that many communities still find themselves in the shadow of apartheid (Heritage Portal, 2016). It is noted that urban areas are dominating this, specifically major tourist provinces Gauteng and Western Cape, with Gauteng accounting to nearly 50% (Heritage Portal, 2016). Most of these sites have government protection in terms of the South African legislation (Heritage Portal, 2016). There are several reasons why heritage is preserved, these reasons include countering the effects on modernization, building nationalism and preserving, collective nostalgia safeguarding artistic and aesthetic values, maintaining environmental diversity and generating economic value (Timothy & Nyaupane, 2009). In conclusion, destination planners and mangers have various responsibilities and tasks related to the potential environmental impacts of tourism (Keyser, 2002). Keyser (2002), continues to explain that they also have the ability to prevent or reduce negative impacts by devising and applying appropriate strategies for impact management. Heritage tourism is considered as significant because of the economic and social benefits it yields in developed and developing countries (Beeho & Prentice, 1997 and Timothy & Nyaupane, 2009). “It is believed that heritage tourism contributes significantly in how tourists perceive themselves and the world around them” (Masilo & Van der Merwe, 2014:1).

20 2.6 Summary

The goal in this chapter was to examine the international context of heritage and heritage tourism. International scholarship and debates around these issues provides the foundation for the empirical study undertaken here of Kliptown. Four themes were under investigation in this chapter. Existing literature and debates about the meaning of ‘heritage’ and the nature of heritage tourism were discussed followed by an examination of the growth and nature of heritage tourists. Critical themes concerning the development, management and conversations of heritage tourism assets where then explored before narrowing to focus on specific issues about heritage and heritage tourism development.

.

21 Chapter 3 Past, Present and Future state of South African Heritage

3.1 Introduction

This chapter aims to analyse existing academic literature with regards to the study of heritage within the South African context. Structurally this chapter is divided into two sections and is comprised as follows; the first section of literature explores South African heritage and the development thereof. The second section examines heritage planning and policy in South Africa. The discussion of this material provides the background context on South African heritage which leads on to the case study of heritage development at Kliptown, Soweto.

3.2 South African Heritage and Development

Arguably, heritage is a loaded discursive term, one that is used to characterize the South African society based on race, tradition, sexual orientation, culture and truth and reconciliation (Shepherd & Robins, 2008). As a result of its contradictory elements, most times heritage is misunderstood and used in many instances in terms of sometimes contradictory political, social and cultural agendas. It has been suggested that South Africa has always been a country searching for a national narrative that can articulate and bind the official state and citizenry (Herwitz, 2012).The first narrative is the pushing factors of the democratic transition in the 1990s; this was essentially the artefact of transition and building a culture of human rights at the same time as opposing colonial and apartheid heritage (Herwitz, 2012).The second narrative is associated with African Renaissance, which was and is a representation of older artefacts of Afro-centrist history deriving from the discourse of Afrocentric return in the late nineteenth century, the formulation of the Afro Renaissance in the 1930s (Herwitz, 2012). The ideology of this narrative is being for South Africa and the African continent through grafting precolonial heritage and indigenous knowledge with neoliberal thinking for a rapid globalizing, democratizing country (Herwitz, 2012).

“Since 1994 heritage transpired as one of the principal elements for negotiating issues associated with culture, identity and citizenship, suggesting authenticity, what constitutes as cultural identity and the importance of a sense of nationality” (Shepherd, 2008:124). As previously mentioned heritage is difficult to define, because of its’ all-encompassing characteristic as it relates to both past (history) and present (living heritage) (Marschall, 2009). As a result of the change in South African politics there has been increased activity within the public heritage arena. After the first general democratic elections on the 27th April 1994 which formerly ended apartheid, the tendency of South Africa has been to reinforce fundamental change in terms of the socio-political landscape. This new order aimed to create a national

22 identity ensuring peaceful transition, a successful economy and international recognition (Marschall, 2009).

The popularity of tourism in South Africa has been linked with the bush experience, because of its fauna and flora that defines the country, where tourists can enjoy the big five in a plethora of public and privately owned nature reserves (Viljoen & Henama, 2017). “Heritage tourism appears to be an important part of tourism growth in the new South Africa, with a growing interest in ‘struggle heritage’” (Masilo & Van der Merwe, 2014:1). Heritage tourism contributes significantly in demonstrating the diverse cultural offerings that South Africa has to offer. Struggle heritage is one of the elements within this niche of cultural tourism. In South Africa the niche of heritage tourism was identified in early planning for the post-apartheid apartheid tourism economy as a potential avenue to expand tourism development (Van der Merwe & Rogerson, 2013). In addition to this a number South African cities have sought to capitalise on aspects of heritage tourism as components of local strategies for urban tourism development and of broader local economic development planning (Rogerson 2002, 2008, 2010; Rogerson & Rogerson, 2010; Rogerson & Visser 2011).

In South Africa and other countries cultural tourism is an industry that is closely linked to the nations past (Viljoen & Henama, 2017). South African heritage has a remarkable representation of assets which include; commemorative monuments, memorial and public statuary and official, lasting and emblematic cultural products classifying memory. The role of these symbols is to create purposeful remembrance and create a particular historical conscious and awareness. These heritage assets are public institutions which are narratives of past events. There are two themes associated with South African monuments and remembrance, the themes of new monuments and old monuments. Since the first democratic elections in 1994, South Africa has faced the challenge of creating new capital to replace old racist paradigms. Monuments and museums have been deployed as part of this agenda of transformation (Rankin, 2013). Van der Merwe (2006) states that heritage is a means of tracking how culture and values are preserved between generations, he continues by stating that heritage educates, deepens or understanding of society and encourages empathy with the experience of others. It facilitates healing and material as well as symbolic restitution and promotes new and previously neglected research into our oral traditions and customs (RSA, 1999:651). Monuments have been inscribed with new meanings and acquisition and policies have changed at existing museums to embrace a wider definition of culture (Rankin, 2013). New monuments and statues are seen as are seen as exceptionally vital as they tell the other side of the story’. According to Marschall (2009), these monuments are there to expose suppressed histories and protect accounts of the past which were left out of the official records, to counter biased interpretations, misinterpreted through the existing symbolic landscape and

23 to acknowledge suffering and pay tribute to individuals or groups who lost their lives through acts of resistance. The old monuments are identified as a representation of a horrific past, which creates a feeling of favouritism toward new monuments from locals.

The reliance of new landmarks isn't novel to South Africa; it has turned out to be progressively famous particularly in western liberal majority rule governments (Marschall, 2009). Nuttall & Coetzee (1998), stated “that South Africa is marked different to other societies which have survived the brute forces of genocide and colonization such as, the USA, Canada, and Australia as in South Africa the place of the past is built into the fabric of the new post-apartheid constitution preamble”. Despite being in the second decade of transition since the end of the apartheid era, questions surrounding the development of a representative South African identity remain at the forefront of political debates (Butler & Ivanovic 2016). South Africa is represented by 11 official languages and four racial groups which are used on the official documents, (African, White, Coloured and Asian). However, research indicates that the tourism development and the practices of it in South Africa have been confined to one small group of the population such that heritage is often labelled as a “white men’s thing” (Richards, 2007). Since 1999 the South African tourism industry has had a makeover, labelled as rainbow nation because of its wealth in cultural, historical and natural resources (Richards 2007). For South Africans, the term heritage is associated with many emotions, for someheritage is seen as elements of empowerment and some of it is considered inherently negative heritage a result of getting rid of the old ideology and creating a new one (Meskell, 2012). For others, it is a symbol of empowerment, a means to uphold their cultural beliefs and values, a symbol of admiration to the heroes of the past and their contributions, a platform to share neglected stories and memories as well as a means to publically acknowledge their suffering and the sacrifices made during the struggle, (Marschall, 2009). Post- apartheid South Africa has seen the development of many new museums that have challenged the established idea of the museums and what should be placed on display (Viljoen & Henama, 2017). Viljoen & Henama (2017) identify the Robben Island and District Six museums in Cape Town as examples of museums dedicated to telling the apartheid experience. Heritage experiences has also developed in townships, African townships played a role an important role in terms of the liberation struggle and have become important sites of heritage consumption post 1994 (Viljoen & Henama, 2017). Witz, Rassool & Minkley (2001:284), mentions “townships tours offer sensory samples of ethnic diversity, visual traces of apartheids deprivations and memorials to resistance which form part of each township tour”.

24 As far as South Africa as a state, heritage is a meanse to satisfy the social needs and objectives of nation building, reconciliation and unity, as well as promoting the economic imperatives of development, job creation and income generation mostly through tourism (Marschall, 2009). Each of these narratives is expressed with response to the inheritance of diverse cultural dynamics which linked groups of people that have been separated for a long time (Herwitz, 2012). Heritage is very important as it vividly reflects the atrocities of apartheid, although it is used as a point of healing and reconciliation (Van der Merwe, 2006). In 2017, South Africa celebrated 23 years of democracy, freedom and dignity and increasingly heritage is seen primarily as a process of tourism expansion and forms part of broader postmodern patterns of consumption (Van der Merwe 2006:65). The National Heritage Resources Act (no. 25) off 1999 states that “our heritage celebrates our achievements and contributes to readdressing past inequities.”

South Africa is comprised of diverse people with profoundly different experiences of shared history which creates a range heritage (Herwitz, 2012).Tourism is recognised as a fast growing division of the economy in South Africa, not only responsible for a boost in revenues but as a solution to reduce poverty (Khumalo et al., 2014).Part of the interest surrounding South Africa’s heritage tourism market, is the fact that it hosts a considerable range of resources including sites, practices, wild animals, meteor craters, archaeological sites, archives and museums, local crafts, contemporary art, sport and many more (Meskell, 2012). The greatest part of South African heritage is linked to politics, be it tribal or racial politics. The end of apartheid and the change to a parliamentary democracy revealed many existing tensions that were silenced under the white minority rule (Murray, 2013). The deep complicated layers of South African histories of early colonialization, settler colonialism, and racial segregation, apartheid along with organised and unorganised resistance created a legacy that is at times complex understand (Murray, 2013).

The relationship between heritage tourism and politics has been generally weak, as they hold elements that can create tension, (Khumalo et al., 2014). Before the 1994 democratic elections tourism in South Africa was strictly confined to so-called “White Areas”. The reasons for this were twofold (Smith & Robinson, 2009). First, because apartheid legislation prohibited the free movement of South Africans and identified black areas as areas with high levels of crime (Smith & Robinson, 2009).The second element was the intense political situation which deterred the role of promotion for both international and local tourism. Internationally foreign governments boycotted South Africa; no country was interested in forming alliances with country with intense political conflict (Rogerson & Visser 2007). Heritage tourism played and

25 still plays an important role in terms of the development of the new South Africa which is referenced as the “Rainbow Nation”. In the theme of heritage tourism the relationship and interpretation of politics is important as it helps academics and researchers understand why people relate to and think about heritage tourism in a certain manner (Van der Merwe, 2016). Heritage tourism has emerged as an important part of tourism growth in the new South Africa, with growing interest in struggle heritage in the same breath heritage tourism contributes significantly in terms of demonstrating the diverse offerings the country has to offer (Masilo & Van der Merwe 2014). The relationship between heritage tourism and local economic development is vital and has been examined in a series of research studies (Van der Merwe & Rogerson 2013; Van der Merwe 2014; Rogerson and Van der Merwe 2016).

For South Africa the growth potential of tourism has been recognised since the democratic transition one of the main pillars of economic growth (Masilo & Van der Merwe, 2014). Moreover, tourism has been recognised also as a solution to reduce poverty (Khumalo et al., 2014). Van der Merwe & Rogerson (2013), argues that critical recognition of national importance of heritage tourism for South Africa was evident with the preparation and launch of the National Heritage and Cultural Tourism Strategy in 2012 by the National Department of Tourism (NDT), with the aims of this strategy being to maximise the benefits of heritage tourism for South Africa (NDT, 2012a). The core objective of this strategy is “to guide and provide strategic direction for development and promotion of heritage and cultural tourism in South Africa (Van der Merwe & Rogerson, 2013). This said, whilst the cultural heritage sector continues to attract visitors and economic benefits, its overall contributions to South African tourism remains unknown as a result of poor national statistical record keeping (NDT, 2012a). Another concern is that South African cultural heritage products have been recently described as being ‘substandard’ in numerous government reports relating to visitors experience and management (Butler & Ivanovic, 2016). The development of the cultural heritage tourism sector in South Africa has the potential to produce a number of benefits which go beyond economic growth and poverty alleviation.

For Butler & Ivanovic it has been identified as an opportunity to influence the perceptions of the international community views about the country. Before 1994 South Africa’s cultural heritage offering was dominated by European heritage, the (limited) flow of long haul international tourists were dominated by visitors in search of the country’s natural beauty and wildlife attractions (Sigala & Leslie, 2005). According to Butler & Ivanovic (2016), since 1994 growing numbers of international tourists have been identified with culture being a motivation to travel.

26 According to South African Tourism’s 2012 Annual Tourism Report, of the 9.19 million international arrivals recorded, only 18.7% (approximately 1.72 million) of tourists arrived primarily travel to the purpose of holiday; of this cohort international tourists 43.1% participated in trips to cultural, historical or heritage sites during their visits, ( SAT, 2013). For those tourists primarily engaged in South Africa’s largest sector Visiting Friends and Relatives (VFR) 20.1% of this visitor type stated that they too had visited cultural, historical or heritage sites during their stay (South African Tourism, 2012). Overall even though it is clear that cultural heritage attractions may not be the dominate motivation factor for visits to the country, South Africa’s cultural heritage remains an important facet of the national tourism economy (Butler & Ivanovic, 2016).

3.3 Heritage Planning and Policy South Africa

Heritage tourism is gaining belated acknowledgment in national tourism policy and planning in South Africa. In contemporary South Africa, there is marked recognition of the potential for the developing country’s heritage tourism economy (Van der Merwe & Rogerson, 2018). Policy Developments which support tourism at a local level have increasingly embraced heritage tourism with many heritage attractions being promoted as anchor destinations for Local economic Development (LED) initiatives (Viljoen & Henama, 2017:4).

During the mid-1990s the Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism (DEAT) acknowledged the potential for tourism growth in South Africa, the Department of Arts and Culture (DAC) recognised the importance of heritage for national economic development (Van der Merwe, 2018).The South African government has implemented several strategies to reshape the tourism economy. According to Visser & Hoogendoorn (2012), after the 2009 elections, the South African government implemented a number of changes in government policy to support tourism. These changes included the establishment of the stand-alone Ministry of Tourism, which is an acknowledgement that tourism has grown in stature and requires dedicated support from government (Viljoen & Henama, 2017). The drafting of the Heritage Strategy in 2011 by the newly created National Department of Tourism reflected the acknowledgment of the importance of heritage tourism and provided a framework for both integration and coordination of heritage and culture into mainstream tourism (Vilijoen & Henama, 2017:4). The current vision of the National Tourism Sector Strategy (NTSS) (NDT, 2011b:6) is to reposition South Africa so that it could be amongst the top 20 tourism destinations in the world by 2020. This said, the NTSS has failed to identify adequately the potential of cultural heritage tourism in terms of achieving this goal; this document

27 acknowledge that cultural heritage assets are of poor quality and poorly managed (NDT, 2011b:22). The National Department Tourism identified that the development of niche products such as cultural tourism is a priority; however it still remains invisible in government documents relating to the industry (Butler & Ivanovic, 2016). During the apartheid era, cultural heritage was largely constructed using a Eurocentric narrative that valued the cultures of British and Dutch settlers above those that were African, instead African cultural heritage was often shunned (Butler & Ivanovic, 2016). The potential of cultural heritage in South Africa, according to Butler & Ivanovic (2016), has been subjected to only limited debate in comparison with other forms of tourism. Indeed, even with its ability to expand economic growth this segment has not received the necessary attention in terms of the NDT and NTTS discourse (Butler & Ivanovic, 2016).Critical recognition of the national importance of heritage tourism for South Africa was promoted by the National Department of Tourism (NDT) through the launch of the 2013 National Heritage and Cultural Tourism Strategy (NHCTS) (Van der Merwe & Rogerson, 2018). The NHCTS clearly states that the country wishes “to realise global competiveness of the South African heritage and cultural resources through product development for sustainable tourism and economic development” (RSA, 2012b:10). Van der Merwe & Rogerson (2018:5), mentions that the central objective of this strategy is to give strategic direction for the development and promotion of heritage and cultural tourism in South Africa, developing a framework for the coordination and integration of heritage and culture into mainstream tourism.

An observation has been made that the significance of heritage is extended across the different levels of government in South Africa from national to provincial land local (Van der Merwe & Rogerson, 2018). A number of South African academics including Rogerson & Visser (2007), identified that at the local scale of government a number of South African cities and small towns sought to capitalise on the aspects of heritage tourism as components of strategies for tourism development, and of broader local economic development planning. Arguably, the promotion of cultural attractions in Gauteng and Western Cape has received some attention is noticed albeit; the focus on these provinces has undermined focus on other provinces (Butler & Ivanovic, 2016). Overall, the “Vision 2012 National Heritage and Culture Tourism Strategy (NHCTS) is to realise the global competiveness of the South African heritage and cultural resources” (NDT 2012a:15). Visitor’s experiences suggest that this potential remains unlocked and as a result of the absence of adequate governmental approaches in terms of analysing and recording the experience of cultural heritage tourists. Another limitation South Africa faces is the ability to monitor the volume and value of cultural heritage tourists. Without this information, it is impossible for national government to implement and promote cultural heritage strategies or to make informed decisions in terms of future developments and

28 investments in these forms of tourism (Butler & Ivanovic 2016). Butler & Ivanovic‘s (2016:7) research states that “the South African Heritage and Cultural Tourism strategy has failed to improve the performance of cultural heritage tourism attractions in South Africa”. A main factor for this failure is the limitations in terms of research. It is stressed that new research programmes are urgently required to understand the characteristics and needs for this specific market (Butler & Ivanovic 2016). As a tourist destination South Africa is abundantly blessed with a wide portfolio of diverse cultural heritage attractions; the concern is whether the potential of these resources can be utilised and managed in the future.

The planning and management of heritage has multiple challenges. At one level of analysis South Africa’s challenges in part are aligned with and reflect the international challenges facing heritage planning and management. Usually the planning of heritage engages a number of parties including; public and private sectors, non-profit organisations and private individuals (Nuryanti, 1996). The planning of heritage and heritage policy is important in order to improve and protect heritage assets. Conventionally the main purpose for policy is to create a balance between preservation and development (Nuryanti, 1996). For Nuryanti, (1996), heritage and heritage policy development can be included in a combination of any of the six approaches conservation, gentrification, rehabilitation, renovation, restoration and reconstruction. Conservation is an effort to preserve the physical setting and activities of the heritage asset so the value or meaning of the asset can be sustained. Gentrification refers to the efforts put in place to increase the vitality of the asset through increasing the quality of the setting through structural changes (Nuryanti, 1996). Rehabilitation is the effort to bring back the condition of the physical setting and activities of the area that has been degraded. Renovation refers to the effort of to accommodate and adapt to change through adaptive reuse. Restorations simply the effort to improve current the current physical condition of the asset (Nuryanti, 1996).The term reconstruction refers to bringing the heritage asset to its closest original form (Nuryanti, 1996).

South Africa has many strategies in place to protect heritage and the heritage resources, which had to be reconstructed due to the fact that much of national heritage was previously marginalized and down-played the heritage of non-white South Africans (Meskell & Scheermeyer, 2008). South Africa’s protection enactment dates to the Bushmans’ Relics Act of 1911 which focused on the protection of archaeological sites and indigenous rock art, (Marschall, 2009). In 1923 the legislation was altered to incorporate historical sites and built environment. During the 1960s period of economic boom the public raised concern about heritage protection and the need for extended legislative measures.

