Experiences of Children in Three Neighbourhoods of Cape Town

Encounters with difference: Experiences of children in three neighbourhoods of Cape Town

Tiia Talvisara

Supervisor: Nick Schuermans

Master thesis presented in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Urban Studies (VUB) and Master of Science in Geography, general orientation, track ‘Urban Studies’ (ULB)

Date of submission: 10th August 2020

Master in Urban Studies – Academic year 2019-2020

Acknowledgment

I would like to acknowledge all the respondents from South Africa and Belgium helping me with this research, and especially the youth workers of Africa Jam Youth Outreach in Cape Town. I sincerely appreciate their time and contribution to this research. Furthermore, I would like to thank my supervisor, Nick Schuermans, for constant support and encouragement, also during both summer holidays in 2019 and 2020. Thanks to him I was able to get the best out of the time spent in South Africa. Finally, I cannot express enough thanks to the children of the afterschool programs in three neighbourhoods of Cape Town for participating to this research and introducing their community for me.

These two months have been amazing and eyes opening. I got new friends, felt being part of a community, saw a lot of hope and joy and got amazing role models…I wish to come back someday. Field Diary, 20.9.2019.

Cover picture: Mental map 1 Khayelitsha

Abstract

While cities in the world are becoming more diverse, the processes of adjusting to these changes and exposures towards differences are becoming more relevant to study. This research follows the interdisciplinary academic debate of the need to understand factors that can support the feelings of trust and tolerance towards difference in the urban encounters. The encounters with difference are examined by qualitative research case study in three suburban neighbourhoods in the city of Cape Town, South Africa. By focusing on children aged 7-15, identified as Coloured and black African, this paper tries to give a voice and to understand groups of citizens that are often underrepresented in the urban narratives. Research is analysing the places where children encounter difference, the forces that are mediating these encounters, and the effects of encounters to the feelings of trust and tolerance towards “the other”. Drawing on interviews with 30 children and 4 youth workers, participant observation, as well as analysing 55 mental maps painted by the children, this paper demonstrates that poverty and inequality are restricting children to their own neighbourhoods and thus decreases their opportunities to encounter difference. Research also shows how gang violence and cultural stigmatization in post-apartheid cities are increasing prejudices towards difference and how there is a need to take care of the basic fundamental conditions, such as trust and feelings of safety to create a meaningful social interaction. Finally, the findings of the research demonstrate how encounters that are made beyond one’s neighbourhood are increasing curiosity, trust and tolerance, and point to the need to acknowledge the relevance of parochial activity in meaningful social encounters with difference.

Keywords: Geographies of encounter, children’s geography, Cape Town, Mental mapping, Social realms.

Table of contents

1. Introduction ...... 1 2. Theoretical framework ...... 4 2.1. Geographies of encounter ...... 4 2.2. Social realms ...... 8 2.3. Children’s geography ...... 9 3. Introduction to the case ...... 10 3.1. Post-apartheid city ...... 10 3.2. Cape Town ...... 12 3.3. Three neighbourhoods ...... 14 4. Methodology ...... 20 4.1. Data collection ...... 20 4.1.1. Participant observation ...... 21 4.1.2. Interviews ...... 25 4.1.3. Mental maps ...... 29 4.2. Positionality ...... 30 4.3. Data analysis ...... 31 5. Findings and results ...... 32 5.1. Places of encounter ...... 32 5.1.1. Public realm ...... 33 5.1.2. Private realm ...... 36 5.1.3. Parochial realm...... 37 5.1.4. Limited conditions to encounter difference ...... 42 5.2. Forces mediating the encounters ...... 42 5.2.1. Gang violence ...... 43 5.2.2. Family and hobbies ...... 47 5.2.3. Presence of adults ...... 49 5.2.4. Post-Apartheid city ...... 50 5.2.5. Poverty ...... 51 5.3. Effects on social relations with difference ...... 53 5.3.1. Encounters with difference in public realm ...... 53 5.3.2. Encounters of difference in private realm ...... 54 5.3.3. Effects of encountering through parochial realm ...... 56

6. Critical reflections and conclusion ...... 58 6.2. Limitation of data and further research ...... 62 Bibliography ...... 64 Appendix 1, list of figures ...... 67 Appendix 2, list of mental maps ...... 67 Appendix 3, list of photos ...... 68

1. Introduction

Contemporary cities are going through rapid changes: globalization, migration, and changes in socio- economic profile and identity. Sensations of uncertainty can be said to be one character of the cities of post-millennium decades, causing fear and cultural anxiety (Zingandel, 2009). Furthermore, cities are facing more diversity of cultures and behaviour. Individuals are increasingly having encounters with strangers in urban spaces with whom they can’t relate to, or towards whom they may have strong perceptions (e.g. Bauman, 2003; Vertovec, 2007; Schuermans, 2019).