29 This resulted in the establishment of the National Monument Council (NMC), which was amended in subsequent years to make provision for new categories of protection, (Marschall, 2009).During the late 1980s discussions began surrounding radical democratisation and multi- cultural adjustment of the South African heritage. These discussions intensified in the early 1990s predictable consequences of the gradual rejection of the apartheid legislation and the impending political changes in South Africa (Marschall, 2009). However not all heritage genres received equal public attention. In 1992 it was estimated that 97% of the declared national monuments related to the white minority and the remaining 3% was the heritage of the minority groups namely the San/Bushman in the form of rock art sites (Marshall, 2009). By the end of the 20th century approximately 3500 sites and buildings were declared as National Monuments of which were associated with British Colonial and Cape Dutch architecture sites associated with the Afrikaner struggle for self-determination (Hall, 2006).

In 1995 the Arts and Culture Task Group (ACTAG) produced a green paper presenting prevailing problems and setting out a vision for the future. This eventually led to the publication of the White Paper on Arts and Culture and Heritage in 1996, with the section on heritage becoming the basis of the 1999 National Heritage Resource Act (NHRA) (Marschall, 2009).The White Paper was meant to redefine and re-imagine South Africa’s cultural heritage, including a radical shift to incorporate non-white cultural heritage that was ignored during the apartheid era (Butler & Ivanovic 2016). In 1997, South Africa was readmitted as a member of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) and in the same year adopted the Tshwane Declaration which were guidelines concerning heritage tourism, (Sigala & Leslie 2003). An important landmark for heritage tourism was that South Africa joined the World Heritage Convention on the 10th July 1997 (DEAT, 1996).

Of critical significance for heritage management in South Africa the introduction in 1999 of the National Heritage Act. This was drawn up to “introduce an integrated and interactive system for the management of national resources, to promote good government and empower civil society to nurture and conserve their Heritage Resources so that they may be bequeathed for future generations, to laydown general principles for governing heritage resources throughout the Republic, to introduce an integrated system for identification assessments and management of the heritage resources of South Africa. This act stressed the need of conservation, protection and the promotion of heritage for all South Africans (Meskell & Scheermeyer, 2008). Another responsibility of the National Heritage Resource Act was to establish the South African Heritage Resources Agency together with its council to co-ordinate and promote the management of heritage resources at national levels to set norms and

30 maintain essential national standards of management of heritage resources in South Africa and to protect national resources. The act was also developed to control the export of nationally significant heritage objects and the importation of illegally obtained objects. Further this act made provision for provinces to establish heritage authorities which must adopt powers to protect and manage certain categories of heritage resources, to provide for the protection and the management of conservation- worthy places and areas by local authorities” (National Heritage Resource Act,1999). Overall the aim of the National Heritage Resource Act of 1999 was to promote good management of national estate and protect these resources for future use as a heritage is a priceless element that cannot be replaced once lost. The Heritage Resources of South Africa are representations of cultural significance, which usually have special value for host communities and are important to the next generation; these resources are also regarded as part of the national estate of South Africa (National Heritage Resource Act, 1999).

The country’s heritage resources include, places or buildings, structures and equipment of cultural significance, places to which oral traditions are attracted, or which are associated with living heritage, historical settlements and townscapes, landscapes of natural features or cultural significance (National Heritage Resources Act 1999). These resources also include archaeological and paleontological sites, graves and burial grounds- which include ancestral graves, royal graves, graves of traditional leaders, and grave of victims of conflict, historical graves and cemeteries and lastly remains that not covered human tissues (National Heritage Act 1999). The list continues with elements which include sites of significance relating to the history of slavery, moveable objects including those recovered from the soil and waters of South Africa. The list also has a section that includes oral traditions associated with living heritage, ethnography, art objects, military objects, decorative fine art, books, recordings, documents, photographic negatives and positives, videos and sound recordings excluding those that are public records as defined in the National Achieves of South Africa Act 1996, (National Heritage Resource Act, 1999). In the National Resource Act of 1999 mention was made about the development of a heritage protection agency.

During 2000 this organisation was established as the South African Heritage Resource Agency (SAHRA). Its mandate was and still is to co-ordinate the identification and management of the national estate, (National Heritage Resource Act 1999).The function of SAHRA is to establish national principles, standards and policy for the identification, recording and management of the national estate in terms of heritage resources and authorities and other relevant bodies associated with the Heritage Resources (National Heritage Resource Act,1999 The agency is further responsible for co-ordinating the management of national estates by all agencies ensuring that they comply with national principles, standards and policy

31 for heritage resources management (National Heritage Resources Act, 1999).SAHRA is also responsible for identifying, and recording significant heritage resources, providing professional expertise at a national provincial and local level. Any individual may nominate a place to be declared a national heritage site or provincial heritage resource, on the condition that site meets the desired criteria (National Heritage Resource Act, 1999). To understand the basis of heritage tourism in South Africa, it has to be clear that there are different categories in terms of heritage assets and attractions, the primary assets are those sites that are selected by UNESCO as world heritage sites. The secondary assets are heritage sites identified and selected by SAHRA (Van der Merwe, 2017). In 2016 South Africa had eight sites that have been selected as World Heritage Sites (WHS), which are regarded as a fundamental element in terms of the value of South African Heritage (Van der Merwe, 2017). In order to be included in this prestigious list, the site needs to be magnificent and meet one of the ten selection criteria (UNESCO, 2016), WHS are divided into three categories; cultural, natural and mixed sites. Of the eight South African WHS; four are cultural sites, three are natural sites and one is a mixed site. Apart from the eight WHS, there are seven new potential heritage sites which include; the Early Farmsteads of the Cape Winelands (Western Cape), the Humans Right, Liberation Struggle and Reconciliation Mandela Legacy Sites (Gauteng, Kwa Zulu -Natal, Eastern Cape and Western Cape Provinces), The Liberation Heritage Route (Gauteng, Limpopo, Free State, North West, Northern Cape, Eastern Cape, Western Cape and Kwa Zulu Natal Provinces), Succulent Karoo Protected Area (Parts of South Africa and Namibia)the Barberton Mountain Land, Barberton Greenstone Belt or Makhonjwa Mountains (Mpumalanga) and the Emergence of Modern Humans: The Pleistocene occupation sites of South Africa (Eastern Cape, KwaZulu-Natal and Western Cape Provinces). In terms of their spatial distribution the existing World Heritage Sites are saturated in the provinces of Kwa Zulu-Natal and Western Cape, with four of them, the Cradle of Humankind, Mapungubwe, Maloti-Drakensberg and iSimangaliso Wetlands situated in areas classified as “distressed areas” in South Africa. The potential seven new world heritage sites are spread throughout South Africa (Van der Merwe, 2017), meaning that economic development will be spread all over South Africa. Including the 8 World Heritage Sites, there is a total of 51911 heritage sites (national and provincial) listed on the South African Heritage Resource Information System (SAHRIS). This total includes a large number of artefacts preserved in South Africa and abroad (SAHRA, 2015b); of the total number of assets only 26467 are publically listed on SAHRIS, the remaining 25444 assets are kept confidential as a means of safeguarding the assets (Van der Merwe, 2017). With all the policy’s put in place to protect heritage assets South Africa is still dealing with instances where these heritage resources and cultural landscapes have been under threat. These threats include vandalism, theft and violent protest that led to the defacing and unlawful removal of statutes in the country (Masilo & Van der

32 Merwe, 2014). These acts are believed to be a result of lack in public consultation and reflections on conflicting perceptions on inherited heritage (Masilo & Van der Merwe, 2014).

Besides the policy practices and the assistance received from industry role players, the South African tourism industry is still confronted with many challenges that need to be addressed, influential faces a number of challenges which need to be addressed, linking to the sectors influences associated with economic contribution and growth South African (Vijoen & Henama, 2017). The South African tourism guidelines back dating to the 1996 White Paper identified that there are four conflicting issues (Visser & Hoogendoorn, 2012:67). These concerns include restricted participation from formerly disadvantaged groups within the sector; unequal tourism funding in different areas; the maintenance of unequal economic development which is responsible for the slow momentum in terms of transformation of tourism in support of pro poor tourism development (Viljoen & Henama, 2017:4). Diverse community’s like South Africa face many challenges associated with inclusivity and representation of heritage mainly because of the role it plays in the country’s cultural and political landscape (Viljoen & Henama, 2017:7).

3.4 Summary

The intent of this chapter was to examine the domestic context of heritage and heritage tourism. Two major themes were explored which focused on the development of South African heritage and heritage planning policy. Within these themes the discussion explored the literature about what constitutes heritage in South Africa, the politics associated with South African heritage, criteria followed and grading of heritage assets and policy put in place focusing on heritage tourism. The following chapter introduces Kliptown begins the examination of the Kliptown case study by outlining the methodology of the research. Chapter Five and Six will present the empirical findings on Kliptown as a heritage site.

33 Chapter 4 Research Methods

4.1 Introduction

The aim in this chapter is to provide a discussion of the methodology which underpinned this research on Kliptown as a heritage site. The discussion reviews issues of data collection, sampling, participant approach, data analysis, ethics and study limitations.

4.2 Data Collection Methods

The research design is simply the structure of the research project, which includes the research questions, the research purpose, ethics, a plan for disseminating the findings and an outline of the overall research strategy as well as the specific methods and techniques and instruments to be used (Boeije, 2010). The research design that is used to complete the study is Mixed Method Design, which has an element of both qualitative and quantitative research. Qualitative research is defined as a research method with a holistic approach that involves discovery, (Williams, 2007). Qualitative research is also described as an effective model that occurs in a natural setting which enables the researcher to create a level of detail in the experience (Creswell, 2003), it also methods of participation observation, qualitative interviewing, focus groups and production of visual material (Boeije, 2010). Quantitative data collection is based on precise measurements using structured and validated data-collection instruments (Johnson & Christensen, 2008). Quantitative information investigation is useful as it passes and provides easy and straightforward results. (Leedy & Ormrod, 2010). Information investigation or interpretation implies a number of things including findings of the original research problem. It also relates to prior writhing ideas, speculations determining whether findings are practical and identifying the limitations to study (Leedy & Ormrod, 2010:94).

For this research dissertation a case study approach was selected as it is an exploratory form of inquiry which provides an in-depth picture of the study which can be a person, group, organisation or social situation (Mills & Birks 2014). Case study research presents a wide variety of research methods which include interviews, observation, questionnaires, surveys or almost other single or mixed method of qualitative or quantitative research (Mills & Birks 2014). The technique used to acquire essential data for this investigation was through documentary analysis, interviews and questionnaire surveys. Documentary analysis includes the collection and analysis of relevant source material in terms of for example the planning documents that have shaped the direction of Kliptown. Interviews allow the researcher to have a better understanding and reasoning to why certain events take place in certain area (Boeije, 2010).

34 Each party interviewed had specific questions which linked to their involvement to the area being studied, however there were to questions that every party had to answer. The interviews explored the challenges Kliptown faces as a heritage site and a potential tourism destination. The interview questions were semi-structured also referred to as soft interviews allows for an open response from the participants instead of yes, no answers (Longhurst, 2010). Longhurst (2010) continues to identify semi-structured interviews as verbal interchange where one individual attempts to elicit information from another person through the interview. Semi-structured interviews unfold in a conversational manner which presents the participant with an opportunity to discuss issues of importance to them. Purposive or purposeful sampling technique was used to select the participants for the semi-structured interviews. This method of sampling allows the researcher to select individuals and sites most suitable for the study which allows the researcher to understand the research problem and central phenomenon in the study (Creswell 2007). In total 11 stakeholder interviews were conducted and the participants were selected by the researcher. These interviews were conducted with; an employee at Joburg Tourism, the research manager at Gauteng Tourism Authority, African Eagle Tour Operators-day tours manager, local tour guide, Soweto Museums chief curator, Kliptown Museum Curator, representative for crafts people on the square, employee at the Johannesburg Development Agency, former community leader/liaison and CEO of Kliptown Our Own Trust, heritage scholar/ analyst and a heritage expert who completed the feasibility study of this development.

At Kliptown the questionnaire surveys were distributed on the square to be completed by visiting tourists. The goal of the questionnaire survey is to acquire information about characteristics, behaviours attitudes of a population by administering a standardised questionnaire to a sample of individuals (McLafferty, 2010). McLafferty (2010) further explains that this technique has been used to discuss a number cases in geography including; perceptions of risk from natural hazards, social networks and coping behaviours amongst people with HIV/AIDS’ environmental attitudes, travel patterns and behaviours and more. This method of research is useful in obtaining people’s attitudes and opinions about social political and environmental issues and is valuable in terms of finding out about complex behaviours and social interactions (McLafferty, 2010:78). In total 55 questionnaires were distributed at the Walter Sisulu Square of Dedication to obtain the required information. Of the 55 questionnaires three were unusable in terms of the response quality and thus the population is reduced to 52 in total. The questionnaires were administered randomly to tourists visiting this site; random distribution simply means that each participant has an equal chance of selection (Babbie, 2010: 135). A copy of the interview questionnaire is given in Appendix 1.

35 In addition to the interviews and questionnaires, field observations were undertaken to monitor developments taking place in the area through regular visits to Kliptown.

4.3 Study Participant Approach

The first part of the study which involved the semi-structured interviews took place over a 6- month period from June – November 2017. These interviews were conducted during the week based on the availability of the participants. The length of the interviews varied based on the individual, some interviews were 10 minutes while others went on for 60 minutes. In total 11 interviews were conducted with different stakeholders that have ties to the Walter Sisulu Square of Dedication and the greater Kliptown area. The second part of the research which involved the quantitative data collection took from January 2018- June 2018, this was completed through regular visits to the square on Thursdays and Fridays.

4.4 Data Analysis

First, the interviews were transcribed before analysis could be done; the interviews were transcribed through verbatim transcription. The study leaned toward categorical aggregation, which is simply clustering data into categories or classes to ease the search of the meaning, (Stake, 1995).This method allows the researcher to seek a collection of instances from data hoping that the relevant issue meanings will emerge, (Creswell, 2007). The method of analysis used for the qualitative data was thematic content analysis. This is a descriptive presentation of qualitative data (Anderson, 2007). A satisfactory thematic content analysis indicates the thematic content of interview transcripts by identifying common themes in the texts provided for analysis (Anderson, 2007). Anderson (2007) describes this form of analysis as “low hovering” as it allows the researcher to group findings and find similarities. This creates a number of themes which allows expressions to the communality of the voices across participants (Anderson, 2007).

The quantitative data from the 55 surveys at Kliptown was recorded with excel software. Excel is an electronic spreadsheet program that can be used for accumulating, codifying, and influencing data (French, 2015). Excel can be used graphing or charting data to assist users in identifying data trends. Excel is also a method used for sorting and refining statistics (French, 2015). The information accumulated in a spreadsheet can easily be consolidated into electronic presentations, web pages, or printed off in report form (French, 2015). The results associated with quantitative research are usually general findings that can be applied to other populations and lastly the scientific method is confirmatory which simply means the top down

36 approach where the researcher tests the hypothesis and theory alongside the data collected (Lichtman, 2006).

4.5 Ethical Considerations.

The information was obtained through voluntary participation, with the condition that personal information is kept confidential. As the researcher it was my responsibility to disclose the full purpose of the study with participants. Prior to the interview permission was requested and once the request was accepted the interview was conducted and the participant signed a consent form. (See appendix 2).

4.6 Limitation to study

The major limitation was experienced during my data collection process and this was simply the fact that two important associates of the WSSD namely, the Soweto Hotel and Managers of the Walter Sisulu Square of Dedication, were not willing to participate in the research. The reasons for their refusal is unknown. In terms of the Soweto Hotel, communication was sent to them, then followed up with a request with the interview questions. However, when it came to set up a date for the actual interview correspondence and communication from them stopped. In terms of the managers of the Square numerous of emails were sent and visits made to the office on site. Nevertheless, the administration were unhelpful and did not respond to my requests for an interview. Finally, in terms of the questionnaire participants it was at times difficult to get tourists to participate and three surveys were incomplete so not included in the analysis.

4.7 Conclusion

This chapter identified the methodological process that was used to complete the study. Documentary research in terms of collection of planning documents about Kliptown was undertaken. Qualitative interviews were constructed to answer the research questions. A case-study approach was used to investigate Kliptown, specifically the Walter Sisulu Square of Dedication. The questions in the interviews revolved around the development of this site, heritage associated with it and whether it is working as a tourism site.

37 Chapter 5 Historical Development and Planning of Kliptown as Heritage Site

5.1 Introduction

This is the first of two chapters which are presenting the results of the research on Kliptown. The discussion draws upon existing secondary sources as well as a number of primary documentary sources, including unpublished consultancy report and planning documents secured by the Johannesburg Development Agency (JDA), to analyse the historical development of Kliptown, its significance in South African history, and the unfolding and contested planning of Kliptown as a heritage tourism site.

The chapter is organised into five sections of material. The Chapter begins by analysing the historical emergence and development as part of the Johannesburg metropolitan area. The discussion than moves to examine respectfully the events, which have made Kliptown an iconic place in South African history. Analysis is presented in turn of the gathering of the Congress of the People an influence of the direction of politics in South Africa, which led to the birth of the Freedom Charter. It is necessary given its significance to move to a discussion of the actual Freedom Charter and the essential meaning of the actual document. The next section of this chapter explores the planning and the development of the Walter Sisulu Square of Dedication as a national heritage site. The final section provides a context for the importance of successful in Kliptown and highlights the poor state of contemporary socio- economic conditions of the majority of local residents.

5.2 Contextualising Kliptown

Kliptown is located 25 km south- west of the Johannesburg city centre and today forms part of the township of Soweto (Judin, Roux & Zack, 2014). Historically, the area of Kliptown existed separately before and independently of what would become Soweto. The township plan for Kliptown was realized in 1891 on a portion of the Klipspruit Farm on the eastern banks of the Klipspruit River and it was for many years, the only settlement of its size in the area. Kliptown is one of the oldest urban settlements in Johannesburg and was, officially established in 1903 as a result of the consolidation of two farms, named Klipspruit and Klipriviersoog (JDA, 2014a). The settlement of Kliptown was one of the primary multi-ethnic communities during the early 20th century at the time comprised of an assortment of races counting Indians, Malays, and Africans as well as indeed a community of little- scale white ranchers.

38 The settlement direction of Kliptown was in this manner profoundly distinctive to that of isolated dark townships that would ended up Soweto and into which advanced Kliptown has been ingested (JDA, 2014a).With the establishment of the various townships north and east of Kliptown (that were ultimately to become Soweto), together with the later development of Eldorado Park to the south and east of Kliptown, the area in many respects became increasingly marginalized, as it was located between these two areas (Kliptown Business & Urban Design Master (2010:8).The marginalization of this “forgotten Kliptown” was further exacerbated due to the fact that it was sandwiched between the two “new development” areas of that time, which developed within the context of the racially-based urban development regime of the time.

Today, the Greater Kliptown area forms part of Soweto and is located between the residential areas of Eldorado Park (to the South), Pimville and Dlamini (to the North). With Klipspruit, the role of Kliptown is essentially a buffer between the two communities, namely the Coloured community of Eldorado Park and the Black townships of Soweto. From its inception, Kliptown was never intended to be designed as a township. The settlement was developed built on two farms on the Klip River with the farms, supplying milk and fresh produce to the mining camp town of early Johannesburg (Kulijan,2009; Noble, 2011). Over the next few decades, the settlement expanded as large groups of people moved to Kliptown, a consequence of the forced removals that took place at the time and secondly the search for employment. A number of newcomers established micro businesses, trading essentials and commodities This presented Kliptown with an opportunity to thrive into a dynamic retail junction providing the community and the rest of the greater Soweto with a retail environment. (JDA, 2014a). Kliptown together with the neighbouring Klipriviersoog Estate and the Race Course, developed into a rural commercial node and residential area possessing a low level of infrastructure serving the around farming areas (Kliptown Business and Urban Design Master, 2010:8). Overall, Kliptown become a retail district distinguished by an energetic fuse of formal and non-formal trading alongside Union Street (JDA, 2014a).