This paper takes a closer look at the city of Cape Town in South Africa and tries to understand the social encounters of its citizens in the urban realm. More profoundly, this research investigates the social encounters of children in three different neighbourhoods of Cape Town; Lotus River, Ottery and Mandela Park in Khayelitsha. The research goal is to better understand the dynamics of the children of Cape Town encountering difference and the unknown in urban spaces. The aim of this paper is to break down the social behaviour of children and to find solutions, in which conditions new encounters could make a positive and meaningful impact, thereby increasing tolerance in these diverse cities. Therefore, the research question is:

Where do children have encounters with difference in the City of Cape Town, which forces mediate these encounters and how does this affect social relations with difference?

The research question is answered with qualitative research methods: interviews, participant observations and mental mapping. Firstly, this paper analyses where children of Cape Town socially interact and encounter difference. Encounters are analysed through Lyn H. Lofland’s three social realms; public, private and parochial. Then, the forces that have an effect on these children's encounters are analysed by discourse analysis from the interviews. Finally, the connection between these forces and the social interaction of the children is studied, especially the feelings of tolerance and trust in the urban realm as well as the connection to the feelings of uncertainty and fear.

This paper has three main hypotheses based on each part of the research question. Firstly, one would expect to find variations in encounters with difference between distinct urban spaces, as well as between different social interactions. This hypothesis answers the first research question and is based on the theories of encounters and social realms, stating that the outcome of encounters is dependent on both spatial as well as socio-cultural factors.

For the second part of the research question, the segregation and fear caused by crime are expected to play a role in decreasing possibilities to encounter difference. This assumption is based on the literature of social and spatial segregation and post-apartheid cities, Cape Town has a history of apartheid and strong inequality in the city.

Thirdly, this research expects to find parochial activity creating meaningful encounters with difference, as creating possibilities for shared activity with different people. This is based on Lofland’s theory of social realms as well as the solution-based urban research to increase meaningful encounters in the cities.

This paper is constructed in the following order; the second chapter gives an introduction to the state of the literature of urban encountering, social realms as well as children’s geography and defines the main theoretical focus of the research. The third chapter opens the case study, starting from the concept of post-apartheid cities, moving to the city of Cape Town and finally introducing the three investigated neighbourhoods. The fourth chapter explains the data, methods and analysis process of the research. The fifth chapter presents the results of the analysis with the three-dimensional approach to the case studies – place, mediation and effect and analyses critically the main findings, and finally the conclusions of the research as well as limitations and recommendations for the further research are formed in the chapter six. The structure of this paper can be visualised in figure 1, going from top to bottom.

Figure 1 Structure of thesis

2. Theoretical framework

This research is situated within wider academic debates on theories of contact and interaction with different groups of people in the cities. This literature review focuses especially on the aspect of meaningful outcomes and increased tolerance towards difference in the studies of encounters (chapter 2.1), social realms (chapter 2.2.) as well as to the youth studies and children’s geography (chapter 2.3.).

2.1. Geographies of encounter

Contemporary cities are facing increasing movement of people from different parts of the world. Concentration of languages, origins and goods are making these cities more diverse with regards to culture, religion and values. Cities can be seen as clusters of agglomerated knowledge and power, but also as clusters of diversity and difference.

Zygmunt Bauman (2003) approaches cities as places where strangers encounter each other. These strangers are at some level unknown for a person perceiving them. The difference often means a different cultural background, such as language, ethnicity, religion and lifestyle (Schuermans, 2019). Furthermore, differences can be divided between two kinds of types. First type is ‘cultural other’ who is different in its values and habits, and second type is ‘social other’ who differ from the socio- economic background (Bauman 2003). Furthermore, Diken (1998) emphasizes how there can be recognizably different levels of strangeness, depending on the fear that is arising from it. The greater the fear is towards the other, the greater the degree of strangeness.

This research focuses to approach difference mainly from cultural and socio-economic aspects. Also, because this research is situated in the context of post-apartheid city, difference is determined on racial and ethnic perspectives. However, to understand the perceptions of the children in their everyday encounters, the concept of difference is in the end stretched to address simply the unknown people that children encounter.

These rapid changes in the cities are causing uncertainty in their socio-economic profile and are often being processed through moral panics and gated communities (Rieniets et al., 2010, 19). ‘The city of bunkers’ is an architectural practice where security is planned through opacity and isolation of groups with common interests and patrolling is made both from inside privately, and from outside publicly (Zingandel, 2009). Enclave urbanism, urban structure of distinct areas by specific socio-economic groups, is one example of this and is common in countries with high inequality (Schuermans, 2016; Zingandel, 2009).

Hence, encounters can increase the fear towards the unknown, and the outcome can be manifested into a physical form. Bauman describes this kind of reaction towards difference as a ‘city of fears’, where borders and enclaves are being built to prevent facing the ’other’. Many contemporary cities are facing mixophobia, wherein neighbourhoods and local communities have an aim to increase sameness in the area in order to avoid encountering difference. People seek similarity from others and tend to avoid mixing socially in the urban realm, which might prevent the feelings of belonging and community in a broader perspective. (Peterson, 2017, 1069).

However, at the same time many cities are trying to increase social mixity as a reaction to the diversifying urban realms. Social mix is seen as ‘good planning’ to reduce stigmatization of social housing, and trust that tolerance would increase when people from different cultures and socio- economic backgrounds are evenly distributed. Still, even if people would share the same community, they might not socialize together. (Arthurson, 2018.)