Despite progress made by 1994, residents had no access to primary infrastructure and welfare services, the residents of Kliptown also faced extreme levels of unemployment. Additionally, Kliptown's status as a retail node in Soweto began to deteriorate as formal and informal retail activity decreased throughout the township (JDA, 2014a). For most of the 1990s, the Greater Kliptown area experienced investment withdrawal. Community- based infrastructure was substandard and could not service the concentrated area. The economic climate faced the same fate: water, sanitation, electricity, transport and communication networks were abandoned and left in a hopeless condition (JDA, 2014a). In 1997, The Greater Kliptown

39 Development Framework was drafted; this document was an attempt at an all-inclusive analysis of the problems the area faced.

In 2001, The Greater Kliptown Regeneration Development project was established with the purpose to revive Kliptown and to commemorate in 2005 the half century celebrations of the signing of the Freedom Charter. The newly established Johannesburg Development Agency was recruited to implement this project. However, it is imperative to note that this project and development was committed to before the JDA was selected as project management for this development (JDA, 2014a). Indeed, in terms of the collaboration between the city of Johannesburg and the JDA, the JDA was tasked to prepare oversee and implement projects for the Greater Kliptown Regeneration area. The Johannesburg Development Agency was responsible for three individual tasks, namely development facilitation, government coordination and project management (JDA, 2014a). The period between 2001 and 2013, saw an increase in the number of private, civic and government agencies associated development programmes within Kliptown. These agencies included the Gauteng provincial development agency (Blue IQ), Johannesburg Property Company (JPC), Metropolitan Trading Company (MTC), and the Greater Kliptown Development Forum (GKDF). Individual stakeholders such as Johannesburg Tourism also participated in terms planning in various stages of development (JDA, 2014a). The development that took place was to benefit the area of Kliptown socially and in a manner that memorialises the history of the community. In terms of social development. The Kliptown project was very important in terms of the upgrades, restructuring and restoration, addressing the needs and requirements of the Kliptown community and the City of Johannesburg. Urban Dynamics was appointed to manage the practical and legal procedures associated with the distribution of services relating to the progress of Kliptwn, (Kliptown Business & Urban Design Master, 2010). The project was to develop six Precincts. It also included the upgrading, restructuring and renewal program, which was presented for each Precinct. According to the (Kliptown Business & Urban Design Masterplan (2010:7) the key intention of the City of Johannesburg was to conclude the rejuvenation of Kliptown (including the re-housing of those residents living in informal structures) in a short- term, while encouraging investment to this project.

Another part of this development framework was the Kliptown Responsible Tourism Project. Responsible Tourism is interpreted as a tourism management blueprint developed to adopt planning management, product outcomes and promotion that will initiate effective social economic, cultural and environment results for the community where tourism development is taking place (Kliptown Business Plan Heritage, Education and Tourism, 2004). The key development in terms of the responsible tourism strategy for Kliptown was to create a cultural

40 outcome that would strengthen the community (Kliptown Business Plan Heritage, Education and Tourism, 2004).

Considering the heritage and cultural assets in Kliptown (i.e. as a living community with a notable history as the home of the Freedom Charter), and its distinctive characteristics an Open Air Museum framework was selected under heritage, education and tourism products. The mission of this development was to acknowledge and revere the Freedom Charter alongside the community of Kliptown through redevelopment while creating several elements that are particular to the visitor’s experience (Kliptown Business Plan Heritage, Education and Tourism, 2004). According to the Kliptown Business Plan Heritage, Education and Tourism (2004:9), the Responsible Tourism concept was to initiate an Open Air Museum as a means of enticing individuals to site but still imparting the values of sustainable development particularly to Kliptown. In terms of space, the development was designed to accommodate the salient features of Kliptown, namely as a living town with a layered history that includes but extends beyond the signing of the Freedom Charter. Kliptown would develop into a precinct that extends beyond the Square (Kliptown Business Plan Heritage, Education and Tourism 2004: 8). This precinct was to be joined together by five ‘national’ nodes, which were to act as centres of community congregation, orientation centres for visitors (with toilets, parking, interpretation/story points and orientation markers for heritage sites and sites of significance), and programming spaces. Each node was designed to be marked by landmarks that reflect the metaphor of fire (e.g. lighting) (Kliptown Business Plan Heritage, Education and Tourism, 2004).

5.3 Congress of the People- Birthplace of Freedom Charter

In South Africa 1955 was a landmark year in terms of the struggle against apartheid. Amid 1955, there were three major campaigns to be specific; the Congress of the People, the campaign against Bantu Education and the Western Areas removal campaign (Sisulu, 2002).

The Congress of the People was held at Kliptown on the 25th and 26th June 1955 and was the most illustrative and biggest assembling ever to amass in South Africa with real effects for South African governmental issues (Congress of the People Kliptown, 1955). On these dates individuals overflowed the distressing, dusty square in Kliptown; which later progressed toward becoming styled as Freedom Square and Walter Sisulu Square of Dedication (JDA, 2014b). (JDA, 2014b). The individuals who gathered at Kliptown represented the African National Congress (ANC), the South African Indian Congress, the Coloured People's

41 Congress, the South African Congress of Trade Unions, and the Congress of Democrats (JDA, 2014b).

According to officials there were 2,844 delegates representing all the most important political movements present at the event (Congress of the People Kliptown, 1955). It was estimated that there was an aggregate of around 300 representatives from Natal, 250 from the Eastern and Western Cape and 50 from the Orange Free State; the adjust came from the Transvaal, primarily from Johannesburg. Delegates were chosen based by the vote of individuals who came together in an assembly where they talked about their desires in terms of the Flexibility Constitution and what their agent would say in terms of the assembly (Suttner & Cronin, 2006). According to Suttner & Cronin (2006), on the first day of the gathering, the crowds started arriving at about 11am on the Saturday morning; however, the conference itself only started at 3pm.

The crowd kept growing as people were coming from all over with every form of transportation possible; at one point it was estimated that a total 7000 spectators watched the proceedings. One of the delegates was quoted as saying, “when we reached the Congress there was a carnival atmosphere in fact the organisation was immaculate, it was very high standard”, (Suttner & Cronin, 2006). The following day, 26 June 1955, the gathering started at 10:00 am and continued until 16:00pm. In his account of events Walter Sisulu (2002:184) mentions that he and Nelson Mandela drove to a dusty field in the township of Kliptown not far from their Orlando West homes, to witness the historic Congress of the People. As both Sisulu and Mandela were “banned persons”, they could only observe the process from the fringes of the 7000- strong audience. According to Sisulu (2002:184), he remembers watching the proceedings from the roof of the Shop of Jada, one of his friends in Kliptown. As the day continued delegates went through the Freedom Charter on a clause by clause basis. The Freedom Charter was presented section by section to the group of 2 884 delegates from all corners of South Africa who travelled to attend this meeting. The second day of proceedings was interrupted by a dramatic police invasion. According to one delegate who was present at the event “In military style the cops circulated the whole of Kliptown ground” (Suttner & Cronin, 2006). Armed police and plain-clothes detectives confiscated thousands of copies of the draft charter as well as other papers and documents (Sisulu, 2002). Equipped police and plain- clothes officers seized thousands of duplicates of the draft constitution as well as other papers and reports (Sisulu, 2002). Nevertheless, the process of reading out the Freedom Charter clause by clause and section by section continued even as the police searched, photographed and recorded the names of the people. The raid undertaken on the final day of the Congress of the People was the prelude to a treason trial. At 4am on December 5 1955

42 police arrested leaders of the Congress Alliance in all parts of South Africa (Suttner & Cronin, 2006).

The total of 156 accused persons included Chief Albert Luthuli, Nelson Mandela, Oliver Tambo, Joe Slovo, Moses Kotane, Ahmed Kathrada, Duma Nokwe, Helen Joseph and Ruth First. They were accused of participating in a “countrywide conspiracy” inspired by international communism to overthrow the state by violence.

The state used the Freedom Charter as part of its evidence against the accused (Suttner & Cronin, 2006).The campaign for the Congress of the People and the Freedom Charter was highly influential. Arguably, the Congress of the People assisted in the integration unification of a number of political-organisations that were not firm in terms of political alliances (Congress of the People Kliptown, 1955). The campaign for the Congress of the People and the Freedom Charter was very persuasive. Arguably, it served to solidify and bind a set of loosely associated political-organisations into a principled alliance based on a coherent political programme (Congress of the People Kliptown, 1955). In addition, it also enabled the Congress leadership to construct a structured relationship between the different components of the liberation forces in South Africa on a common and shared vision of an alternative and radically different social order (Congress of the People Kliptown, 1955).The racial differing qualities of the community played a vital part in choice of the zone. Amid the 1950’s the African National Congress (ANC) felt that the time had come to draw up a charter of freedom, which would grasp the trusts and desires of all the individuals and the vision of the sort of South Africa they needed, (Suttner & Cronin, 2006). For the first time the Congress embodies a multi-racial assembly inclusive of the entire South African population. There was a representation of all races, genders and working class (Congress of the People Kliptown, 1955). The crusade for the Congress of the People and the Freedom Charter changed what was an urban-based development into a completely fledged national development speaking to the diverse racial divisions and the centre social powers of the freedom organization together (Congress of the People Kliptown, 1955).

For Walter Sisulu the Congress of the People was the most highly organised campaign the movement had ever undertaken (Sisulu, 2002). This said, it was Z.K. Matthews who first proposed the idea of the Freedom Charter during ANC Cape provincial congress, which took place in Cradock in 1953. The proposed Charter was a response to the introduction of discriminatory and repressive laws being implemented by the apartheid government, (Suttner & Cronin, 2006). Matthews continued to support the event of the Congress of the People before the ANC was banned as an organisation. The vision was for people from all across the country to gather as one voice for a free society (Bremner, 2004). At a meeting in Tongaat

43 Natal on the 20-21 March 1954, Chief Albert Luthuli, who chaired the meeting, traced the development of inter-racial political co-operation and unity since 1950 (Suttner & Cronin, 2006)

A resolution of the joint conference defined the Congress of the People as a “democratically elected assembly of representatives of all races and of all parts of the country to frame and adopt a Freedom Charter expressing the will of the people. The Secretariat of the National Action Council (NAC) was appointed to spearhead this project, with 16 members including Walter Sisulu, Yusuf Cachalia, Lionel Bernstein, Stanley Lollan, Albert Luthuli, EP Moretsele, OR Tambo and A Kathrada (Suttner & Cronin, 2006). Figures 5.1, 5.2 and 5.3 show key aspects of the Congress of the People and the Freedom Charter.

Figure 5.1 Figure 5.2

Figure 5. 1 Invitation to the Congress of the People.

Figure 5. 2 the signing of the Congress of the People (Source: Kliptown Public Environment Upgrade Phase 2)

Figure 5.3

Figure 5. 3 Draft Freedom Charter (Source: JDA Walter Sisulu Square of Dedication – Activation Plan 15 June 2015).

44

The South African state at the time associated the campaign of the Congress of the People and the Freedom Charter as an act of treason (Congress of the People Kliptown, 1955). Accordingly on early morning 5th December 1956 (and some days later), 156 members of the Congress Alliance were arrested and accused of being part of a 'country-wide conspiracy' inspired by international communism to overthrow the state by violence. The Congress of the People held at Kliptown became the central focus of the prosecution's case, and the Freedom Charter a key document in the trial. It was mentioned that the “‘nature of the crime was high treason', said Oswald Pirow (the Chief Prosecutor), with militant aims." The intent was seen in the Freedom Charter, as it was needed for the Congress Alliance to overthrow the South African government through violence in order to achieve the requests set out in the document (Congress of the People Kliptown, 1955). However, the state’s charges could not stand in court and were eventually the charge dismissed (Suttner & Cronin, 2006).

The Freedom Charter became a manifesto for the liberation movement, symbolising the vision and dreams for a free South Africa, and the Congress of the People has been observed as the event that not only changed the scope of South African politics but also was influential in terms of the freedom movement. In Suttner & Cronin (2006:80), Chief Albert Luthuli is quoted saying “nothing in the history of the liberatory movement in South Africa quite caught the popular imagination as this did, not even the Defiance Campaign”. This event paved the way for other historical events including the Treason Trial and The Rivonia Trial, which lead to the sentencing of freedom fighters including, Nelson Mandela, Ahmed Kathrada, Govan Mbeki and many others.

5.4 Freedom Charter- Understanding the document.

The heritage status of Kliptown is inseparable from the Freedom Charter and of its iconic position in the apartheid struggle. Given its significance, this section provides an analysis of the Freedom Charter and debates surrounding the historic document.

There are many discussions around the Freedom Charter. “Some scholars have argued that it is a document of bourgeois democratic demands; others have said its socialist” (Suttner & Cronin, 2006:128). The treason charge levelled against several of its leading activist proponents was based largely as a result of allegations that the Freedom Charter was a blueprint for African dictatorship. This said, Africanist groups have criticised the Freedom Charter as they believe it was importing ‘foreign’ socialist ideologies. At the time of the initial

45 drafting of the document, the Freedom Charter has also been criticised for addressing the needs of the wealthy professionals, small traders and so on rather than workers (Suttner & Cronin, 2006). The Freedom Charter is identified as a people’s document as it was created through a democratic process, which at the time was unprecedented in South Africa and most other countries in the world. It is argued that the document continues to speak to the interests of all oppressed South Africans who suffered under the apartheid rule. A group of individuals with fine intellect developed the charter and because of this, its content is associated with conditions different South Africans faced at the time (Suttner & Cronin, 2006).

The charter was adopted at the Congress of the People, Kliptown on June 26 1955. As a result of its significance for Kliptown it is presented in detail below.

The preamble to the Charter Declares as follows:

“We the people of South Africa, declare for all our country and world to know that South Africa belongs to all who live in it, black and white no government can justify or claim authority unless it’s based on the will of the people. Our people have been robbed of their birth right to land, liberty and peace by a form of government founded on injustice and quality. Our country will never be prosperous or free until all our people live in brotherhood, enjoying equal rights and opportunities. Only a democratic state based on the will of all the people can secure all their birth right without distinction of colour, race, sex or belief. Therefore, we the people of South Africa, black and white together equals, countrymen and brothers adopt this Freedom Charter. We pledge ourselves to strive together, sparing neither strength nor courage until the democratic here set out have been won (African National Congress, 1955:1).

The Charter contains several key clauses as set forth below:

The People Shall Govern!. “Every man and woman shall have the right to vote for and stand as a candidate for all bodies which make laws. All the people shall be entitled to take part in the administration of the country. The rights of the people shall be the same regardless of race, colour, sex. All bodies of minority rule advisory boards, councils and authorities shall be replaced by democratic organs of self government” (African National Congress, 1955:1). According to Suttner & Cronin (2006), the first clause of the Freedom Charter is based on the premise that no government can justly claim authority unless it is based on the will of all people who fall under the country’s constitution adopted in 1996. This clause simply speaks on every South Africans right to vote and be a part of the law making process of the country.

All National Groups Shall Have Equal Rights!. “There shall be equal status in the bodies of state, in the courts and in the schools for all national groups and races. The national groups

46 shall be protected by law against insults to their race and national pride. All people shall have equal rights to use their own language to develop their own folk culture and customs. The preaching and practice of national race or colour discrimination and contempt shall be a punishable crime. All apartheid laws and practices shall be set aside.” In stark contrast to the country’s apartheid past, the new democratic constitution provides that every South African, regardless of their race has “full and equal enjoyment of all rights and freedoms” (African National Congress, 1955:1).In addition to that, no South African can be discriminated based on race, gender, ethnic group, sexual orientation, religion and beliefs.

The People Shall Share In The Country’s Wealth!. “The national wealth of our country, the heritage of all South Africans, shall be restored to the people. The mineral wealth beneath the soil, the banks and monopoly industry shall be transferred to the ownership of the people as a whole. All the industries and trades shall be controlled to assist the well-being of the people. All people shall have equal rights to trade where they choose to manufacture and to enter all traders, crafts and professions” (African National Congress, 1955:1). This section addresses the extreme imbalance; the constitution recognises the right of every citizen to choose his or her trade, occupation or profession freely (Suttner & Cronin, 2006).

The Land Shall Be Shared Among Those Who Work It!. “Restrictions of land ownership on racial basis shall be ended and all the land re-divide amongst those who work it, to banish famine and land hunger. The stat will help peasants with implements, seeds, tractors and dams to save the soil and assist the tillers. Freedom of movement shall be guaranteed to all who work on the land. All shall have the right to occupy land wherever they choose. People shall not be robbed of their cattle and forced labour and farm prisons shall be abolished” (African National Congress, 1955:1). The Freedom Charter 50th Anniversary Celebrations 1955-2005 mentions, that the new constitution ended race-based restrictions on land ownership, and laid the basis for land reform. Through a process of land restitution, redistribution and tenure reform, important progress has been made in securing the rights who live and work on the land (Suttner & Cronin, 2006).

All Shall Be Equal Before The Law!. “No one shall be imprisoned, deported or restricted without a fair trial. No one shall be condemned by the order of any government official. The courts shall be representative of all people. Imprisonment shall be only for serious crimes against people and shall aim at red-education, not vengeance. The police force and army shall be open to all on an equal basis and shall be the helpers and protectors of the people. All laws

47 which discriminate on the grounds of race, colour of belief shall be repealed” (African National Congress, 1955:1).

All Shall Enjoy Human Rights! “The law shall guarantee to all the right to speak, to organise, to meet together, to publish, to preach, to worship and to educate their children. The privacy of the house from police raids shall be protected by law. All shall be free to travel without restrictions from countryside to town, from province to province, and from South Africa abroad” (African National Congress, 1955:1). According to Suttner & Cronin, 2006, the Bill of Rights which was found in the constitution was identified as a “cornerstone of democracy in South Africa”, it made sure the rights of all South Africans were respected, rights associated with privacy, freedom of conscience, religion, thought, belief and opinion.

There Shall Be Work And Security! “All who work shall be free to form trade unions, to elect their officers and to make wage agreements with their employers. The state shall recognise the right and duty of all to work and to draw full unemployment benefits. Men and women of all races shall receive equal pay for equal work. There shall be a forty-hour working week, a national minimum wage, paid annual leave and sick leave for all workers and maternity leave on full pay for all working mothers. Miners, domestic workers, farm workers and civil servants shall have the same rights as all others who work. Child labour, compound labour, the tot system and contract labour shall be abolished” (African National Congress, 1955:1). Summarised, this clause discusses the employment rights for every worker, it focuses on the right to work in peace and being able to participate in collective bargaining. It continues by discussing equal pay, working hours that child labour is illegal (Suttner & Cronin, 2006).

The Doors Of Learning And Culture Shall Be Opened! “The government shall discover, develop and encourage national talent for the enhancement of our cultural life. All the cultural treasures of mankind shall be open to all, by free exchange of books, ideas and contact with other lands. The aim of education shall be to teach the youth to love their people and their culture, to honour human brotherhood, liberty and peace. Education shall be free, compulsory, universal and equal for all children. Higher education and technical training shall be opened to all by means of state allowance and scholarships awarded on the basis of merit. Adult literacy shall be ended by a mass state education plan. Teachers shall have all rights of other citizens. The colour bar in cultural life, in sport and in education shall be abolished” (African National Congress, 1955:1). Within the first 10 years of democracy the quality education had

48 improved for all South Africans. However, the government is still confronted with the challenge of improving the quality of education in rural areas. Another struggle is improving the quality of teaching in mathematical and science subjects (Suttner & Cronin, 2006).

There Shall Be Houses, “Security and Comfort! All people shall have the right to live where they choose, to be decently housed and bring up their families in comfort and security. Unused housing space to be made available to the people. Rent prices shall be lowered; food plentiful and no one shall go hungry. Free medical care and hospitalisation shall be provided for all, with special care for mothers and young children. Slums shall be demolished and new suburbs built where all shall have transport, roads, lighting, playing fields crèches and social centres. The aged, orphans, the disabled and the sick shall be cared for by the state. Rest, leisure and recreation shall be the right of all. Fenced locations and ghettos shall be abolished and laws, which break up families, shall be repealed” (African National Congress, 1955:1). Summarised this section looks at the government’s dilemma to provide shelter and adequate health care to the people of South Africa. As part of efforts to poverty and provide an expanded safety budget, spending on social grants rose from R10 billion a year in 1994 to almost R34.8 billion poor and vulnerable South Africa (Suttner & Cronin, 2006).

The last clause discussed is “There Shall Be Peace And Friendship!” South Africa shall be a fully independent State, which respects the rights and sovereignty of all nations. South Africa shall strive to maintain world peace and the settlement of all international disputes by negotiation not war. Peace and friendship amongst all our people shall be secured by upholding the equal rights, opportunities and status of all. The people of the protectorates Basutoland, Bechuanaland and Swaziland shall be free to decide for themselves their own future. The right of all the peoples of Africa to independence and self- government shall be recognised and shall be the basis of close cooperation. Let all who love their people and their country now say as we say here these freedoms we will fight for side by side throughout our lives until we won our liberty” (African National Congress, 1955:1). The final clause discusses the contrast of apartheid, South Africa was divided influenced the neighbouring countries opinions, the democratic South Africa contributed largely to development, stability and peace across the continent (Suttner & Cronin, 2006). South Africa has actively supported the United Nations and sought to strengthen the multilateral process in its approach to international affairs. This has lead South Africa endeavour to build a stable system of international relations, peace and security (Congress of People, 1955).

49 5.5 The Development of Walter Sisulu Square Dedication the Heritage Site

At the Core of Kliptown’s development as a heritage site is Walter Sisulu Square of Dedication. This section looks at the development of the Walter Sisulu Square of Dedication; this heritage site is an example of built heritage. It is argued that after a number of failed attempts at creating a built development that commemorates the Congress of the People and the drafting of the Freedom Charter the Walter Sisulu Square of Dedication was the outcome.

The story begins during the 1990’s when Khosana Investments Pty Ltd, a commercial property developer acquired the developmental rights to the site, however the first architectural drawings for this development were dated November 1991 (Noble 2008:16). The plans were to create a trading area which resembled that of Kliptown (Noble 2008). This said, these plans were never realised due to the fact that financial institutions were sceptical about committing to fund black South Africans (Noble, 2008). Around 1993 and 1994, another group of architects procured these rights with the intention of establishing a conventional shopping centre. In 1994, a branch of the National Monuments Council (NMC) noted the intended development. Initially they were not opposed and even encouraged that a section of the development be dedicated to the historical events that has taken place (Noble, 2008).

The data about this advancement was announced and caused caution which brought about network challenges. In spite of challenge activity, a site improvement get ready for the planned shopping centre was submitted to board specialists and was considered by a sitting of the NMC on 7 March 1996 (Noble, 2008).By July of that year, resistance regarding this project escalated. It was argued by objectors to the development that Freedom Charter’s importance was devalued by the proposed construction at the site of a shopping centre (Noble, 2008). These concerns resulted in a rethinking of proposals for site development and strategic planning around the development of the Kliptown Area. By May 1997 the Greater Kliptown Framework Plan (GKDFP) was built up and advanced Kliptown as an "unquestionable requirement see site" for neighborhood and global explorers. The proposition was for the foundation at the site of 'Flexibility Square'. Flexibility Square undertaking execution group was shaped nearby the GJMC to make mindfulness and to put accentuation on the global hugeness of the Freedom Charter with performative types of celebration (Noble, 2008).With all the focus placed on this initiative, the end goal was that the Freedom Square would transcend the constraints of the nationalist narrative and inspire an international commitment to the support of the struggles for freedom and human rights (Noble, 2008).

It is clear that there was a great concern in terms of the lack of awareness surrounding this area; another concern for the National Monument Council was the guidelines to follow in

50 acknowledging the area (Noble, 2008). A survey was conducted to establish certain facts around the Congress of the People, in terms of its actual location, what it looked like and which aspects of it constituted as ‘authentic heritage (Noble, 2008). The results of this survey indicated that the urban tissue of the area had evolved from what it was when the Congress of the People took place. The NMC stated that “no old building of intrinsic architectural merit has been identified” albeit, yet the desirability of preserving the “vibrant social economic character of the area” was noted (Noble, 2008: 20). The matter in question was what exactly they were trying to conserve and how they would create a tangible memory of an event which was not very tangible to start with as Union Street was identified as the only “sign place” of the Freedom Charter (Noble, 2008). Since 1999 Kliptown has been on the selection for redevelopment by the Gauteng provincial government under whose jurisdiction it still currently falls (Bremner, 2004). The redevelopment initiative included the rehabilitation of the adjacent Klipspruit River, improvement of bulk infrastructure, an initiative to build seven thousand new houses and a provision of service delivery for those in shacks; this represents 33 percent of the budget of the redevelopment plan (Bremner, 2004).

During 2000, the Gauteng provincial government reached a consensus to include the Kliptown development on its priority list for projects associated economic development. Under the responsibility of Blue IQ, the Gauteng development agency, Kliptown was to be a heritage tourism development alongside Constitution Hill and the Cradle of Humankind paleoanthropological site (Bremner, 2004). The Kliptown development aligned with the Gauteng tourism strategy, which included a focus on tourism in townships. During the post- apartheid period the townships have been reconceptualised as one of the province’s tourist assets because they represent an image of apartheid’s legacies of racial segregation and poverty, a site of ethnic and cultural identity and of particular ideologies associated with the political struggle (Bremner, 2004). The Johannesburg Development Agency joined the Blue IQ project for the development of Kliptown coming on board in order to manage and formulate the plans for the Greater Kliptown (Noble, 2008).

It is significant that the original planning around Kliptown was based on integrated philosophies of Responsible tourism (Kliptown Business Plan, Heritage, Education and Tourism, 2004). Responsible tourism is defined as a form of tourism management that includes, inter alia, planning, management, product development and marketing to bring positive economic, social cultural and environmental impacts to the community in which tourism development is taking place (Kliptown Business Plan, Heritage, Education and Tourism, 2004). In terms of project development for Kliptown an architectural competition for the redesign of the freedom square was conceptualised with the intention of commemorating the events that occurred in the area. The redesigned space was meant to resonate with the vision and dreams of a free South

51 Africa in order to represent the ideals of the Freedom Charter to an international community so it would “support struggles of freedom and human rights wherever it is required” and at the same time deal with the basic community need (Bremner, 2004: 524).

The competition was promoted by the JDA on a national level in 2002. The scope and intent of the competition was to create a built environment that commemorates the past events that has taken place in the area (Noble, 2008). In total 35 design entries were submitted to the Walter Sisulu Square project. The winning project was a design that not only visualised a particularly symbolic square but also incorporated a larger urban plan for the area as part of the rejuvenation of greater Soweto (JDA, 2010). The winning design came from StudioMas Architecture and Urban Design with Pierre Swanwpoel, Precious Makwe and Justin Snell as the design team (JDA, 2010). The brief of their submitted design was identified as "a living brief" in which there was a need to "balance all realities" to "create an urban context for the building".

According to this design boldly proposed Soweto’s wholesale transformation from a township into South Africa’s first town, a new parliamentary capital reclaiming Kliptown’s role as the primary site for national debate. The submission, according to the eight judges, was to "provide statements that indicate a direction to be taken rather than a destination", and the winner's design does that (Barac, 2007).

According to the JDA (2010), the development design was based on nine principles: identity, legibility, history, symbolism, analogy, accessibility, robustness, legality, programme and equality. The head designer of this project identified these principles as "strong anchoring points emphasising that there is a universal acceptance of them". The idea was presented in a grid representing nine squares, to represent South Africa’s nine provinces, and "a symbol of equality and democracy". The grid was reflected in the two squares, which are a symbolic a representation of the “old” and “new”; the old representing the old apartheid South Africa and that of new democratic South Africa (JDA, 2010). The "old" square, measuring 100m by 100m, was the original spot of the 1955 meeting, which in reality would be an open meeting space, crossed by a jagged diagonal line representing a path across the square that was originally taken by residents, symbolic of crossing out the past (JDA, 2010).

During the project’s development phase in the south of the square, which housed rows of wholesalers dealing largely in hardware, livestock and bulk food supplies, it was planned that these be demolished as it was that stated "they were in a bad state and presented a fire hazard." According to JDA (2010), press release these buildings would be replaced by up to 600 hawker stalls set among colonnades and interspersed with a police station and a post office. Above the stalls, allowance would made for offices for doctors, lawyers and perhaps an

52 advice centre. At the north side of the square the design includes an auditorium, exhibition space, monument and museum. Linking the two squares is a walkway which is designed with a winding pattern of indigenous trees to represent the snakes of people who queued to cast their first vote in the country’s first democratic election in 1994. Alongside the super-graphic paving the walkway leads to a tall tower on the north side, which was to be called be the Freedom Charter Monument. According to head architect on the project (Pierre Swanepoel) the shape of the tower was designed to be conical which was a "universal form", He elaborates on other examples of conical shapes - the towers in the Great Zimbabwe ruins, Native American tents and traditional African fishing baskets (JDA, 2010).

The monument holds an eternal flame and panels with the text of the Freedom Charter. An X shape, the "mark of freedom", was to be cut into the roof of the tower, which was to be lighted and visible as a beacon at night to guide people to the square and at midday, the X is reflected on the panels with the Freedom Charter (JDA, 2010). Centred in the monument is the eternal flame, which is a metaphor for the Congress of the People. This flame was planned to be lit continuously. This said, on a recent tour to the site the tour guide mentioned that the flame is no longer a 24 hour sighting as a safety precaution. Currently the flame is only lit on special occasions significant to the country examples of this is the day former President Mandela passed and on the anniversary of the Congress of the People. Adjacent to the conical tower was planned to be another tower containing a "kwashisanyama", a Zulu word meaning "a place to prepare food"; the vision for this space be an open, informal restaurant. This second conical placed into the southerly superstructure and clad in reclaimed corrugated iron from dismantled shacks (Barac, 2007). Swanpoel had emphasised that the broader urban context in the design is exciting with similarities to Central Park in New York moving towards the east direction from the square hectares of green space are incorporated in the design (JDA, 2010). On recent field observation, visits to the site these elements are in place and one can see that the greening takes place on a regular basis.

The area where the “kwashisanyama” is situated is one of the most vibrant corners on the square. It is where people gather and eat food which is traditional to the area including Kota’s and offal. This section was later to be converted into high-density, mixed-use space that could densified with shops and restaurants, depending on the community. Included in this densification plan was a space in the design which was dedicated to a "parliament", or "building of significance", which was to be built on the highest point in the park. According the (JDA, 2010), Swanepoel envisioned this space either as a venue for a possible African parliament, or for the offices of the Nepad secretariat or used for any other function the community chooses. The judges also indicated interest in this particular element mentioning the parliament would spark "international significance" rather than it simply being another an

53 African building (JDA, 2010). The precinct design also included five nodes, which would act as centres’ of community congregation, orientation centres of visitors, and programming spaces, each of the nodes representing fire (Kliptown Business Plan, Heritage, Education and Tourism, 2004). These nodes, however, were not designed to preclude the inclusion of heritage sites within a visitor’s route, but instead to be used as a way of facilitating a visitor’s navigation of Kliptown (Kliptown Business Plan, Heritage, Education and Tourism, 2004).The representation of the nodes is as follows; Commemoration /Celebration Node, which is the key visitor node and encompasses the entire new development of the square and its immediate surroundings.

The Community Node includes the existing visitor centre-surrounding cluster of interest. Arts and Culture Node which meant to include the Gerald Sekoto house and the SAN Souci Cluster. The Environmental Node would include the children’s farm and environmental centre and the last node would be the Women’s Node that would include Charlotte Maxeke’s house, SKY( and Eva Mokoka’s house).Figure 5.4 shows the planned layout of these areas.

Figure 5. 4 Kliptown Museum Initial Planning, (Kliptown Business Plan, Heritage, Education and Tourism, 2004:18)

The early planning around the Kliptown Open Air Museum included a set of both in-house and outsourced components. The in-house components were the products managed by the open- air museum and the outsourced products managed through an external body associated with the museum, through a service level agreement (Kliptown Business Plan, Heritage, Education and Tourism, 2004). The intention was to have 12 programming spaces, which would be used, accommodate individuals who would partake in the programmes offered at the square. These programming spaces were the education and study centre, multipurpose centre, the square,

54 collections centre, exhibition making workshop, Jadas, visitors centre, Gerald Sekoto Gallery, Gerald Sekoto Art School (outsourced), environmental education centre (outsourced), children’s farm (initially in-house outsourced overtime), women’s centre (outsourced), Dispersed Exhibition Sites, Visitor Route, Open Air Museum Administration and visitor service. The space design incorporated the multi-layered history of Kliptown which was meant to be reflected in the design of the square. According to the JDA’s, Kliptown Business Plan, Heritage, Education and Tourism, (2004:35-42), the target market for tourism was to included local residents, day visitors and foreign tourists. The projected estimates of visitors in various categories is shown on Table 5.1.

The key differentiation was between international visitors market and the resident market of domestic South Africans. The Resident Market which was divide into two categories namely the residents of the Kliptown community and the larger Soweto. The target market also included foreign tourists, educational groups, Johannesburg day-trippers, domestic tourists and conference and events market. It is significant to observe from Table 5.1 that the largest planned category of tourist was that of international tourists which accounted for almost two- thirds of potential visitor arrivals. The relatively small numbers of domestic visitors, which it was anticipated would be visiting Kliptown, is remarkable and indicative of the fact that even the most iconic icons linked to the apartheid struggle were not expected to attract substantial numbers of domestic tourists.

Table 5. 1 Kliptown: Project Optimum Visitors Levels

Source: Kliptown Business Plan, Heritage, Education and Tourism, 2004:51

The main purpose of this development therefore was to market Kliptown to a mainly international tourism market based on it being a ‘living symbol for change’ in South Africa. One of the pivotal aspects of the renewal was to establish a historical and cultural tourism business

55 with the marketing relaying the story of Kliptown – past, present and future (Kliptown Business Plan, Heritage, Education and Tourism, 2004:42). With regard to visitor projections the Kliptown Business Plan, Heritage, Education and Tourism, (2004:51) that “the visitor levels projected from the market demand assessment are the optimum levels for a fully functioning Museum, and therefore. To allow for some phasing in of the exhibition elements and for initial lower market penetration, we have assumed that in year 1, only 50% of this visitation level will be achieved, growing to 65% in year 2, 75% in year 3, 90% in year 4, and 100% from year 5 onwards”.

In terms of unfolding implementation of the Kliptown heritage development between 2001 and 2003, a number of private, civic and government agencies initiated development programmes within Kliptown. The most important development actors included; Blue IQ, the Johannesburg Property Company (JPC), Metropolitan Trading Company (MTC), Greater Kliptown Development Forum (GKDF) and other individual stakeholders including Johannesburg Tourism (JDA, 2014a).

**Blue IQ was an investment holdings provincial entity initiated to develop cost effective economic operations. As the provincial entity responsible for this development of the square, Blue IQ distributed the funds to the Johannesburg Development Agency who was responsible for the implementation and final approval of this project (JDA, 2014a). The Johannesburg Property Company’s responsibility was to head and advance the property belonging to the City of Johannesburg (CoJ). Once the Walter Sisulu Square of Dedication was completed in 2005, it was handed to the JPC to be managed as part of its portfolio. The Greater Kliptown Development Forum regarded the approach of the JPC and their failure to fulfil their obligation to maintain the infrastructure and marketing the square resigned concern (JDA, 2014a). According JDA (2014a), it seemed as if the managing costs were not realistic which resulted in the final development. The Metropolitan Trading Company was responsible for the non- formal trading and transportation sector within the municipality. According to the JDA (2014a), the JDA transferred the management of Kliptown traders market to the MTC, however it seems as the MTC did not fulfil their functions which included the collection of rental fees from traders within the square. In terms of economic projections associated with the entire development, according to the Kliptown Urban Design Framework, the estimation was around of R545- million (JDA, 2014a). According to JDA (2014a), during the period of the development, overheads already amounted to R339 Million. Between the timeframe of 2001 and 2010 the Greater Kliptown Regeneration project was present with another sum of R497- million. This approximation is based on the contribution made to the JDA for the implementation of the Kliptown projects. However, the total cost excludes other state payments. (JDA, 2014a).

56 A landmark event in the establishment of Kliptown as a heritage tourism site was that the visionary design was unveiled at a formal ceremony, which coincided with the 47th anniversary of the Congress of the People on the 26th of June 2002 (Noble, 2008). By then, the Freedom Square had already been renamed as the Walter Sisulu Square of Dedication (WSSD) as a tribute to anti-apartheid activist and former secretary general and Deputy President of the ANC, Walter Sisulu (1912-2003) (Noble, 2008). It was evident, however, that there was no public consultation or deliberation with regards to the name change of the monument (Kuljian, 2009). Indeed, it appears that the decision was made because the development of ‘Freedom Park’ was underway in Pretoria and government felt that it would be confusing for tourists to have two heritage spaces with the same name (Kuljian, 2009). The community of Kliptown was not impressed with the name change as they believed that the name Kliptown had value by itself and that the new name had no link to Kliptown and the past historical events (Kuljan, 2007).

Construction for the development commenced in 2003. The redevelopment process was accompanied with differences in opinion and dissatisfaction from shop owners. In particular, the redevelopment of, what was an Indian area of trade meant that the owners of the shops would have to vacate their premises. Noble (2008), indicates that the shop owners were forced out of their shops and with the exception of Epstein (was shop in area, the family was renting the property) the shopkeepers along Union Street were renting their shops which was a pattern from the apartheid laws which prohibited ‘non-whites’ to purchase land. Without the title deeds as proof that they own the land these traders found themselves in a difficult position as their interests were not a priority for the developers. Rashid Jada (owner of Jadas’) and Abdul Samad Tokolias (owner of Tokolias) fought this issue. And, after many disagreements a deal was struck whereby they received new land along the Klipspruit Valley Road at an attractive price with new premises were built at the traders expense, (Noble, 2008). The traders were not the only unhappy party. Community members felt that this project was belittling to them as this great development took place whilst they still lived in terrible conditions and obviously not benefiting from the Freedom Charter (Kulijan, 2009). One community member went as far to say “that ‘they built a white elephant on the road so that tourists can step on and off the bus without actually seeing Kliptown” (cited in Kulijan, 2009: 45). The Jada family had a prominent position in Kliptown’s evolution as they owned the hardware store during the Congress of the People event where, Walter Sisulu hid and watched the second day of proceedings (Sisulu 2002:184). During the early phases of the Kliptown redevelopment, as a close friend of Walter Sisulu the Jada family donated the building to the government in remembrance of his friend and this building became the museum.

57 Several aspects of the original planning for the Kliptown heritage development were never realised in the projects unfolding implementation. Indeed, in many respects, the complete project was downscaled and many of the facilities originally presented to the panel were never implemented. These included the establishment of training spaces, sports facilities, a police station and a community advice centre. The completed development included houses, a community hall (which is open for hire), a downsized museum (which remained closed for 18 months after the unveiling of the square), various vendors at ground level, banking facilities, a 4 star hotel and restaurant and an enlarged monument of the Freedom Charter (FC) positioned in the centre, (Noble, 2008). According to the Soweto Hotel homepage (Soweto Hotel, 2018), the hotel on the square is identified as Joburg’s best-kept secret and is the first four-star hotel boutique hotel offering African hospitality in the heart of Soweto.