Encounters with difference can facilitate the creation of new common identities and cultures between individuals. As a counterpart for the ‘city of fears’ Bauman describes the opposite reaction towards the strangers as the ‘city of hopes’, where difference is rather embraced, and encounters with the ‘other’ are seen as possibilities to learn to live better together (Bauman, 2003). The locations of encounters is a way to focus on meaningful outcomes in the everyday encounters of difference in the urban realm.

The outcome of encounters depends on the context and conditions around the social interactions. Many urban scholars argue that encounters in certain meaningful and optimal conditions can reduce perceptions towards the unknown (e.g. Valentine, 2008, Allport, 1954; Muyeba & Seekings, 2010; Schuermans, 2019). Contact hypothesis theory from Gordon W. Allport (1954) supports the idea of decreased perceptions between different groups, especially between majority and minority groups when the conditions for new encounters are optimal and equal.

The first hypothesis of this paper expects to find differences in encounters of the children depending on the nature of urban spaces as well as the conditions of the social interaction. There can be many recognized conditions where encounters can generate meaningful contact and reduce negative prejudices of others. One condition is when people meet each other in a positive situation with equal conditions ( Allport, 1954; Pettigrew & Tropp, 2006). Egalitarian or optimal conditions refer mainly to shared common identities or common goal, for example when having similar income or living conditions (Muyeba & Seekings, 2010). For instance, a work office can be a place where people have the same starting point and intention for the encounter.

Furthermore, feelings of safety in urban space is a condition that can facilitate a positive impact in social encounters (Reay & Lucey, 2002). Shared inclusive spaces in the urban realm go hand in hand with a feeling of safety. Shared spaces bring people together from different backgrounds and facilitate the development of common identities. (Vanstiphout & Proost, 2018, 35). This research tries to find these kinds of optimal situations and places for meaningful encounters among children in the first part of the research question.

When equal conditions and feelings of safety have normally a positive effect for tolerance and trust towards difference, there are factors that can prevent the emergence of these feelings. Territorial identities and stigmas that some communities and spaces carry can affect the encounters with difference by decreasing the willingness and curiosity to interact with ‘the other’. Besides focusing on the physical spaces, prejudices and stigmas towards regions and communities reflect on the people associated with these territories (Nayak, 2019; Wacquant, 2008).

Therefore, the prejudices that people have towards each other don’t often follow the intended behaviour in public spaces. For example, a person who has tolerance towards homeless people, might avoid catching the gaze of one of these people because of the feeling of uncomfortableness and having the ‘anxiety of privilege’ (Sennett, 2003). Hence, by increasing meaningful encounters between different groups the gap between prejudice and behaviour should be addressed and, in this way, make social change possible (Valentine, 2008; Schuermans, 2019).

There can be recognized unevenness in encounters with difference within a city between people from different transferable skills as well as between cities in different countries. Some people, especially from the global north and from developed countries are indeed very global and face differences in many situations. At the same time less wealthy groups are tied to their homes and fixed to their ‘locality’, having very limited chances to encounter difference or experience the ‘postmodern freedom’ of travelling. In this way today’s polarization of groups can be divided between nomads, the ones who have the means to encounter difference by traveling from one place to another, and the settled groups that are conditioned to stay in place with decreased chances to go beyond their communities. (Bauman, 1998b, 92.).

For the second part of the research question, the mediating forces affecting the encounters of the children in Cape Town can have indications of poverty and unevenness. As a hypothesis it is expected that inequality in Cape Town is causing the decrease in opportunities to encounter difference for the children, and that there are differences between children from different neighbourhoods and socio- economic backgrounds.

Dixon, Tropp, Durrheim & Tredoux (2010) state that the research to reduce perceptions between different groups has been focusing too often on the advantaged groups, and their antipathy behaviour, which leads to action to change these advantageous people somehow. One example of this is the research around enclave living and the upper-class perceptions towards people from lower socio-economic classes. Furthermore, it seems that often interaction between different groups of people can happen easier in poorer neighbourhoods than wealthier, because people have more reasons to encounter each other “where walls are lower, gardens smaller, and people walk rather than drive down the street” (Muyeba & Seekings, 2010, p. 3). Therefore, there can be a recognized need for research about the perceptions of the more disadvantaged groups in encounters.

To refresh the memory, I repeat that Allport’s contact theory stresses the prejudices, or bias among conflicting croups and that the solution is to build equal conditions for peaceful co-existence in the cities. However, contact theory is being criticized by its limited views and few of the studies come from Cape Town. Critics state how Allport’s contact theory is not aiming to get rid of prejudice itself in encounters but is focusing strongly just to replace the negative ‘hate prejudice’ with positive feelings, or ‘love prejudice’. This can be problematic thus the definitions between these two are dependent on social constructions and are often based on dualistic assumptions of what is good and what bad. Furthermore, this theory is not focused too much on implementing its interventions on interracial and interethnic relations and in this way leaves the context around the contact vague. Instead of focusing analysis on the contact, attention should be paid rather to the social and political situation around it, and to the feelings of belonging and regarding the critical antiracist praxis. (Zuma, 2014; Erasmus 2010; Reicher, 2007.)

Figure 2 presents the summary of the conceptualization of the geographies of encounter by Schuermans (2019). Encounter can be observed chronologically through time; from shared space to the encounter and finally to the effect, yet it can be observed through mediating forces that affect the nature of encounter. This research uses Schuerman’s figure to locate the outcome of the analysis with regards to the current debate around the geographies of encounters. This is done by forming a personalised analysis graph by dividing the three research questions into three chronological dimensions; space, mediation and effect. Instead of observing physical spaces, this research uses social realms (public, private and parochial) as another dimension.

Figure 2 Summary of the Geographies of encounter by Schuermans (2019)

Hence, this research is interested in encounters of the children beyond their own neighbourhoods. Kwan (2013) suggests focusing on group movement and feelings in different places instead of investigating only certain places where different groups frequent. This liberates the research from boundaries of place and time.

2.2. Social realms

When discussing encounters with difference in cities, it is important to recognize cities as social environments, not just physical spaces. Urban research often strives to understand the social behaviour of people through spatial dimensions, yet social behaviour, or feelings of privacy and publicity are not necessarily tied to a place. Lyn H. Lofland (1998) divides the social being of people in three realms, the public, the parochial and the private. Instead of focusing on physical places in the city, these realms should perhaps be viewed as social, not spatial environments. Realms exist in a physical place, but they are not dependent on the place but the nature of activity and sociocultural elements.

When one focuses on the physical place itself, the public realm emphasizes the public aspect in the social dimension and social territory. For example asking directions in the city can happen in public realm. The private realm is in opposition with the public realm: social interaction happens in private situations, where persons are familiar to one another, e.g. family dinner. The parochial realm refers to the “world of the neighbourhood, workplace, or acquaintance networks” (Lofland, 1998, p. 10.) In

8 other words, the parochial realm is a social dimension between public and private, determined by the common purpose of being or activity shared by the people that might otherwise be strangers to each other. In this parochial realm, parochial activity is made. For instance, participating in a concert or a church service are examples of parochial activity. Even if people might be strangers towards each other, they all share the same purpose of being and work towards the same goal during that moment.

In the studies of geographies of encounters, many scholars support the shared parochial activity as an efficient way for meaningful encounters of difference (e.g. Peterson, 2017; Amin, 2002; Valentine, 2008). Semi-public shared spaces are important venues for encountering difference and to negotiate diversity (Peterson, 2017). Even if public spaces such as parks and streets are places that are used by different people, they don’t encourage social interaction in the same way as places that are semi- familiar or allow people to disrupt familiar patterns. These semi-public spaces allow people to practice encountering differences. (Amin, 2002.)

Indeed, even if encounters with difference happen in physical places, they are strongly shaped by social and cultural processes. People mainly encounter strangers in public spaces. Lofland states that encounters in the parochial realm in public spaces could increase tolerance towards difference as well as social cohesion. Following these statements, the hypothesis for the third part of the research question will attempt to find evidence that encounters in the parochial realm are increasing tolerance and trust towards difference for the children.

It is important to regard the effects of encounters across difference realistically and to avoid romanticizing the effects or to see only the beneficial side of it. Increasing interaction between different groups doesn’t necessarily create just positive effects and can be in the worst case scenario an experience of fear and anger. Furthermore, encounters with certain conditions can create institutionalized inequality as well as prejudices and conflicts between groups of people. These kinds of experiences in encounters across difference can strengthen the classification of groups under stereotypes and increase the urge to maintain avoidance of encounters with difference (Schuermans, 2013). This is why it is important to have a careful and accurate approach towards the situations of encounters and observe which conditions can increase the tolerance of difference and togetherness.

2.3. Children’s geography

Many social geographers state how much of urban geographical research as well as research of encounters is focusing on adults and thus empirical work positioning children and youth in urban research is required (e.g. Hammond, 2020; Valentine, 2008; Reay & Lucey, 2002). Children’s

9 geography is an approach to study cities and urban life from a minor perspective. ‘The child’ is both biologically defined as well as a socially constructed concept of a person, identified often as being under 18 years old.

Academic literature recognizes how children are often seen as the ones who need protection or conversely the ones who need to be controlled. Questions of safety seem to be an important element in the children's geography, and comparisons between safe and unsafe zones are often being made (Reay & Lucey, 2002). This imagination is reflecting also to the use of space for children in urban spaces: they are often pushed to spend time in specific places allocated for them and are similarly increasingly absent form general urban cityscape (Hammond 2020, p. 44).

Furthermore, children can be seen as a group which is under the influence of more advantageous groups. Children in general are not often represented in urban research nor in local decision-making processes. Yet, as minors, children often need to adapt to the current living conditions.

Children’s geography has the potential to see alternative ways of viewing urban spaces from the point of view of younger generations. Geography literature recognizes how age can be a factor in increased tensions between groups and for competition of physical spaces and social domination in socially diverse neighbourhoods (Watt and Stenson, 1998; Valentine & MacDonald, 2004).