Overall, the core purpose for the development of the Walter Sisulu Square of Dedication was to memorialise the Congress of the People. The square was opened officially on 25 June 2005 by President Mbeki and on the same day the site was declared a national heritage site, (Noble, 2008).The Walter Sisulu Square of Dedication is now a feature on the Liberation Heritage Route (LHR), which appears on the UNESCO tentative list. In 2009, a series of 13 sites within South Africa was submitted to UNESCO for world heritage status all linked through the tale of liberation, (Bialostocka, 2013). The intention for the LHR was to create a route consisting of series sites, which would express the key aspects the South African liberation experience (Liberation Struggle Report, 2013).

Despite these initiatives it is argued that since its opening in 2005 the Kliptown site has been neglected for various reasons. The disconnect between the community, the developers and government could be one of the major reasons why this national heritage site has been neglected. Community participation has been identified as an important element in terms of the development of other post-apartheid public memorials and usually determines whether it is a success or failure (Kuljan, 2007. In numerous post-politically-sanctioned racial segregation ventures, "network" is viewed as a national network. Kliptown, be that as it may, has both national and neighborhood implications of the occasion that has occurred; the nearby network was essential in memorializing the site, (Kuljan, 2007). The people group of Kliptown through the association "Kliptown Our Town Trust" created and opened a display which praised their social political history however essentially the show was not utilized , unfortunately this was not utilized as a part of the advancement of the official exhibition hall in 2007 (Kuljan, 2009). It is argued Kliptown Our Town Trust was a community initiative that promoted the heritage of the community of Kliptown; it was an alternative initiative to commemorate the community of Kliptown. This included an exhibition of artwork and heritage assets (Duiker, 2017).

58 Bremner (2004) states as follows “For StudioMas the commemoration of a founding myth of the new democracy, the Freedom Charter enables the investment resources in monumental urban spaces as a stage for celebration and spectacle. Dramatic and exaggerated forms created in the image of new city a new morphology for urban life. For in a single gesture, all traces of the existing community and its people have been erased” (Kuljan 2009).

The Walter Sisulu Square of Dedication was envisioned to resemble the open-air cafes and restaurant feel of Rosebank; however, in the end, this design removed the authentic elements of the community, the look, smell and sound and thus created a massive sanitised space (Kuljan 2007). Sanitised or idealised pasts simply refers to the tendency of focusing on a piece of the past that emphasis on the positive events and people and exclude the elements that are unpleasant and socially unacceptable (Timothy & Boyd, 2006). According to Barac (2007), the difficulty with this development is associated with the architectural fusion of symbol and practicality, which is widely misunderstood in the public sector space debate. Barac (2007) continues by saying that conversations around development is usually associated with development policy, academic discourse and grassroots activism based on improving the quality of the bottom of the economic ladder architecture is irrelevant. “The square was meant to memorialise the Freedom Charter and, the Freedom Charter itself would be laid to rest inside a truncated cone” (See Figure 5.5) (Bremner, 2004: 525). At this cone, at midday on June 26th each year, observers would be able to watch the sun briefly light up the surface, before it receded once more into the shadows of history (Meskell & Scheermeyer, 2009).

Figure 5. 5Truncated Cone in which the Freedom Charter is laid to rest (Image Naomi Roux 2009).

59

In terms of maximising the economic growth and empowerment, it is mentioned that SMMEs from the greater Kliptown area have benefited from the WSSD (JDA, 2014a) however; this statement has not been backed with evidence. In terms of maximising the heritage tourism and educational significance and importance of the square according to the JDA ( 2014a), the Walter Sisulu Square of Dedication was built as a world class economic heritage site at a cost of R180-million. This investment was made with the intention of leveraging the heritage value of the square to foster private investment. Certain private investment has occurred. The most notable is the building of the 4 star hotel which was built at the cost of R24-million, through a public private partnership between the Zatic Group and the Industrial Development Cooperation (JDA, 2014a). Based on JDA (2014a), the hotel remains afloat largely by capital injections from the IDC and its private accomplices. This data is a sign that the more noteworthy Kliptown Recovery Improvement has not come to the legacy esteem of the square in drawing in an adequate stream of visitors to the location. Essentially, the break- even point of the hotel stands at 45% occupancy, over a three-year period the hotel only managed to surpass this break-even point during the 2010 World Cup.

Several explanations have been put forward in relation to the under-performance of Kliptown as a heritage tourism attraction. In particular JDA (2014a), highlights two factors, the first is that the Johannesburg Tourism company has been unable to market Kliptown effectively as a tourism destination in Gauteng, which is sharp contrast with the vibrancy at Vilakazi Street which is identified as a primary tourism attraction in Soweto. The second contributing factor identified was that the property company responsible for the management and marketing of the square has not fulfilled its duties in terms of marketing and maintenance of the square. Indeed, JDA (2014a) argues that a cursory overview of the Walter Sisulu Square of Dedication webpage indicates that there has not been any updates on the website for the last year. Adding to this, substantial amounts of rentals were in arrears, which have influenced the management’s ability to maintain the square; by June 2011 it had been R1.6 million overdue in rent (JDA, 2014a).

5.6 Socio- Economic State of Kliptown.

The underperformance of the heritage site in terms of tourism impacts must be set in the context of the continued state of poor living conditions and livelihoods of local Kliptown residents. By 2001, the greater Kliptown area had a population between 38 000 and 45 000 people. The 2001 census indicated that the area has an unemployment rate of between 60

60 and 70 percent, with more than half of the community with no regular income (Himlin et al., 2007). During the time of the 2001 census Kliptown had a high amount of informal dwellings with 8977 shacks. Despite the highly recognised historical political significance Kliptown area has yet to be uplifted from its impoverished conditions with high unemployment and low education levels and many people living on social grants (Himlin et al., 2007).

For many years Kliptown remained neglected in terms of social and economic development. In the study conducted by Roux (2009), the community expressed their sense of unhappiness in terms of the state that Kliptown has been in for the past 50 after the event of the Congress of the People. In July 2008 during birthday, celebrations held in Kliptown for former president Nelson Mandela a group of community protestors handed over a memorandum to a representative from the Nelson Mandela Foundation (Roux 2009:101). This was an expression of their concerns concerning housing in Kliptown. In the Kliptown Neighbourhood Business District February 2009 document, the JDA mentions that their focus is to move away from tourism and instead now be place on social development. The plan is to move away from the overemphasis on physical space and instead follow a strategy that presents a system that develops the isolated square into an urban hub (JDA, 2009). The JDA (2014a) mentioned the social development programmes supported by the JDA have had positive impacts for certain individuals. One example of this is an individual who became a full time photographer and has established a studio. In terms of crime, data collected by the SAPs indicates that there has been a decrease in crime between the periods of 2002 and 2007. However, the JDA encourages caution on interpreting the statics, as they may have not been a direct result of the JDA’s development in the township (JDA, 2014a). Further evidence of the poor state of Kliptown appeared in 2016. In a recent newspaper article titled “Kliptown’s fall from grace”, the writer mentions that the historic suburb is still neglected; he also mentions the increase of socials ills because of overcrowding and lack of resources (Wessels, 2016). Admittedly, Kliptown has received large capital injections over the last few years towards its heritage status, with tourism and business developments centred on the Walter Sisulu Square of dedication.

Nevertheless, despite this funding the majority of local residents in Kliptown still do not have access to the basic human needs such as housing, electricity, sensation and social services, (Himlin et al., 2007). One former community leader and current community member contrasted this situation in an interview conducted by myself that during the old Kliptown days, the people made provision for the community and there were classes for children to learn even though it was in only one room or stables they got the necessary education.

61 In the past it was observed that families built their own homes, community members ran their own business, there were informal clinics but it benefited the entire community of Kliptown and “we were one big family” (Duiker, 2017). It was observed that the “living conditions in contemporary Kliptown as opposed to the past are seen negatively as the community has not been built up but rather left to rot” (Duiker, 2017). Furthermore it was stated that “this evidence is seen when you walk around in the area, the built houses are the old ones and the 100 that were built after the tornado and flash floods, the few flats built by the JDA however, majority of the community live in shacks” (Duiker, 2017). “These shacks are six rooms and hosts even up to 25 family members, there is no water but the communal taps and there a pit toilets designated to each section and the people do not have electricity. Along with that, the community members are surrounded with filth, as the refuse service do not come in the area” (Duiker, 2017). Something that stood out most of his interview is when (Duiker, 2017) mentioned, “I always say it seems as if there is a silent wish that the township of Kliptown should die. This community gets treated as if it is just a plague and there is need to get rid of it”. The interview concluded with Duiker (2017) “stating there is simply no acknowledgment for the place that brought the nation together”.

In terms of the development of the square, it was discussed in the JDA’s Kliptown Neighbourhood Business District Envision Document authored by Cohen, Judin & Silverman (2009) that the new development in the area was about foregrounding local needs, which move away from the former focus on tourism as a catalyst but focusing on the importance upgrading social facilities and services. The redevelopment was an attempt to weave the isolated square into an immediate urban context, this simply refers to the design of spaces which is a collaborative and multi-disciplinary process of shaping the physical spaces be it cities, towns or villages (Cohen, Judin & Silverman 2009). At the time when this document was published, the JDA was looking at the development from a perspective that would create economic regeneration practices in Kliptown. The JDA’s Kliptown Public Environment Upgrade (2015), isolates key issues in the area. These include; lack of activity on the building edges creating desolated and underutilised space, existing heritage buildings that are neglected and damaged, the area designated for informal trading is not well kept and is not being used; and lastly there is limited visual and physical connections to the square. According to the document, the new concept for planned redevelopment would transform the built up square into a garden or park with emphasis on greening the area. Overall, the second phase of the redevelopment project is aimed to create a robust liveable, workable, and safe environment whilst ensuring the heritage of the greater Kliptown (Kliptown Capital Works Phase 2, 2015). The intention is to create a safe and attractive space that would promote social cohesion and upgrade the area. The redevelopment plan included a possible relocation

62 of the museum from the corner to a place where it is seen, a hotel redevelopment that included extending the hotel, a new restaurant, new entrances and a new service yard (Kliptown Capital Works Phase 2, 2015), no justification was given in relation to the hotel redevelopment. The total budget allocation for the first phase of the redevelopment which was scheduled to take place between 2015 and 2016 (year 1) was an estimated R61 million with, R20.2 million estimated for the second phase which was scheduled to take place between 2016 and 2017. Thus, the total estimated value of this redevelopment is a financial commitment of R 81 million (Kliptown Capital Works Phase 2, 2015).

5.7 Summary

This chapter presents the first set of research findings on Kliptown as a heritage tourism development. The material drawn upon is existing secondary sources and importantly a set of primary documentary sources in terms of planning documents which have informed various stages of the development and proposed redevelopment of Kliptown. It was stressed that Kliptown is a heritage site of major significance in terms of its role in the liberation struggle. The chapter reviewed the development of this township, the gathering of the Congress of the People, the Freedom Charter document and lastly the development of the Walter Sisulu Square of Dedication national heritage site. It was demonstrated that planning proposals were controversial and contested on many occasions by the local community. The overall evidence is that Kliptown is under-performing in terms of heritage tourism site, in part because of problems in its unfolding planning as well as the implementation or lack thereof planning proposals. The following chapter continues with these themes and uses interview sources and survey material to further evaluate how Kliptown is performing as a tourism heritage site.

63 Chapter 6 Data Analysis and Findings

6.1 Introduction

The objective in this chapter is to discuss and analyse the data collected through the semi- structured interviews and the questionnaire survey undertaken with tourists undertaking visits to Kliptown to obtain findings and thereby to provide a constructive conclusion. As mentioned in Chapter four a mixed method approach was used to obtain the necessary information to determine the results for this study .In terms of structure this chapter is divided into three sections, the first looking at the qualitative research findings and the second looking at the quantitative research findings. The third section is a summary of key findings across both the qualitative and quantitative material.

As was made clear in Chapter four the qualitative interviews were conducted with 11 different stakeholders linked to Kliptown Walter Sisulu Square of Dedication. Each of the stakeholders had to answer questions relating to their operations or link to the square. There were two additional questions that each participant had to answer, which related to their opinions regarding to Kliptown as a tourism site and solutions on what can be done in terms of improvement. The findings are separated into different themes based on the research questions asked to the different stakeholders. The participants approached included a specialist in destination development and planning, tourism planning, urban management planning, community consultation and facilitation, place marketing and sector policy and a researcher who did the feasibility study on the Walter Sisulu Square of Dedication (Heritage Analyst), Joburg Heritage Analyst/Researcher Museum Curator, Crafts Salesperson, representatives from both Joburg Tourism and Gauteng Tourism Authority, Day Tours Manager at African Eagle Tour Operators, a local Tour Guide, a lifelong resident of Kliptown/ Community leader and a representative from the Johannesburg Development Agency.

The overall response received from the different stakeholders indicates that they are well informed about Kliptown, the historical events and the developments that has taken place within the area and most demonstrated a sense of concern with regards to the future of this area. The feedback from the interviews are clustered into themes with the richness of certain interviews indicated by the presentation of extended quotes to reflect the ‘voices’ of stakeholders. Direct quotations from interviewees are presented in italics.

64 6.2 Stakeholder Interview Findings

6.2.1 Tours to Kliptown

This theme aimed to establish the tour routes the participants used, whether they stopped at Kliptown, the amount of time spent, whether people actually got the correct information with regards to the events that have occurred and the type of emotions shown by tourists on site. Both tour managers indicated that they have full and half day Soweto Tours which includes Kliptown on the route. The Soweto Tours have been identified as a popular tour for both establishments, the day tour manager of the tour operator is quoted saying that “Out of 11 tours we run at our institution, we will refer to it as Soweto would be 90% volume of all my tours be it on a half or full day tour.” The local tour guide quoted: “If it is a busy week I can do 4 to 5 hours a week sometimes twice a day and I have two other guides that are helping me they assist me as well and if it is a slow week 3 sometimes 2 tours a week”. With regards to time spent on site, the local tour guides spends about 90 minutes in the area as he takes tourists to the square and is also affiliated with a local charity in the area, the tour operator spends about 15 to 20 minutes.

Both interviewees indicated that the individuals participating in the tours were predominantly international travellers, which confirms the target population which was in the tourism planning for Kliptown as discussed in Chapter Five. The tourists were informed about the development of the township and why this township and heritage is so important. The story of the Freedom Charter is told to the tourists, why this area was selected to host the Congress of the People, the importance of the event in terms of South African politics. Both local tour guide and day tours manager of a tour operator mentioned that emotions were shown, emotions associated with empathy and concern as to why these basic needs are not met particularly in the area where the Freedom Charter was drafted.

On the square, there was one guide who was seated amongst the craft salesmen. This specific tour guide took me on the Kliptown walk prior to this tour I have visited the site a few times on my own. There is a great difference as on my own I did not understand what was in front of me as there was no signage or dialogue with the necessary guidance.

When guided certain things were pointed out to me that began to make sense based on the information received from the guide. The second part of the tour was the walk into the township itself; this part of the tour had so much importance as it allows the tourist experience the community’s daily struggles. It allows the tourist to see beyond the square and realise the level

65 of inequality surrounding the open air museum. In addition the second part of the tour allows the tourist to look at the Freedom Charter and view the area that hosted the event and see whether it has been beneficial.

6.2.2 Museum on the Square.

The museum on the Walter Sisulu Square of Dedication has been there since 2007 and opened on the 26th June as a commemoration of the event of the Congress of the People which took place on the 25-26 June 1955. During my first interview with an individual who represents the museum, it was established that the museum is owned by the local government and that the management has not changed since the date of inception. The interviewee mentioned that his biggest concern was that there is no signage indicating where the museum was situated. In addition, he expressed concern about the community’s awareness and interest with regards to the museum saying “But our concern, the community they are not aware of the museum because we don’t have the signs. Remember secondly, the culture of the black people they are not aware of museums and so on- maybe if there is signage it could be much better“.

The second interviewee was the Chief Curator for Soweto Museums. With regards to the maintenance of the museum and the comments made by the other interviewee it was stated as follows: “The Kliptown Open Air Museum along with the hector Pieterson Museum and the June 16 Interpretation Centre all belong to one umbrella institution called Soweto Museums. And it is not true that the recent renovations are the only ones that have taken place in the past ten years. There have been numerous repairs and maintenance done on the museum from time to time. The budget for repairs comes in three forms, namely: emergency work, OPEX (Operational expenditure) and CAPEX (capital Expenditure) in both the cases of OPEX and CAPEX the budget for each financial year is divided among all the institutions under Arts, Culture and heritage and a unit called Capital projects and the Johannesburg Property Company have to priories repairs, maintenance and purchase of capital goods based on the amount of money available and the needs of each institution. OPEX is often much easier to get but CAPEX is more difficult because it often means major renovations”. This was a response to the viewpoint of the first individual who claimed that there had not been any work done to the museum since it was developed 10 years ago.

It was revealed that the per annum amount of visitors to the site are as follows. During 2014 the number of visitors was 9261, however in 2015 the numbers decreased to 8505 visitors and in 2016 it decreased even more to 6653 visitors which is far less than what was projected in the Kliptown Education and Business Plan. In previous research done by Roux (2009) it is

66 mentioned that before the official opening of this museum, the community had an open-air museum that has information about the community. In response to question as to why is this information not incorporated in the current curriculum of the museum and what is being done with this information, the CCMS confirmed that in 2011 “The Museum hosted an exhibition called iKasi lama Kasi which featured a number of photographs by Bolo Manetjie who is now deceased and Mr Gene Duiker. Then later in 2014 we hosted an exhibition by the Kliptown Artist Prince Massinham which also included some archival material from Gene Duiker. Some of the material from the first exhibition we requested to keep in the Hector Pieterson Museum archives as a way of ensuring that this history is not lost. We are aware of the issue around the representation of Kliptown in the permanent exhibition so these temporary exhibitions are intended partly to remedy that situation”. Lastly, when asked what the greatest concern was for the Chief Curator of Soweto Museums’ regards to the Kliptown Museum he stated “That if state owned entities continue with development without consultation it will lead to further alienation of the community of Kliptown”.

6.2.3 Tourism Industry Stakeholders View

This theme reviews the interviews conducted with representatives of the two tourism agencies namely, Joburg Tourism and Gauteng Tourism Authority (GTA). The Joburg Tourism office on the Walter Sisulu Square of Dedication has been functioning between 2004-2005 and is open Monday to Friday 8am-5pm. According to the representative, Joburg Tourism’s purpose “is to serve as an information centre, which is to delineate information to whoever visits the centre be it a tourist or a local person, so anyone who needs information with regards to tourism, Kliptown and Soweto can go to the centre, however many locals do not come to the centre as they do not relate information centre. Besides delineating information we are also responsible for what we call Fam Trips or Familiarisation Trips whereby we arrange travel or trips for media personnel or international delegates who would want to know more about Johannesburg so we arrange that and take them around on a tour”. When asked whether Kliptown was well marketed the participant mentioned that more needed to be done to encourage people to visit Kliptown.

The Gauteng Tourism Authority’s (GTA) response to their role as a tourism agency was: “Our role as the Gauteng Tourism Authority is that we are a destination marketing organization, our sole purpose is to promote and market Gauteng as a tourist destination for business, events and leisure you know, tourism in general. So that is basically our purpose we are a destination

67 marketing organization to promote Gauteng.” When asked what their heritage strategy is for Gauteng as a province the response was that they do not particularly have a heritage strategy. This said, it was argued that they have a general tourism strategy in place that is suitable for different products offered including those that are associated with heritage. In terms of association with Kliptown, the representative mentioned that Kliptown has always been a project of the GTA which has not necessarily been tapped into in terms of exposure as some of the other tourism sites in Gauteng. The representative continued to say that all other establishments that exists in the province are part of our products as Gauteng Tourism Authority.

6.2.4 The Heritage Overview

Analysis of this theme is based on the interviews conducted with two different heritage analysts/scholars. Issues of concern are around heritage in South Africa and the future thereof. In order to differentiate their responses they are referred to as HAS1 and HAS2.