Besides horizontal unevenness in the world, there can be a recognized generational polarisation of wealth. Gill Valentine (2018, 3) argues that in the studies of the geographies of youths, research requires a shifting focus out of preoccupation of boundaries towards contemporary structural problems and generational inequalities giving more the voice for the youth. The financial crisis in 2008 has furthered increased the generational inequality in wealth between the youngest and older generations. Hence, this increases the importance to focus on the youth as a group in this research.

3. Introduction to the case

3.1. Post-apartheid city

South Africa has a long history of segregation of people, which culminated in the system of apartheid being introduced, a policy of systematic and institutional racial segregation between racial groups and discrimination against non-white groups from 1948 until the early 1990s. The governmental body, The Group Areas Act, divided all social spaces and residential areas for different racial groups.

What is common today between the cities of South-Africa are the features of the post-apartheid city. Still, after over 20 years since the end of apartheid, most of the neighbourhoods in South Africa consist of one race of people. Children are attending mono-racial schools and inter-racial families are rare. Race as a division and identity is still present in South Africa and the effects of apartheid-era on inequality cannot be avoided in research. In the research of segregation, the population of South Africa has been divided into Whites, coloured and Black Africans.

Although systematic segregation ended along with the aparatheid, socially constructed racial divisions and the lack of common identity and solidarity still exist in South Africa. (Muyeba & Seekings, 2010.) Even though the legal and political framework of segregation has disappeared, the socially constructed framework and informal segregation still exists, and racialized identities still matter.

Lately, the concept of neoapartheid is being introduced in the post-apartheid studies. Neoapartheid refers to the conditions with neoliberal tendencies, and this can be recognized in South Africa from the post-1994 state (Pinnock 2016, p. 10). Even if coloured and Black African groups were free and equal in the eyes of the law, they were not given any facilities and guidance to respond to the needs of survival in the capitalistic system. The lack of know-how to create their own businesses and jobs led to unemployment in their communities.

Nonetheless, there can be seen marks of appreciation for racial mixing and the socio-economic urban boundaries are less solid than they have normally been seen in post-apartheid urban research. In the current debate, the presence of race is dominant and can prevent analysis of the urban space in other dimensions. Teppo (2018) argues, how interracial relations have been improving over the two decades that she has been doing fieldwork in South Africa. Furthermore, she sees that the segregation today in South African cities is increasingly colour-blind and focusing more on economic inequality, although inequality is still mainly divided by the colour of one’s skin and consequences of colonialism and apartheid. Even if people have little interest towards each other, increasing racial toleration and reduced prejudices are more present in mixed neighbourhoods. Egalitarian conditions, like the same income level, allow people to interact and trust each other. (Muyeba & Seekings, 2010; Teppo, 2018.)

Hoyssay-Holzschuch & Teppo (2009) state, that after apartheid urban spaces in South Africa have been going through changes towards publicization, processes through which spaces are made more public. Besides shopping malls, the process can be recognised in parks and places of worship, and in this way the marks of social cohesion and ‘shared experiences’ can be increasingly observed.

Indeed, since the end of the Apartheid, the research of urban spaces in South Africa has been focusing substantially on analysing the consequences of segregation, exclusion and inequality in the cities. Lately, solution-based research has been in the field of urban studies which is focusing on inclusion and similarities of people instead of socio-economic borders. Many researchers studying South African cities (e.g. Teppo, 2018; Erasmus, 2010; Reicher, 2007) state, how it is important to make a transformation in the research focus towards investigations about social feelings of belonging and inclusion. Hence this is also the aim of this paper, to examine the encounters and behaviour of people in the diverse city and to find elements that increase social togetherness besides the features led by perceptions and fear towards the other.

3.2. Cape Town

This research is investigating the communities in the city of Cape Town, South Africa. Compared to the cities in the western and developed countries, Cape Town among other African cities has distinguishable features such as a colonial past that is affecting the social relations. Cape Town, a city in South Africa is a holiday destination for many people because of its nature and the Table Mountain dominating its landscape. It is an African city, despite having a façade or western commercialism and urbanity in certain parts (Pinnock, 2016). The history of Cape Town is filled with diversity because of the colonialist past with slavery and land wars.

Compared to other cities in South Africa, Cape Town is an atypical city in the country. While the majority of the citizens of South Africa are Black African, the city of Cape Town has been for most of its history mainly white and coloured. This is based on the descendants of colonial settlers from Europe and slaves that they brought from the Dutch East Indies. Just after the 1980s the Black African population grew in the city naturally and due to the rapid immigration. Today, over a third of the citizens are Black African. Citizens of Cape Town differ with respect to their religion, lifestyles as well as language; Afrikaans, English or isiXhosa. (Muyeba & Seekings, 2010; City of Cape Town, 2017.)

Still, maybe one of the most significant elements in the history of Cape Town is the era of Apartheid, racial segregation of people during 1948-1994. The white population of Cape Town, and of the whole country, segregated the people of the city depending on their race. Race was defined both culturally and physically. Since the official apartheid ended in 1994, the social mixing and equality of people has been recovering very slowly, and in some cases even worsening.