When asked what are the reasons for heritage sites becoming neglected and eventually start vanishing? HAS1 stated that:

“There are many reasons, sometimes it’s a matter of maintenance, there is rarely a maintenance budget available to maintain the sites - I would say that the bulk of the problems particularly with built environment so with buildings, towns and cities owners public or private sector may not necessary have budget to maintain, so things like community halls may not be maintained the way they should be, we have found that graveyards are often neglected so they are vulnerable to vandalism, even vulnerable to theft so we find that in some cemeteries people are stealing headstones because they are basically recycling them as headstones. So vandalism is a big problem, theft - you find stuff being stolen, a good example would be when the clockwork in the old Rissik Street post office got stolen, the actual bells and clockwork were stolen.

Management capacity - so often we find that local authorities or even the private sector have to look after heritage sites but they don’t have the capacity, the management capacity or the knowledge or the skills so you find for example when restoration or maintenance work is carried out its not done by professionals that know how to work with heritage structures. Then there are acts where developers basically do developments outside the act, so it’s illegal developments that may destroy heritage sites and alter sites without even taking necessary

68 research into those sites or they don’t get the necessary improvements, so Canteen Koppies is a good example where an international significant archaeological site has been illegally mined, so mining is a big problem we find that illegal mining and even sometimes legal mining is a big challenge particularly in rural areas which leave paleontological sites, archaeological sites vulnerable.”

In terms of what can be done to protect heritage assets in South Africa the response was that: “I think that one of the biggest challenges is that the authorities that are supposed to be looking after heritage sites don’t have capacity, so institutionally we very weak, so we don’t really have a lot of capacity. Often you talk to provinces like Limpopo, North West or Free State and find that there is literally 1 or 2 people who are responsible for heritage within the provincial structures and no one is responsible for heritage at a local authority- which means that heritage crimes are not really reported, they not prosecuted and even in the big cities where we might have those institutional capacities heritage crimes are often not prosecuted by police, so you try to lay a charge at the police station and the police officers laugh at you, so crimes aren’t prosecuted. So I think the issue is government not taking this sector seriously and therefore we don’t really have constitutions in place that actively lay out mandates as set out in the National Heritage Resource Act, so I think that probably the biggest challenge is that there is no capacity to look after heritage. Funding is a problem as well, there just isn’t funding for heritage”.

The views of the HAS2 were similar and confirm much of the above narrative. However, this respondent placed emphasis on the state of despair and the neglect that heritage structures faced. HAS2 also mentioned that a general problem with heritage is the lack of respect for assets from both private and public sectors and that this situation is changing but only very slowly. Another response from HAS1 who worked on the feasibility study of the Walter Sisulu Square of Dedication development was whether it was considered that the project was feasible. His response was a definite “no” and in explanation he stated as follows:

“No, I think the project was over ambitious. I think way too much money was spent on physical infrastructure that perhaps the community didn’t really need, so some aspects of it seems to be working, the market for example; having the market there I’m sure is good for local traders, but I think the overall heritage education and tourism project was perhaps too ambitious.

I say that because it required management and institutional capacity to run and maintain, that never materialised and I think that we should have at the outset been more conservative in

69 terms of thinking through what the real capacity would be to maintain and manage a site of that scale. I do think it’s probably a general problem we’ve had in South Africa, where there’s been massive capital budgets allocated to large scale tourism projects, heritage projects but where there’s simply not operational capacity or budget available to maintain or run those and I think Kliptown is a good example of that”.

When asked what are the core challengers of Kliptown as a heritage site it was observed that:

“I think management capacity - you know if I’m not mistaken part of it is currently managed by the Johannesburg Property Company, and their role is to look after property for the city and they don’t particularly do that. I mean their role is not heritage, education and tourism and as I said there’s the directorate Arts, Culture and Heritage and like I said they also don’t have capacity, they can’t even manage the Johannesburg Art Gallery or Museum Africa, which both have much larger collections, much more complex conservational findings if they can’t even run those so I’m not surprised it’s the way it is. So I think the challenges one sees at the Walter Sisulu Square of Dedication are really about management issues, maintenance issues, but there’s another element to that which is that for tourism to work you need ongoing programming so the idea was always that space would be utilised for huge gala events, some of the venue halls that were built, were built with the intention to be able to seat joint sessions for both parliament and the council of provinces so that was the intention and no one has been driving that process or try to get events active. I think in that sense it’s not being properly managed in terms of facilities that are there and what one can actually do with those facilities, and the result of that is that a lot of the tourism is than affected as well.

At the same time there are tour operators who do fantastic tours in Kliptown and I mean they do use the square but the challenge there is that sometimes when you arrive at the museum you find that it is closed, so the last few times I went through there the museum was always closed, so the problem faced is not knowing whether the museum will be opened or closed. Secondly, the actual monument is supposed to be a metaphor for an eternal flame, personally I think it was also a bad idea-you can’t put something in if you can’t maintain it. I think that’s quite an appropriate symbol the problem is calling it an eternal flame but you can’t keep it eternal. The important point there is that it’s not just the square that is neglected; it’s the overall heritage associated with Kliptown. I mean there’s the house of Charlotte Maxeke, there’s the house where Gerald Sekoto lived there are other heritage sites, there was the Kliptown Our

70 Town Initiative exhibition and they desperately needed support and that never really happened and I was very sad about that, because I actually thought that instead of building a new museum rather work with that exhibition. When we worked on the project there were some oral histories, where they would be I don’t know, I don’t know where you could get that.”

In relation to the management capacity the second respondent (HAS2) raised other issues. It was stated that the individual responsible for heritage in Johannesburg has been doing his best with the minimal amount of staff and resources. She mentioned that the budget he has to work with is very small which limits the work that can be undertaken. HAS2 also mentioned that she believes that heritage is not intentionally destroyed, it happens as a result of not having the financial capacity or manpower to save all important heritage assets.

6.2.5 Development Plan for Walter Sisulu Square of Dedication

This section relates to the development of the Walter Sisulu Square of Dedication and the interview conducted with a representative from the Johannesburg Development Agency. It was argued that Kliptown was one of the JDA’s first development projects and the JDA’s role and responsibility with this area was to create a sense of rejuvenation and regeneration during the project time. This was based on a wide mandate identified as the development phase of the square, a monument which would potentially activate Kliptown and attract public and private sector investments to the area based on the idea that the square would serve as a civic spine, as well as a monument that celebrates the significance of the area. The JDA was centrally involved in the planning and commissioning of the square. The JDA was also involved in the precinct planning of the square, how it would work, what would be expected, how it would inject life into Kliptown. The development agency later revisited the site to identify what was working and what was not working on site. When asked the reasons why some of the programmes that were initially in the planning of the square did not make it to the final development the representative answered:

“To tell you the truth there has been a strong leaning towards the celebration of the Freedom Charter and it took more presidency than all the other things. I mean the square was designed to serve a whole lot of functions but I think politically at that time it was very much attached to the sentiment that it celebrates the Freedom Charter. I think the government of the time was invested in it serving that function more than anything, look at the events that has been done around the Freedom Charter you find that there are political events held in the square very

71 often, however they have taken a back seat in terms of the other elements including tourism and social development.

So, I’m not sure whether the political elements took presidency or whether other parties involved just did not serve the functions that they had to serve or was it a matter of poor planning and these developments were imposed on people. Look many things have been done to make the square work in the past however it remains that there isn’t enough foot traffic”.

Questioned about the hotel which was not part of the original plan it was stated that: “In the original planning the space where the hotel is now, was marked to be offices, civic offices and then all of a sudden there was a change and someone decided that a hotel would make a good thing to be located on the square and I’m not sure was this in anticipation with regards to high tourist numbers that the square would generate and so forth and maybe it was tied to the bigger tourism plan with expectations of buzz in the community of Kliptown.”. The next question asked of the JDA respondents was their opinions regarding the design of the square in terms of being ambitious considering the social demographics of the area. It was responded that “To some extent, yes, I think it was. I do think that the square sucked the life out of the fine green activities that were happening, there was a market at some point where the square was. There was a bit of vibrancy, then the square came and sucked out all the energy and blocked people out. So, I do feel to some extent it was slightly ambitious and also the community was not as involved as they probably should have been.

I feel that the city did not develop the square with the intention of having a community owning it. Yeah, the principles were there, but there were some gaps. With my interactions with community members around reasons why the square is not working as part of the activation plan, the one thing that came out is that they feel they don’t own that square, it’s owned by the government. Meaning that there was a certain level of planning that missed the opportunity of community participation. I mean right now if you as a community member want to use the square for whatever reason, you have to pay about 15 grand to book it and if you want to use the conference infrastructure that’s another different fee so it’s ridiculous if you are saying that you are designing it for the community, that is an indication that someone was looking too far ahead and missed a very critical element which is how do we get the community involved. Another flaw in the initial design and development of the square was that it was fenced off for a while after its development creating a feeling in the community that it was not really for them, so I’d say there are some blind spots to the initial conceptualisation”.

72

Lastly, the participant mentioned or reiterated that the heritage associated with the Congress of the People overshadowed Kliptown’s heritage being one of the oldest townships and having great people coming from this area. The new developments for Kliptown are urban renewal of the public environment which includes expansion of roads, expansion of sidewalks, and lighting in the area which would create a safe environment. The intention is to improve social cohesion and encouraging further investment and upgrading in the area.

6.2.6 Participants view on Kliptown and whether it is working as a tourist site.

The final theme is based on the questions relating to Kliptown and whether it is working as a tourist site and opinions with regards to what can be done to improve the situation in Kliptown. All 11 stakeholders answered this question. The responses have been divided into two groups, entities or business that operates on the square and tourism department representatives. The entities or business that operates on the square includes the Kliptown Museum, Local Tours guide, Tour Operators, and the crafts people.

Overall, these questions were answered with mixed feelings, the craftsperson and lifelong community member and CEO of Kliptown Our Own Trust expressed that they do not feel that Kliptown is working as a heritage or tourism site. The community member was quoted saying “Kliptown is being treated as some kind of disease that nobody wants to be associated with”. The Heritage Analyst interviewed who worked on the feasibility study of the Walter Sisulu Square of Dedication mentioned that it is not working as a tourism site: “In terms of tourism I don’t really know, the last time, a few years ago I asked for visitor numbers at the museum and what I got was about 4000 visitors per annum which is so low, I mean that is pathetic – so as tourism entity no I don’t think it achieved anything quite frankly, it means people don’t go there actually”. The second heritage analyst was uncertain if she could answer the question but based on what she had read about the township she did not see much reflection of the role this site played or think that the heritage is reflected adequately. Likewise, the tour guide, tour operator and museum curator all felt that the heritage site has not reached the potential it should give all the important history that is associated with the area, albeit it is still possible for it to become a success. The tourism industry representatives including the Gauteng Tourism Authority and Joburg Tourism, both reiterated that Kliptown is a heritage site and that

73 is really what matters, however that more needs to be done in terms of promoting it as a tourism destination, to create awareness and motivate people to visit this site.

The different stakeholders all observed that more needs to be done with regards to getting this heritage site to attract more tourists and in this regard the main issues related to the marketing and promotion of this site. Another concern expressed relates to the participation from the different role players involved with the rejuvenation of this heritage site as a tourism destination. The representative from Joburg Tourism stated that for tourism to be a success “It needs people from all angles all aspects of life, tourism aspects, Kliptown community, and the government to come into place have campaigns to bring people onto the same page, whereby people will understand what tourism is and what role they can play in tourism in the community and the economy as well because tourism is one of the most integral parts of our economy in South Africa so that’s what needs to be done”. The representative from the JDA’s opinion with regards to Kliptown working as a tourism site was: “No it is not working as a tourism site however, it has the potential to work if the right elements were put in place for it to work. It still is a site where people would like to visit, it’s just the way it’s packaged, curated, the way it’s sold and marketed that needs to be worked on to make it work”.

Further issues around marketing and promotion were aired by other respondents. The Day Tours Manager representing African Eagle stated: “I cannot as a private sector go advertise for Kliptown for the whole of South Africa as much as I’d love to do that. We need to go back to the drawing board, we need to engage with SA Tourism, Soweto Tourism, Gauteng Tourism, Joburg Tourism basically Gauteng and SA Tourism they need to come in as one hub, one table sit down and have a talk on what would make or how can we build or grow Soweto as a destination, how can we ensure that clients are safe in Johannesburg those are the things, those are the factors, so with not these stakeholders playing ball there’s not much field for us to do what we want to play on by promoting Kliptown”.

Other issues that hinder the success of Kliptown include funding and management. In terms of funding, specifically referring to the Museum, it was argued that “something has to change”. During the interview with the museum curator he constantly mentioned that they do not receive their own funding they depend on what they receive from the Hector Pieterson Museum: “As I said we don’t have enough budget, so we are trying our best, but we are quite sure, once we independent from the Hector Pieterson Museum lot of people will come we will be marketing through ourselves, now we are depending on funds from the Hector Pieterson Museum as our mother body financially. For example, we share same manager here at Kliptown Museum with

74 the Hector Pieterson Museum.” The Heritage analyst interviewed mentioned that on different occasions that he went to the Museum he found that it was closed and his views that something has to change drastically in terms of the management of the museum. He said “Okay so firstly I think the museum needs its own intervention because clearly it’s not working, so they need to just close it down or put in proper budgets to have permanent staff there and the most important thing there is the facility itself because if its maintained, it is cleaned, if you know when you arrive there it’s going to be open people will go, but you need someone to make it happen- so you need people with the right skills and experience to run it”.

The above answer was reiterated in terms of what stakeholders considered could suggest be done to improve Kliptown as a tourist destination. The most common response was enhanced marketing. It was argued by stakeholders that marketing efforts need to be improved, and this should not be done as an individual task but as a cooperation by different parties working on the WSSD or responsible for the square. Another solution mentioned was creating a ‘buzzing environment’ that would be intriguing to visitors, The Joburg Tourism official interviewed is quoted saying that “I mean tourism in Kliptown can be improved like the tourism in Vilakazi, they have a square which is actually an advantage to Vilakazi you know. There is so much that can be done it just needs people to sit down and think about opportunities around tourism and involve people it will be easier that way because if you involve people you involve more ideas to one place, implement those ideas and you will see change”. The heritage analyst continued that: “I think they probably need to relook at the facilities, like a tenanting strategy, saying look we’ve got these massive spaces available do we have the right tenants in, do we have the right businesses and what can be done to improve that if you are really serious about heritage tourism, educational programmes as well. I would imagine them focusing on educational programmes there and as you said Kliptown is an important place where Soweto basically started.” The representative interviewed at Gauteng Tourism also spoke on the efforts that need to be put in place: “At least the advantage of Kliptown is that it has an establishment, the precinct, which on its own is something good as the hotel is fully utilised. By virtue of it being fully utilised people who know the name Kliptown the advice would be people could come sleep there and don’t need to wake up to go to Vilakazi as the square will be an active spot”.

In a parallel response to what can be done to improve the situation, the JDA representative answered that there was a need to find an alternative spot on the museum which is located on “the wrong side of the square, divorced from where the tourism is and other activities

75 happen, so the best thing would be to move it to a better location in the square. Another thing that needs to be done is re-planning of the curation of the museum, it’s too old school and not appealing, it needs to include modern technology. The museum also needs to be remastered to include the missing heritage or elements needed to celebrate Kliptown as a place not just a site for the Congress of the People”. The second suggestion element would be “To market the place because right now the different destinations looking at the Soweto/Johannesburg tours, Kliptown is not prominently featured because of the way it is presented. Local entrepreneurs that will complement the heritage and create a better relationship with the community, also having traders inside the square not located outside. More needs to be done in terms of collaboration from the different stakeholders, Kliptown is now recognised as an important heritage site as it is part of the Liberation Heritage Route, which is another unique selling point so now it has two attracting forces it being part of the Soweto experience and it has been recognised as part of the Liberation Heritage Route which is a part of UNESCO’s tentative list”.

6.2.7 Field Observation.

Field observations at the Square confirm that the Johannesburg Development Agency has been active in terms of implementing the changes as indicated in the documents provided from them. From mid-2016 one can observe the upgrades taking place, the widening of roads, some greening of the square and fresh signage indicating that it is the Walter Sisulu Square of Dedication. This said, more signage needs to be erected indicating where the different businesses on the square are located. Signs also need to be located at the monument pieces because if individuals go to the site the meanings of the statutes or pillars are not apparent. One example is the nine pillars mentioned in the JDA document which represents the nine provinces of South Africa. In terms of the museum experience, it is located poorly as visitors cannot see it when visiting the actual square because it is hidden in a dark corner opposite the hotel entrance. Unless visitors intend to visit the hotel they would miss the museum which has no signage. The individual who claims to be the museum curator does not necessarily take individuals on the tour unless requested and the occasions that I went through the museum I did it incorrectly as there is no standard assistance or signage indicating where one should begin the tour and where you would end.

76 With regards to the information centre on the square, it was observed as quiet on all the occasions visited, as any other information centre. The centre had all the relevant information regarding Joburg and Soweto albeit much information was seen relating specifically to Kliptown. The staff was not eager to assist and eventually I was assisted at the Joburg Tourism office at Park Station. The crafts stand is very small and on my first few visits to the craft stalls the crafts sold were not authentic to South Africa or have any association with the heritage of the square or the area. Crafts on sale were typically representations of the big five and of masks, or wood crafts from other African countries. This said, on my 2018 visit to the site I noticed that the craft stalls now include beading authentic to South Africa and at one stall art is available from a local resident which includes Ndebele murals and images of the struggle icons who visited the site during the Congress of the People.

In terms of the architecture it was discussed in Chapter Five relating to Kliptown that not all the nodes and phases of the square have been completed as designed. Although spaces were included in the design, project funding dried up which resulted these offices spaces not being developed. However, on recent visit to the site I was advised that these spaces are in use and it hosts a HIV/AIDS testing and counselling, there is a licensing department, a college, art gallery dance studio and a career guidance department of labour office.

Overall, field observation reveals that the greater Kliptown still remains a slum and that notwithstanding recent housing developments in the area Kliptown is largely made up of shacks. On the tour through the entire township one can actually experience the inequality of development regarding the square and that poor living conditions of the majority of the community members. It was disclosed that most local families live in six roomed shacks with as many as 24 or more family members living in this space. On the walk-in tour one could see that there is no sewerage and that there is one tap that services an entire section of informal house. Further, the community members of the greater Kliptown do not have proper abolition facilities and still use the pit stilled toilets and lastly, they do not have electricity which has resulted in them connecting their own electricity illegally, which is very dangerous as the wiring is connected carelessly.

77

6.3 Tourist Survey Findings

This section of this chapter turns to analyse the quantitative research findings from the tourist survey. As indicated in Chapter Four these findings were obtained through quantitative survey collected at the Walter Sisulu Square of Dedication, with the participants being tourists visiting this heritage site. A total number of 55 surveys were collected, however three questionnaires were not complete so the total number of surveys analysed to be 52. As shown in Appendix 1 the survey consisted of 13 questions; 8 of being selective questions with the remaining 5 being open ended questions. The first four questions aimed to determine the type of tourist visiting the site and knowledge regarding the Walter Sisulu Square of Dedication. The subsequent questions discussed tourist’s expectations, experiences and impressions of the site. The last questions were an overall of the heritage site, which determined whether tourists would spread the word regarding the site.

Table 6.3.1: Types of tourists visiting the site (n=52, in %)

Type of Tourist Total Total in %

Leisure 11 21.1%

Visiting Friends & Relatives 6 11.5%

Business Tourists 11 21.1%

Religious Tourists 2 3.8%

Educational Tourists 13 25%

Other Types of Tourists 9 17.3%

In terms of types of tourists, respondents were asking to identify reasons for visiting the heritage site, which will help identify the types of tourists visiting the site. In total 21.1% indicated that the reason for visiting the site was for leisure purpose, 11.5% indicated they visited the site as a result of visiting friends and relatives, 21.1% identified themselves as business tourist, 3.8% identified themselves as religious tourists, 25% visited the site for educational purposes and 17.3% indicated that their visit to the site was for other purposes.