Today, Cape Town is a very diverse city. Its citizens have roots that can be traced not only from South Africa, but also from surrounding African countries and from Asia and Europe because of the slavery

12 past. Being a post-apartheid city, segregation is a significant feature of Cape Town compared to other cities in the world. Furthermore, Cape Town is one of the most unequal cities in the world, having a remarkable population of young people under 30 years old fighting increasingly for their lives due to poverty, overcrowding and gang violence.

More than half of the population of South Africa lives in poverty, and only 20% can be considered as middle class. The distribution of poverty is unequal in South Africa; the poorest people are mainly the Black African population, children under 17 years, females and people from the rural areas. The poverty of Black African and Coloured population is increasing constantly. (Chutel & Kopf, 2018; Head, 2018.) The middle-class in Cape Town is mainly white. The white population living under the poverty line is only 0,4% of the whole population of South Africa. Income inequality has been constantly increasing in the Western Cape Province between 2010 and 2016 (Lehlola, 2017; City of Cape Town, 2017b, p. 13).

Hence, Cape Town has features of insecurity and growing inequality in the population and between different groups. These features are persistent and have been increasing in the post-apartheid era. (Chutel & Kopf, 2018; Head, 2018.) Cape Town is struggling with poverty and low standards of living for its citizens. Rising unemployment, low commodity prices, higher consumer prices and policy uncertainty are all elements behind this. The city’s unemployment rate was estimated to be 24,8% in 2020. Furthermore, the city's food poverty has been increasing for the past ten years 2006-2017. (City of Cape Town, 2017b; Democratic Alliance, 2020).

In Cape Town one-fifth of the population is living in state-built subsidized houses in low-income formal neighbourhoods. An area called the Cape Flats, includes state subsidised housing complexes, to where coloured and Black African’s were forced to move during the apartheid. Instead of moving whole communities, conjugal families were individually relocated to these statehouses. As a consequence, the solidarity and trust between communities and neighbourhoods disappeared. (Pinnock, 2016.)

Cape Flats are in the fringes of Cape Town, hidden from the sight of tourists, but there lives most of the population of the city. These areas are not very well organized or maintained from an urban planning perspective. Citizens in these areas don’t own property, are mostly unemployed and are under constant fear of gang violence. People that were forced to move there had to start a new life in these areas without sufficient work opportunities or guidance to create their own businesses. This created an economic decline and unemployment within the communities. In the time of urban industrialization, coloured people in the city of Cape Town didn’t have enough political clout

13 developed to ensure the share of urban development and profits, which has been one reasons for the development of the increasing inequality and gang violence after the end of the apartheid until present day. (Pinnock 2016, p. 22).

Cape Town can be seen as a crime driven city. It has the highest crime rates in the whole country. In 2019 there were 3065 murders among the city's population of 4,5 million, which was the all-time record of the city's history. The murder rate was 68,3 murders per 100 000 population (2019), which made it 8th most violent city in the world. Between 30 and 70 people are murdered in the city every weekend, mainly in the area of cape flats and townships. Weekly shootings and robberies prevent access to the public space for the majority of inhabitants and the only solution left for the local state is to increase the volume of fences and to assign more soldiers and police authorities to these neighbourhoods. (Business Tech, 2020; Business Day, 2019; IOA, 2019.)

Besides crime itself, the fear of crime is strong in Cape Town and the levels of residential protection and “architectures of fear”, in the landscape shaped by preoccupation of fear, have increased in the city (Lemanski, 2004; Schuermans, 2013). As a consequence, the local governments and moral entrepreneurs (e.g. church and private security firms) are dependent on the process of the gang control industry (Hallsworth, 2011). In this way crime as well as the fear of crime strongly affects the economy of the city (City of Cape Town, 2017b). Other serious consequences from the fear of crime and the architectures of fear is the social polarization of groups, which takes its physical form for example in enclave living and gated securitized communities (Lemanski, 2006, Schuermans, 2016). Furthermore, Lemanski (2004) describes this process as ‘new apartheid’, whereas the aim of urban planning is to make living safer.

3.3. Three neighbourhoods

In order to do the empirical part of the study, case studies of three communities which are located in the north-east parts of the Cape Town have been formed. Lotus River and Ottery are suburbs next to each other, and Khayelitsha is a large township, located further east (see Figure 3). These communities have been chosen for this study because of the possible access point to data via the Africa Jam Youth Outreach organization by opting to volunteer in the youth program. Furthermore, the interest to research less privileged communities where encounters could happen more easily led me to seek volunteers from the communities in the area of Cape Flats.

Figure 3 Afterschool programs in the city of Cape Town

FigureCompared SEQ Figure with\* ARABIC the 34 relatively MMapap of Cape diverse Town, afterschoolcommunities programs of the in three centre communities of Cape Town, the three neighbourhoods that are investigated in this research are rather homogeneous from the social, racial and cultural perspective. Lotus River, Ottery and Khayelitsha are all very densely populated urban suburbs with high unemployment rates and significant numbers of young populations under 30 years old. Mono-racial communities are still very typical in South Africa, and mixed neighbourhoods are rare, but slowly increasing. This is why besides encounters inside one’s neighbourhood, this research is interested in encounters beyond the neighbourhoods.

Lotus River and Ottery can be identified as part of the area of Cape Flats. They are neighbourhoods with mainly coloured population, most of its inhabitants under 30 years old. Lotus River has a population of 38 143 citizens, and 93% are categorised as coloured. Unemployment rate in the neighbourhood was 19,53% in 2011 and the monthly household income average was R3200-R6400 (150-300 euros).

Ottery has 17 942 citizens and 72% of them were coloured in 2011, 6,9% Black African and 8% White, when in Lotus River only 0,3%, and in Khayelitsha 0,1% were white. The monthly household income average in Ottery is R 12 801-R 25 600 (600-1250 euros) and unemployment rate 8,59%. (City of Cape Town, 2013 a, b, c). The main languages in both Lotus River and Ottery are Afrikaans and English.

Photo 1 Lotus River, 2019

Photo 2 Lotus River, Google street view (2014)

Photo 3 Lotus River, Google street view (2014)

Photo 4 Ottery, Google street view (2014)

Photo 5 Ottery, Google street view (2014)

The third neighbourhood, Khayelitsha, is the second-largest township of South Africa. It has 391 749 residents, 99% of them are categorised as Black African, and the main language is isiXhosa. Khayelitsha includes many different sub-neighbourhoods, some of them mainly with formal houses and some of them fully informal settlements. The community has 54 primary schools and one college.

In 2013 the monthly household income average in Khayelitsha was between R1-R1600 (0-80 euros), and 55% of the population lived in informal dwellings. (City of Cape Town, 2013.) The highest unemployment rate in the Cape Metropolitan area was recorded in Khayelitsha (31,8%) during the period of 2006-2016 (City of Cape Town, 2017b). The youth unemployment is even higher, reaching the peak of 60% (Elitsha, 2014). This research focuses on the neighbourhood of Mandela Park inside Khayelitsha, because the afterschool program is situated there. Compared to other areas inside Khayelitsha, Mandela Park has more formal houses than the average landscape of the neighbourhood and the atmosphere is more peaceful than in some crime driven areas inside the community. The area is coloured turquoise in the Figure 4 below:

Figure 4 City of Cape Town (2013) Census Suburb Khayelitsha

Photo 6 Khayelitsha, Mandela Park Google street view (2014)

Photo 7 Khayelitsha, Mandela Park Google street view (2014)

Photo 8 Khayelitsha, Mandela Park, 2019

The urban landscape has many elements in common in all three neighbourhoods. Streets are wide, car traffic is constant and hectic, and the streets are filled with taxis and buses. Houses are all colourful, 1-4 floors high, either occupied by one family or constructions of bigger flats with multiple families also exist. The condition of these houses is often poor, for they have not been well maintained since their construction. Furthermore, badly maintained road infrastructure is typical.

What is important to notice is the common stigma of crime and gang violence in these neighbourhoods. Gang violence is unfortunately very common and is having an influence on the feelings of safety and trust for the majority of the inhabitants. During the summer of 2019, Ottery faced a period of gang violence that involved shootings towards innocent people. During the time of data collection, the national army was implemented to the suburbs of Cape Town, also in Lotus River and in Ottery, to prevent gang violence happening and to protect citizens.

4. Methodology

4.1. Data collection

Based on three neighbourhoods in Cape Town, this study indicates that children aged 7-15 years old from working class families are knowledgeable agents with a rich store of information and experience about urban spaces as well as social realms. Their visualisations and stories of their neighbourhoods are describing powerfully the dynamics of the places and activity made there while concerning encounters, as well as how the question of safety is playing a dominant role in these encounters.

To understand the social encounters of children in a post-apartheid city, further information is needed. To analyse the processes and the nature of encountering for this thesis, the observations are made from three communities introduced earlier, during a two month stay in Cape Town. Data is collected by three different methods: semi structured interviews, mental mapping and a field diary. I chose these methods so that the research question could be approached from different ankles. Analysis focuses strongly to the interviews and the words of the children, but the visualisation by mental maps of children’s everyday life is giving nonverbal input to the story to support the analysis. Furthermore, participant observation is helping to ground the interpretations form two other methods to the right context.

Access to respondents was accomplished by working for the youth organization Africa Jam Youth Outreach. The organization has a focus on local youth aged 8-16 by life skill education and different activities over eight different neighbourhoods. The main focus of Africa Jam Youth Outreach takes place in deprived coloured and Black African neighbourhoods of Cape Town, where children and youths are facing difficulties in finding their way because of high rates of unemployment and gang violence. The organization itself is a 15 year old religious Christian non-profit and non-governmental actor, focusing on youth empowerment and serving youth in local communities that are economically disadvantaged in Cape Town (Africa Jam, 2020).

During my stay in Cape Town, I worked in the school and afterschool programs four to five days per week. For the first two weeks I stayed in Lotus River, the second two in Khayelitsha and thirdly two weeks in Ottery. I organized painting lessons for the children in each neighbourhood. These reflective painting workshops were part of the data collection, as an aim to collect mental maps from the children. My role as a researcher was interactive with the children and I got involved in the activity by organizing and assisting workshops. I participated altogether in 24 workshops, 8 in each neighbourhood and each of them lasted 2-3 hours (around 60 hours in total). During the last week, I

20 visited each of the neighbourhoods once more and conducted the interviews of the youth workers of Africa Jam. My work with children was also helpful for the organization because the mapping project provided new information about how the children felt about their communities.