78

Table 6.3.2: Tourists knowledge of the heritage site (n=52, in %)

Total Total in %

Knowledge of sites heritage prior to visit. 33 63.4%

Unaware of sites heritage prior to visit. 19 36.5%

Table 6.3.2 shows whether the tourists visiting the site had any knowledge about Kliptown and the heritage associated to the area prior to the visit. It was found that 63.4% were aware of the township and the heritage associated with it and the remaining 36.5% were unaware of this information.

Table 6.3.3: Awareness around the sites UNESCO association (n=52, in %)

Total Total in %

Knowledge of sites heritage prior to visit. 26 50%

Unaware of sites heritage prior to visit. 26 50%

Table 6.3.3 determined whether tourists were aware that this heritage site was a part of the Liberation Heritage Route and associated to UNESCO. The result split evenly with 50% tourists aware of this information and 50% tourists was unaware of this information.

Table 6.3.4: Tourist’s sources of information regarding site (n=52, in %)

Information Source Total Total in %

Tour Operator/Guide 12 23.0%

Friends & Relatives 17 32.6%

Social Media 10 19.2%

Other Means of Information 13 25%

79 Table 6.3.4 shows the means tourists found out about this heritage site. From the 52 analysed surveys it was revealed that 23.0% tourists found out about this site through a tour guide or tour operator, 32.6% heard about this site through friends and relatives,19.2% heard about this site through social media and, the remaining 25% heard about this site through other means of information. The next section of material turns to discuss the tourist’s expectations, experiences and impressions.

Table 6.3.5: Tourists Impression of the site (n=52, in %)

Impression of the site Responses Total in %

Excellent 12 23.0%

Good 22 42.3%

Poor 6 11.5%

Fair 12 23.0%

Table 6.3.5 looks at the tourist’s impressions of the Walter Sisulu Square of Dedication on arrival. Overall, 23.0% tourists agreed that the first impression was excellent, 42.3%agreed that it was good, 11.5%mentioned that their first impression was poor, and 23.0% mentioned that it was fair.

Table 6.3.6: Emotions tourist expressed during the tour (n=52, in %)

Emotion Total Total in %

Sadness 10 19.2%

Pride 14 26.9%

Happiness 9 17.3%

Excitement 5 9.6%

Anger 3 5.7%

Disgust 1 1.9%

No Emotions 10 19.2%

80 Table 6.3.6 indicates the most important emotion felt by tourists during their visit to the Walter Sisulu Square of Dedication.

The first emotion expressed was sadness and 19.2% of the tourist felt this way, 26.9% individuals were expressed that they felt proud,17.3% expressed feelings of happiness, 9.6% expressed they had feelings of excitement, 5.7% expressed feelings of anger, 1.9% individual expressed feelings of disgust and 19.2% expressed that they felt no emotions on this tour.

Table 6.3.7: Elements that stood out most for tourist at site (n=52, in %)

Elements that stood out for tourists. Total Total in %

Nothing 10 19.2%

Informal Business Setup 7 13.4%

Architecture 10 19.2%

Socio State of surrounding community 6 11.5%

History 19 36.5 %

Table 6.3.7 discusses the elements that stood out most for the tourists while visiting Kliptown, 19.2% from the total number mentioned nothing,13.4% mentioned that it was the informal business set up in the area, 19.2% mentioned the architecture, 11.5% mentioned the current socio-economic state of the community and the largest share, 36.5% mentioned the history of the area. The results of the final three questions of the survey relate to the tourist’s overall experience during this tour.

Table 6.3.8: Tourist’s rating for the site (n=52, in %)

Element rated Poor Fair Good Very Good Excellent

Signage Total 15 15 15 4 3

Signage % 28.8% 28.8% 28.8% 7.6% 5.7%

81 Amenities Total 16 14 13 9 0

Amenities 30.7% 26.9% 25% 17.3% 0

%

Quality of Information Total 8 9 17 10 8

Quality of Information % 15.3% 17.3% 32.6% 19.2% 15.3%

Guide’s Knowledge Total 6 10 13 15 8

Guide’s Knowledge % 11.5% 19.2% 25% 28.8% 15.3%

Overall Experience total 5 14 18 5 10

Overall Experience % 9.6% 26.9% 34.6% 9.6% 19.2%

A number of elements associated with the Walter Sisulu Square of Dedication including signage, amenities, quality of information, guides knowledge and the tourists overall experience. Signage was not viewed favourably by the respondents. It was disclosed that 28.8% of the tourists rated the signage on the site poor, 28.8% rated it fair, 28.8% rated it good, 7.6% rated it as very good and 5.7% rated the signage as excellent. In terms of ratings for the amenities on site, 30.7% tourists rated it poor, 26.9% rated it as fair, 25% rated it as good, and 17.3% rated it very good. In terms of quality of information received on the tour, from the total number of analysed surveys the overall impressions were positive. The findings show that 15.3% individuals rated the quality of information they received as poor, 17.3% thought it was fair, 32.6% felt it was good, 19.2% felt that the quality of information received was very good and 15.3% tourists thought it was excellent. In terms of ratings associated with the guide’s knowledge of the site once more the responses were favourable. In total only 11.5% tourists rated it as poor, 19.2% individuals rated it as fair, 25% rated it as good, 28.8% tourists rated it as very good and 15.3% rated it as excellent. In terms of the tourist’s overall experience at the Kliptown, Walter Sisulu Square of Dedication; 9.6% tourists rated the experience as poor, 26.9% rated it as fair, 34.6% rated it as good, 9.6% rated it as very good and 19.2% individuals rated the experience excellent.

Table 6.3.9: would the tourist return and recommend Kliptown (n=52, in %)

Statement Total Total in %

82 Tourists interested in returning to site 40 76.9%

Uninterested to return to site 12 23.0%

Willing to inform others about site 42 80.7%

Not willing to inform others about site 10 19.2%

The questionnaire was concluded with the questions discuses in Table 6.9. When asked if tourists would visit this site again; 76.9% tourists said yes and the remaining 23.0% said no. When asked if they would encourage anyone else to visit this heritage site; 80.7% individuals said yes and 19.2%, no they would not encourage anyone to visit this site.

Both these responses reveal positive aspects of the Kilptown tour experience from the perspective of visitors.

6.4 Discussion of Key Findings

The final section of this chapter is an overview of all the data collected using triangulation as a method to substantiate the findings. The findings identified 25% of the total number tourists who visited the site, visited it for educational purposes. Within heritage tourist groupings these individuals would be identified as ‘greatly motivated’ cultural tourists or hard-core heritage enthusiasts as they travel specifically to learn about the heritage within a destination. It was observed that 63.4% of the visitors were aware of the township’s heritage and 50% of the tourists were aware of the sites association with UNESCO’s tentative list. Of note also is that 19.2% of the tourists heard about this site through social media and 23% of were aware of this site through tour operators/guides. Most tourists were made aware of Kliptown by friends and relatives and other sources of information.

The interviews with the tour operators and guides concluded that they need assistance from the tourism marketers to boost destinations such as Kliptown as they know the importance of such sites but cannot persuade tourists to ‘buy into’ a product if they have no knowledge regarding it. Important findings disclosed from representatives interviewed from both Gauteng Tourism Authority and Joburg Tourism were that Kliptown is one of many sites of importance that has been neglected in terms of recognition and promotion. These stakeholders are aware of the impact it has in terms of the tourism numbers within neglected areas. This said, these

83 stakeholders have begun a process to engage in activation programmes in Kliptown and use this heritage site to host tourism events. The consensus from the all stakeholders is that the marketing for this site needs to become a priority and more awareness needs to be created.

The focus will now turn to the rating of the site starting with qualitative, followed by quantitative and concluding with the field observation. The feedback from the qualitative data disclosed that the square was ambiguous, and contradicted the culture of the community, ultimately making it a waste of resources that could have been dedicated to bettering the socio-economic state of the surrounding community. It would appear that the community was initially meant to form part of the economic activity associated with the development, as to create cohesion between the private sector, government and the community. However, this has not been the case. Unsurprisingly, therefore, the community in turn does not associate with the square and has expressed resentment over the isolation. In terms of the quantitative research 19% of the visitors showed interest in the architecture of the square and these individuals identified it as the element that stood out most for them. In terms of signage 28.8% of the population agreed that the signage on site was poor, 28.8% thought it was fair and another 28.8% rated the square as signage as good. The response to the signage from the qualitative perspective and field observation was that the current state of signage is in need of improvement. The inadequate existing signage often leaves visitors confused. With reference to the amenities at Kliptown most visitors rated the state of these amenities as in need of considerable improvement. The qualitative and field observation information also confirmed that the amenities on the site are poor referencing the fact that there were no public restrooms, with visitors having to use facilities either at the museum or the hotel. With reference to the quality of information received 32.6% of the total number of visitors acknowledged that the quality information received was good, 17.3% rated the quality of information received as fair and 15.3% rated it as poor.

The ratings associated with the guide’s knowledge of the site were positive overall. This was confirmed in the qualitative research in which it was established that the tour guides were very familiar to this site and the history associated with it. Indeed, two of the guides interviewed are from the township indicating that they grew up with these stories. Guides working for the tour operator are trained to tell the correct story and from the beginning familiarise their selves within the communities. The link between information received and the guide’s knowledge of the site is essential as it determines the tourist’s experiences and what is taken away from the heritage site. Overall, tourists visiting Kliptown expressed satisfaction with the tour experience as good, albeit substantiating the qualitative findings that there is need for improvement for this site largely associated with the management thereof. These findings suggest that the

84 Kliptown heritage site must be improved in order to maximise its potential for heritage tourism and community development.

6.5 Summary

This chapter is the second to deal with research findings from the Kliptown study. In Chapter Five the focus was upon the analysis of the primary documentary sources to trace the development and planning of Kliptown as a heritage tourism destination. In this chapter the attention was upon the results from the semi-structured interviews and from the survey of tourists visiting and experiencing Kliptown as part of a Soweto tour. The final chapter of this dissertation presents the key research contributions of this study and summarises the key findings.

85

Chapter 7 Conclusion and recommendations

7.1 Introduction.

This concluding chapter presents a summary of hey findings of this research and offers a set of policy recommendation.

Arguably, for heritage tourism to be a success it demands great care in planning, development, management and marketing, (Nuryanti, 1996). Heritage tourism has the potential to enhance an appreciation of the past and creating a binding relationships between the past, present and future, encouraging a positive society (Nuryanti, 1996).

Even with the 2012 National Strategy on Heritage and Cultural Tourism as a guideline the development and promotion of this specific niche is still lacking in South Africa. This document was created to realise the global competitiveness of South African heritage and cultural resources, package it as a product ensuring sustainable tourism and economic development, however five years after the document was published this has not been the case. There are numerous heritage sites that are neglected not only in Gauteng but in South Africa due to many different reasons.

7.2 Research Study Summary.

My case study focused on Kliptown and the heritage of this community being neglected even with its great significance. The result of the data analysis indicates that Kliptown had a number underlying issues that led to this site of significance being neglected. From the findings of the research my recommendations of the study are categorised in three groups, recommendation with regards to the area studied being Kliptown, followed by recommendations with regards to South African heritage in general and lastly recommendations in terms of the entire study. This study aimed to provide insight on the following objectives.

Core Objectives

 Understand Heritage and heritage tourism within both the international and South African context, understanding the importance thereof.  Identify elements associated with the development of heritage sites.  Analyse why and how these become neglected.

86  Analyse initiatives that can be implemented to develop and rejuvenate areas with particular placed on Kliptown.

Secondary Objectives.

 Analyse and disclose the developmental history and the highlight the important events that has taken place in this township.  To investigate and identify the progress and development made in Kliptown, determining whether this heritage site is a success or failure.  To identify that can be implemented to promote this township.

7.3 Summary of Findings

The initial development plan of the square for Kliptown was intended to be something not only celebrated the heritage of the area but give something back to the community. This explains why this project had two elements of development; the first a social development which included the building of flats widening the streets adding street lights and greening the area. The second development that took place in the area was the development of the Walter Sisulu Square of Dedication which is an open air museum and is linked to the historical events that has taken place in the area. On paper the developmental plan appears sound but in reality this was not the case. One of the problems this project faced regarded funding or there miscommunication around the expenditure of this project which led to the downscaling of the development. Another problem of this project was liaising with community members. It is evident the community was initially not impressed and that much involved with the development and today they still feel the same sentiments towards the square. Community members play an important role in terms of gatekeeping and protecting monuments and in this case the importance of the community is seen, the disinterest is evident with this specific site. For many heritage sites community involvement is a key factor associated with its success as they place a lot of their emotions and efforts in making it work. These community members have the ability to tell the correct story. An example of a successful site is Vilikazi Street in Soweto, the primary attraction in this street was the fact that Nobel Prize winners lived in one street, however with community participation it became something bigger than that and today Vilikazi Street is one of the most sought after experience.

The marketing and promotion of Kliptown has also been played a role regarding the level of success associated with this site. One of the tourism company’s interviewed for the research mentioned that for years Kliptown has not received that attention it deserved but from 2017 they have been working actively to transform Kliptown into a sight that is associated with. The

87 idea was there, the history is there, and all the necessary elements are there to make Kliptown a successful heritage site, however it has not reached its full potential as a result of how the project has been implemented. Based on the research findings it is currently not working as a heritage site, however it has the potential to be a successful heritage tourism attraction.

Much attention and focus has been placed on the political association of Kliptown forgetting social heritage around the township, how it come to life, why this township was this popular amongst people and why it was selected to host the Congress of the People. Much of this heritage was narrated by one individual and is known by the older generation however, remains unknown to the younger generation currently residing in Kliptown. This is a great concern as it means that if the older generation is lost so is that part of Kliptown’s heritage. Many of the heritage assets associated with the social aspect of Kliptown still exists and a while back there was talk about preserving these assets but nothing has been done. These asset include the church where political meetings were held, the house in which Nelson Mandela hid for a while and the homes of Charlotte Maxeke and Gerard Sekoto. Overall, in terms of heritage scholarship, the research findings indicate that it is in a dire state and something urgently needs to be done in terms of a turnaround before a whole lot of these priceless assets are lost for good.

7.4 Recommendations

Recommendations as discussed relate to Kliptown, South African heritage tourism and for further review.

Recommendations for Kliptown Heritage, Walter Sisulu Square of Dedication and Kliptown Museum

 As the concern frequently mentioned by participants was that people need to be made aware of the significant site, my first recommendation would to intensify marketing around Kliptown and the Walter Sisulu Square of Dedication, with different tourism stakeholders involved in the area creating a conversation around this site and the importance of it. The research findings indicate that the marketing of this heritage is neglected, which influences the popularity of this destination among tourists

 My second recommendations for Kliptown is the need for collaboration from the different stakeholders involved in the area; if they all worked together instead of surviving individually tourism would be a success in the square as well as in the Greater Kliptown as there is an interesting story and element of attraction to the area.

88  The third recommendation is to consider Urban Regeneration as a solution to the Walter Sisulu Square of Dedication which is seen as a “White Elephant”. This would be an attempt to reverse decline through improving both the physical structure as well as the economy of the area. This theory has been proven to be a success in the Johannesburg Central Business District, specifically in areas like Braamfontein Yeoville and Maboneng which have previously faced decline. On the same point, the management of the square could partner up with initiatives like OPEN, which provides open working/meeting spaces for walk-in day use, nomadic worker teams; SMME’s and even larger companies, with the concept being they pay for the use of the space, wifi and coffee.

 With regards to the museum and the history indigenous to the area, my first recommendation would be to employ people that have a background with this history and who can inform the tourist. Secondly, to get a team that is available throughout service times. This recommendation is made on the basis that on different occasions the museum was visited by different individuals including myself and the museum would be closed with no explanation to why and when it was open. The team would be in their offices and not at the museum which meant that tours were not guided. The other histories regarding the area of Kliptown need to be included in the curriculum offered at the museum as it focuses mainly on the Congress of the People and the ANC neglecting the information associated with the area, being one of the first developed townships, which was also inclusive to all during political unrest.

 Another issue within the community relates to social development, people living in the township where the Congress of the People the event where the Freedom Charter was drafted and adopted still do not have their basic human rights fulfilled .

 My last recommendation for Kliptown is to implement greater efforts to build a relationship with the community. As mentioned by parties interviewed, members of the community feel they are not part of the site and this had led to them not being interested in the site. Khumalo et al. (2014) and Van der Merwe (2013) propose that reinforcing the alliance and communication with local leadership, heritage collaborations and public will be influential in achieving the goals of all-inclusive heritage countering the modern challengers of the tourism market

89

Recommendations associated with heritage.

 South African heritage continues to be a very sensitive and painful issue for many individuals. More needs to be done in terms of protecting all heritage in a manner that is not prejudice or offensive to any South African. The protection of heritage is a great concern as the assets are lost due to a number of underlying factors. My recommendation is associated with protection of heritage as heritage does not only face neglect but damage as well. Harsh laws need to be implemented and enforced to protect assets from being destroyed through political demonstrations or criminal activities (like theft) as these assets belong to the country and the destruction thereof is a criminal offense.

 There is a great need to create conversations exploring heritage in South Africa to have more academic talks on heritage as a means of nation building instead of looking at heritage as something of sensitivity. The people of South Africa need to be educated about historical events, to understand and celebrate it instead of being arrogant towards it.

 Funding would be another recommendation for heritage and the protection thereof. Sites can only be preserved when funds are made available and this has become a hindrance in the maintenance of sites with devastating results as seen with Museum Africa, parts of the Prison at Constitutional Hill and Winnie Mandela’s Brandfort home which was designated to be a museum. Funding is not only needed to protect the sites but also to employ individuals with the qualifications necessary to tell the correct story to the tourists.

 My last recommendation for heritage would be inclusivity of all heritage associated with South Africa, based on the fact that we are a diverse nation and have created many histories building up to that of Apartheid and the end of it. These histories include those of tribes and tribalism, military wars, the gold rush, urbanisation and even the influence sport had on uniting the nation. All these historical events are just a small part of the bigger picture associated with heritage and it needs to be embraced. If this does not happen soon a great amount of heritage could be lost

90 Recommendation for Future Research.

 Academic literature on neglected or endangered heritage in South Africa and the continent of Africa has been difficult to obtain in terms of this study, indicating there is need to encourage further research in this specific focus by other academics.

7.5 Limitations to Study

The first limitation I faced was associated with literature, as previously mentioned neglected or forsaken heritage is one of those understudied topics which makes it difficult to write and reference. My second limitation was experienced during my data collection process and this was simply the fact that two important associates of the WSSD namely, the Soweto Hotel and Mangers of the Walter Sisulu Square of Dedication, were not willing to participate in the research the reasons for that were unknown. In terms of the Soweto Hotel communication was sent to them, they asked for the questions, however when it came to the actual interview correspondence from them was a problem. In terms of the managers of the Square I sent numerous emails and went to the office on site however the front lady was not really helpful. No interview was possible.

91 Reference List

1. African National Congress. (1955). Freedom Charter. Available on www.anc.org.za. 2. Anderson, R. (2007). Thematic Content Analysis: Descriptive Presentation of Qualitative Data. Unpublished Manuscript. Available from: rosemarieanderson.com/wpcontents/uploads/2014/08ThematicContentAnalysis.pdf 3. Ashworth, G.J. (2008). Paradigms and paradoxes in planning the past. In M. Smith & L. Onderwater (Eds.) Reflections: Selling or Telling Paradoxes in Tourism, Cultural Heritage (pp23-24). Arnhem: ATLAS. 4. Babbie, E. (2010). The Practice of Social Research 13th Edition. Wadsworth: Cengage Learning. 5. Barac, M. (2007). Long Walk to Freedom: This Urban Square in Soweto Commemorates Political Struggle and Creates a New Forum for Township Life. Architecture Review. http://www.thefreeliberary.com 6. Beeho, A.J & Prentice, R.C. (1997). Conceptualizing the Experience of Heritage Tourist: A Case Study of New Lanark World Heritage Village. Tourism Management. 18(2) 75-87 7. Bialostocka, O. (2014). Using the Past to Build the Future: A Critical Review of the Liberation Heritage Route (LHR). Project of South Africa. Africa Insight. 44(2). September 2014. 8. Boeijie, H. (2010). Analysis in Qualitative Research. Thousand Oaks California: Sage. 9. Boyd, S. W & Timothy, D. (2001). Developing Partnerships: Tools for Interpretation and Management of World Heritage Sites. Tourism Recreation. 26(1)47-53. 10. Bremner, L. (2004). Reframing Township Space: The Kliptown Project. Public Culture, 16 (3) 521-531. 11. Butler, G. & Ivanovic, M. (2016). Cultural heritage tourism development in post- apartheid South Africa: Critical Issues and challenges. In H. Manwa, N.N. Moswete & Saarinen, J. Cultural Tourism in Southern Africa (pp. 58-75). Channel View Publications. 12. Chang, T.C. (1999). Local Uniqueness in the Global Village: Heritage. Austin. University of Texas Press. 13. Creswell, J.W. (2003). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative & Mixed Method Approaches. Sage publications. 14. Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative Inquiry & Research Design: Choosing Among Five Approaches. Sage Publication. Thousand Oaks. 15. Cudney, W. (2017). The Ironbridge Gorge Heritage and its Local Regional Functions. In Chodlkowska-Miszczuk, J & Szy-manska, D. Bulletin of Geography. Socio Economic

92 Series 36. Nicolaus Copernicus University. 61-75. DOI: http//dx.doi.org/10:1515bog- 2017-0014. 16. Cohen. Judin & Silverman, M. (2009). Kliptown Analysis. Unpublished Report prepared for Johannesburg Development Agency. 17. Cohen. Judin & Silverman, M (2009). Kliptown Neighbourhood Business District. Unpublished Report prepared for the Johannesburg Development Agency. 18. GAAP Architects, 2015a: Kliptown Public Environment Upgrade. Unpublished Report prepared for the Johannesburg Development Agency. 19. GAAP Architects, 2015b: Kliptown Public Environment Upgrade Phase 2. Unpublished Report prepared for the Johannesburg Development Agency. 20. Goodall, B. (1997). The Future of Heritage Tourism - Conference Proceeding. The Geographical Journal: Environment Transformation in Developing Countries, 163 (2). 243- 244. Available from : http://www.jstor.org/stable/3060207 21. Herwitz, D. (2012). Heritage Culture and Politics in the Postcolony. New York. Columbia University Press. 22. Ivanovic, M. Khunou, P.S, Reynish. N, Pawson. R, Tseane. L. &Wasung, N. (2009). Tourism Development Fresh Perspectives. Cape Town. Pearson. Prentice Hall. 23. Ivanovic, M. (2011). Cultural Tourism. Cape Town. Juta 24. Ivanovic, M & Saayman M. (2013). Telling or selling? Experiencing South African Cultural heritage tourism products. African Journal for Physical, Health Recreation and Dance, September (Supplement 2), 172-186. 25. Jamal, T. & Robinson, M. (2009). The Sage Handbook of Tourism Studies. London. Sage. 26. Jamieson, W. (1998). Cultural Heritage Tourism Planning and Development: Defining the Field and Its Challenges. APT Bulletin: The Journal of Preservation Technology, 29 (3), 65-67. 27. Judin. H, Roux. N & Zack, T. (2014). Kliptown: Resilience and despair in the face of a hundred years of planning. In P. Harrison, G. Gotz, A. Todes & C. Wray. Changing Space, Changing City: Johannesburg after Apartheid. Wits University Press. 28. Keyser, H. (2002). Tourism Development. Oxford. Oxford University Press. 29. Khumalo, T.Sebatlelo, P. & Van der Merwe, C.D. (2014). Who is a heritage tourist? A comparative study of Constitutional Hill and the Hector Pieterson Memorial and Museum, Johannesburg, South Africa, African Journal of Hospitality, Tourism and Leisure, 3. 1-13. 30. Kuljian, C.L. (2007). What Happened To Kliptown. University of Witwatersrand. Johannesburg.

93 31. Kuljian, C. (2009). The Congress of the People and the Walter Sisulu Square of Dedication: from public deliberation to bureaucratic imposition in Kliptown. Social Dynamics.35:2. 450-464. DOI: 10.1080/02533950903076584. 32. Leddy, P. D & Ormrod, J. E. (2010). Practical Research: Planning & Design. Merrill, Upper Saddle River, NJ. 33. Longhurst, R. (2010). Semi- structured Interviews and Focus Groups. In N. Clifford, S. French & G. Valentine. Key Methods in Geography. London. Sage Publications 103-115 34. Marschall, S. (2009). Landscape of Memory: Commemorative Monuments, Memorials and Public Statuary in Post – Apartheid South Africa. Leiden, Boston. Brill 35. Masilo, H. & Van der Merwe, C. (2014). Heritage tourists experiences of struggle heritage at Liliesleaf Farm Museum, Hector Pieterson Memorial and Museum South Africa. African Journal of Hospitality, Tourism and Leisure. Special Edition. 5 (3)-(2014). 1-20. 36. Mawere, M. & Mubaya, R. (2015).Colonial Heritage Memory & Sustainability in Africa: challenges, opportunities and prospects. North West Region Cameroon. Langaa 37. Mccorick, R. R. (2011). Marketing Cultural & Heritage Tourism: World of Opportunity. Denver, Colorado. Museum Store Association. 38. McKercher, B. & du Cros, H. (2002). Cultural Tourism: The Partnership between Tourism & Cultural Heritage Management. Haworth Hospitality Press. 39. McIntosh, A. & Prentice, R. (1999). Affirming authenticity: Consuming cultural heritage. Annals of Tourism Research, 26 (3), 589-612. 40. McLafferty, S.L. (2010). Semi- structured Interviews and Focus Groups. In N. Clifford, S. French & G. Valentine. Key Methods in Geography. London. Sage Publications. 77-88. 41. Meskell, L. & Scheermeyer, C. (2008). Heritage as Therapy: Set Pieces from the New South Africa. Journal of Material Culture, 13:153-173. Doi: 10.1177/1359183508090899. 42. Meskell, L. (2012). The Nature of Heritage: The New South Africa. West Sussex: John Wiley- Blackwell. 43. Meskell, L. (2015). Global Heritage: A Reader. West Sussex. Wiley. 44. Mills, J. & Birks, N. (2014). Qualitative Methodology: A Practical Guide. Sage. Los Angeles. 45. Moscardo, G. (1996). Mindful visitor: heritage and tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 23(2), 376-397. 46. Murray, M.J. (2013). Commemorating and Forgetting: Challenges for the New South Africa. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. 47. Noble, J. (2008). Memorialising the Freedom Charter: contested imaginations for the development of the Freedom Square at Kliptown. South African Journal of History Volume 23 Issue 1. 13-32

94 48. Noble, J. (2011). African Identity in Post Aparthied Public Architecture: White Skin, Black Masks. Farnham, Burlington. Ashgate. 49. Nuryanti, W. (1996). Heritage and Postmodern Tourism. Annals of Tourism Research. Annals of Tourism Research, 23 (3), 249-260. 50. Nuttall, S. & Coetzee, C. (1998). Negotiating the Past: The Making of Memory in South Africa. Cape Town. University Press. 51. Nyaupane, G.P, White, D. & Burdruk, M. (2006). Motive- Based Tourism Market Segmentation: An Application to Native American Culture Sites in Arizona, USA. Journal of Heritage Tourism 1 (2): 81-99. 52. Ochre Communications 2004: Kliptown Business Plan: Heritage, Education and Tourism. Unpublished report for the Johannesburg Development Agency. 53. Poria, Y. Butler, R. & Airey, D. (2001). Clarifying Heritage Tourism. Annals of Tourism Research.28 (4)1047-1049. 54. Rankin, E. (2013). Creating / Curating Cultural Capital: Monuments & Museums for Post– Apartheid South Africa. Humanities (2) 72-98. Available on www.mdpi.com/journal/humanities. 55. Republic of South Africa. (1999). National Heritage Resources Act 25 of 1999. Cape Town. Government Gazette. 56. Richards, G. (2001). Cultural Attractions & European Tourism. Wallingford New York. CABI Publishing 57. Richards, G. (2007). Cultural Tourism: Global & Local Perspectives. United States. The Harworth Hospitality Press. 58. Rogerson, C.M. (2002). Tourism-led local economic development: The South African experience. Urban Forum, 13, 95-119. 59. Rogerson, C.M. (2008). Consolidating local economic development in South Africa. Urban Forum, 19,307-328. 60. Rogerson, C.M. & Rogerson, J.M (2011). Tourism research within the South African Development Community: Production and consumption in academic journals, 2000- 2010. Tourism Review International, 15(1-2), 213-222). 61. Rogerson, C.M & Visser, G. (2007). Urban Tourism in the Developing World: The Southern African Experience. New Branswick, New Jersey. Transaction Publisher. 62. Rogerson, C.M & Visser, G. (2011). Rethinking South African urban tourism research. Tourism Review International, 15(1/2), 77-90. 63. Roux, N. (2009). Speaking of freedom? Heritage memory and public remembering in Kliptown. Masters Dissertation. Johannesburg: University of Witswatersrand.

95 64. Salazar, N.B. (2010). The glocalisation of heritage through tourism: balancing standardisation and differentiation. In S. Labadi & C. Long (eds), Heritage & Globalisation. London: Routledge, pp. 130-147. 65. Shepherd, N. & Robins, S. (2008). New South African Keywords. Johannesburg, Jacana/ Athens. Ohio University Press. 66. Sigala, M. & Leslie. (2005). International Cultural Tourism: Management, Implications and Cases. Amsterdam, London. Elsevier. 67. Sisulu, E. (2002). Walter & Albertina Sisulu in Our Lifetime. Claremont. David Philip Publishers. 68. Smith, M.K. (2009). Issues in Cultural Tourism Studies 2nd Edition. New York. Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group. 69. Suttner, R. & Cronin, J. (2006). 50 years of the Freedom Charter. Pretoria. University of South Africa. 70. Tyler, N. Ligibel, T.J & Tyler, I.R. (2009). Historic Preservation: An Introduction to its History, Principles and Practices, 2nd edition. New York. W.W Norton & Company. 71. Timothy, D.J. (1997). Tourism and the Personal Heritage Experience. Annals of Tourism Research. 24 (3): 751-754. 72. Timothy, D. J. (2011). Cultural Heritage & Tourism: An Introduction. Channel View. Bristol. 73. Timothy, D. J. (2014). Contemporary Cultural Heritage and Tourism: Development Issues and Emerging Trends. Public Archaeology 13(1-3)30-47. DOI10.1179/1465518714Z.00000000052. 74. Timothy, D.J. (2018). Making Sense of heritage tourism: Research trends in a maturing field of study. Tourism Management Perspectives. 25, 177-180 75. Timothy, D. J. & Boyd, S.W. (2006). Heritage Tourism in the 21st Century: Valued Traditions and New Perspectives. Journal of Heritage Tourism. 1:1, 1-16. DOI: 10.1080/17438730608668462. 76. Timothy, D. J. & Nyaupane, G.P. (2009). Cultural Heritage and Tourism in the Developing World: A Regional Perspective. New York. Routledge. 77. Tunbridge, J.E & Ashworth, G.J. (1996). Dissonant Heritage: The Management of the Past as a Resource in Conflict. Chichester. Wiley 78. Urban Dynamics 2010: Kliptown Business Plan and Urban Design Master Plan. Unpublished Report prepared for the City of Johannesburg. 79. Uriely, N. (2005). The Tourist Experience: Conceptual Developments. Annals of Tourism Research, 32 (1): 199-216.

96 80. Van der Merwe, C.D. (2006). The Use of Heritage and Environmental Justice in Urban Regeneration: The Case for Constitutional Johannesburg. African Geographic Review, (25) 63-84. 81. Van der Merwe, C.D & Rogerson, C.M. (2013). Industrial heritage at the ‘Big Hole’ Kimberly, South Africa. African Journal for physical, Health Education, Recreation and Dance, (Supplement 2), 155-171. 82. Van der Merwe, C.D. (2016). Tourist guides’ perceptions of cultural heritage tourism in South Africa. In: Szymanska, D. and Bieganska, J. Editors, Bulletin of Geography. Socio- economic Series, No. 34, Torun Nicolaus Copernicus University, pp 117-130. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/bog-2016-0039 83. Van der Merwe, C.D. (2016). The Organisation, Geography and Local Development Impacts of Heritage Tourism in South Africa. Unpublished Philosophiae Doctor (PHD Thesis). University of Johannesburg Auckland Park Johannesburg. 84. Van der Merwe, C.D. & Rogerson, C. M. (2018). The local development challenges of industrial heritage in the developing world: evidence from Cullinan, South Africa. GeoJournal of Tourism & Geosites. 1(21), 7-14. 85. Vilijoen, J. & Henama, U.S. (2017). Growing Heritage Tourism and Social Cohesion in South Africa. African Journal of Hospitality, Tourism and Leisure, 6 (4):1-15. 86. Wang, N. (2006). Itineraries and the tourist experience. In C. Minca & T. Oaks (Eds.), travels in paradox: Remapping Tourism (pp.65-76). New York: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. 87. Visser, G. & Hoogendoorn, G. (2012). Uneven tourism development in South Africa: Another ongoing struggle. African Insight, 42(2), 66-75. 88. Waterton, E. & Watson, S. (2015). The Palgrave Handbook of Contemporary Heritage Research. New York. Palgrave Macillan. 89. Wessels, E. (2016 November). Kliptown’s fall from grace. Caxton Urban Newspapers: Eldorado Urban News. 571. 90. Witz, L. Rassool, C & Minkley, G. (2001). Repackaging the past for South African Tourism. Daedalus, 130 (1):277-296. 91. The Congress of the People, Kliptown 1955. South African History Online www.sahistory.org.za. Congress of the People Archive. 92. Congress of People 1955: Freedom Charter. Accessed from Historical Papers Collection AD1137, University of Witwatersrand, Johannesburg. 93. Heritage Portal 2016: Our Vanishing Heritage – South Africa’s top ten endangered sites 2016. Available at www.theheritageportal.co.za 94. Johannesburg Development Agency 2010: Walter Sisulu- The Winners Design. Available atwww.jda.org.za

97 95. Johannesburg Development Agency 2014a: The Story of Kliptown: A JDA Perspective. Available at www.jda.org.za 96. Johannesburg Development Agency 2014b: Kliptown is a place of hope. Available at www.jda.org.za. 97. NWHO, (1999). Sustainable Tourism and Cultural Heritage: A Review of Development Assistance and its Potential to Promote Sustainability. Oslo. Nordic World Heritage Office. 98. RSA (2012a), National Tourism Sector Strategy. Department of Tourism, Pretoria. South Africa. 99. RSA (2012b), National Heritage and Cultural Tourism Strategy. Department of Arts and Culture, Pretoria, South Africa. 100. RSA (2013), The Liberation Struggle & Heritage Sites in South Africa. National Heritage Council. Department of Arts and Culture, Pretoria. South Africa 101. Saving Our Vanishing Heritage: Safeguarding Endangered Cultural Heritage Sites in the Developing World. (2010). Research conducted by the Global Heritage Fund. Palo Alto, California. 102. UNESCO. (2016). World Heritage Convention–World Heritage List [Online]. Available at www.whc.unesco.org/en/list. 103. UNWTO. (2013). UNWTO Tourism Highlights. Madrid. United World Tourism Organisation.

Stakeholder Interviews

104. Baloyi, K. (2017). Joburg Tourism. Park Station, Johannesburg. Duiker, G.J.M. (2017). Former Community Leader and CEO of Kliptown Our Own Trust. Private Home, Kliptown Johannesburg. 105. Kekana, H. (2017). Research Manager Gauteng Tourism Authority. Gauteng Tourism Authority Office, Johannesburg. 106. Maparura, C. (2017). Representative for crafts sales people on the Walter Sisulu Square of Dedication. Walter Sisulu Square of Dedication, Kliptown, Johannesburg. 107. Njwembe, E. (2017). Kliptown Museum Curator. Kliptown Museum Water Sisulu Square of Dedication, Johannesburg. 108. Nogrecg, B. (2017). African Eagle Day Tours Manger. African Eagle Head Office, Rivonia, Johannesburg. 109. Parker, A. (2017). Heritage Scholar & Analyst. Wits University, Johannesburg. 110. Shelembe, N. (2017). Owner of Nkuli Tours & Tour Guide. Soweto Hotel, Walter Sisulu Square of Dedication, Kliptown, Johannesburg.

98 111. Sikiti, L. (2017). Johannesburg Development Agency. Johannesburg Development Agency Office, Johannesburg. 112. Stoltz, J. (2017). Co-Founder Heritage Monitoring Project, Heritage Analyst. Breezeblock Cafe, Brixton, Johannesburg. 113. Gule, K. (2017). Chief Curator of Soweto Museums.8287 Khumalo Street. Orlando West Soweto.

99 Appendix 1 Survey Questionnaire

Dear Tourist/ Participant

Thank you for your participation.

My name is Genevieve Ray, a Masters student at the University of Johannesburg, under the supervision of Professor Chris Rogerson. The title of my research topic is Forsaken Heritage: the case of Kliptown. I am using the Walter Sisulu Square of Dedication National Heritage Site as the Case Study. Please complete the questionaire below which will only take a few minutes of your time.

______

Please mark your answer with an X

1. Reason for visiting the site? Leisure Visiting Friends and Relatives Business Religion Education Other

2. Prior to your visit to Kliptown / Walter Sislu Square of Dedication were you aware of this township and the heritage associated with it? Yes NO

3. Are you aware that the Walter Sisulu Square of Dedication is part of the Liberation Heritage Route, which falls under the UNESCO (United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organisation) Tentative List? Yes NO

4. How did you find out about this heritage site? Tour Guide/Tour Operator Friend & Relatives Social Media/ Internet Others

5. What were your expectations before visiting this site?

______

6. What was your impression on arrival to site? Excellent

100 Good Fair Poor

7. Please justify your answer selection in question 6.

______

8. What did you learn from this heritage site?

______

9. What emotions were experienced during this visit?

______

10. What stood out most for you on this tour?

______

11. Would you visit this site again?

Yes No

12. Would you encourage anyone to visit this site?

Yes No

13. Rating for experience on site Statement Poor Fair Good Very Excellent Good Signage on Site Amenities Quality of the information received Guides Knowledge of area Overall Experience

Thank you for your time  Enjoy the rest of your trip.

101 Appendix 2 Ethics Consent Form

School of Tourism and Hospitality.

Dear Stakeholder.

Thank you for your time. My name is Genevieve Ray a Masters student at the University of Johannesburg- under the supervision of Professor Chris Rogerson. The tittle of my reserach topic is Forsaken Heritage: the case of Kliptown. I am using the Walter Sisulu Square of Dedication National Heritage Site as the Case Study. Your time and input will be higly appreciated.All personal informantion will be kept strictly confiediential and it is simply for record purposes.Results will be captured in a manner that will be confidential and your response will be valuble in the research.

For any queries or questions please feel free to contact me- my contact details are below.

Genevieve Ray Masters Student (201181179) Email- [email protected] [email protected] Cell 0815345552

Consent Forrm

I ______(Name & Surame) confirm I have been informed about the study mentioned above. I also understand the reason for the interview and understand that all information will be used for the purpose of the study.

102