4.1.1. Participant observation

Data for this research was collected through participant observation. It is a method to get a deeper understanding of the behaviour of groups in different situations. Instead of getting data of surveys, like a number of participants, observation can give deeper information about the dynamics of the group, as well as an understanding of why people behave as they do (Mackellar, 2013).

During my stay, I wrote my observations down daily about the experience in the local communities. This field diary consists of observations mainly about the afterschool programs and the behaviour of the children there. Observations are participatory. Besides descriptions of the afterschool programs the field diary describes the personal feelings of public spaces in the communities. Also, the field diary consists of my personal feelings about commuting to the neighbourhoods and experiences in the urban spaces. However, it is important to note that participant observation as a method is a subjective way to gather data from a person who is not from the community. As a disadvantage is the low degree of reliability and representativeness of the data.

Photo 9 Lotus River, street of the afterschool program, 2019

Photo 10 Lotus River, Church where the afterschool program takes place, 2019

Photo 11 Lotus River, mental maps painting, 2019

Photo 12 Ottery afterschool program, 2019

Photo 13 Ottery afterschool program, 2019

Photo 14 Ottery, mental mapping task, 2019

Photo 15 Mandela Park, Khayelitsha, street of afterschool program, 2019

Photo 16 Mandela Park, Khayelitsha, place of afterschool program, 2019

Photo 17 Khayelitsha, mental mapping task, 2019

4.1.2. Interviews

One of the main methods for this research are the structured interviews. I interviewed 10 children from each of the three neighbourhoods. Besides this, four interviews were conducted with youth workers, which makes altogether 34 interviews for the data. The interviews of the children are 20-40 minutes in length and the interviews of the youth workers are 1 hour long.

Children are aged between 7-15 years old. 16 of them are boys and 14 are girls. Most of them share Christian religion, and three of them are Muslims. The children from Lotus River and Ottery are all coloured, with either their mother language or secondary language being Afrikaans. Children in Mandela Park, Khayelitsha self-identify themselves as Black African and their mother language is IsiXhosa. Also, two of them belong to the Zutu ethnicity. All the children speak English fluently, yet in Khayelitsha children struggle slightly with the language.

Interviews of the children are structured through six different themes. First theme is basic information; secondly describes the mental mapping task as well as the safest places of their neighbourhood; third theme is a description of the child’s own neighbourhood; fourth is about movability between communities and knowledge of other neighbourhoods in the city; the fifth theme focuses on social encounters with strangers and the friend making process; and the sixth theme approaches the feelings of safety and trust towards difference.

Interviews with one youth workers from each of the three neighbourhoods, and two from Lotus River were conducted. All of my colleagues were born and raised in their own communities, except LRC1, who lives in the community of Retreat, located next to Lotus River. Interviews with the youth workers focus mainly on their work experience, as well as on their feelings about their neighbourhoods and their views on the lives of the children. Interviews are focusing on the narratives about the change in time from their own childhood to the current situation in their community.

All interviews with the children as well as the youth workers are recorded and transcribed. The table below gives an overview of the respondents with basic information. Every interviewee is coded. Besides information like age, sex and religion I found it relevant to add information about the family situation to give a better overview and personality of the setting of the child.

Furthermore, this paper uses racial categories, which are not normally recommended to use in urban research because of their discriminative roots. However, in the context of post-apartheid studies, these racial categories have become part of the post-apartheid South African society and identities and are used by the children themselves. The coloured population is composed of many cultures who are imported as slaves from the Dutch East Indies (Malays). Black African population is speaking Bantu languages like isiXhosa, the White population being descendants of colonial settlers. (See Muyeba & Seekings, 2010.) It is important to notice that besides their cultural differences, these groups are heterogeneous, having different religions, cultural habits and lifestyles.

Lotus River

Name Race Sex Age / Mother Religion Family Date grade tongue

LR1 Colored Girl 8 / G2 Afrikaans Christian Separated 13.8.2019 parents, 4 children

LR2 Colored Girl 9 / G4 English Christian Separated 13.8.2019 (Afrikaans) parents, only child

LR3 Colored Boy 10 / G5 English Christian 13.8.2019

LR4 Colored Boy 9 / G3 English Christian Separated 13.8.2019 (Afrikaans) parents, 3 children

LR5 Colored Girl 11 / G5 English Christian Separated 26.8.2019 parents, 3 children

LR6 Colored Boy 9 / G3 English Christian 26.8.2019 (Afrikaans)

LR7 Colored Girl 9 /G3 English Muslim 11.9.2019

LR8 Colored Girl 7 / G2 Afrikaans Christian 11.9.2019

LR9 Colored Boy 11 / G6 English Christian Separated 13.8.2019 (Afrikaans) parents

LR10 Colored boy 12 / G6 English Christian 3 children 13.8.2019

Ottery

Name Race Sex Age / Mother Religion Family Date grade tongue

O1 Colored Boy 14 / G7 Afrikaans Christian 4 children 2.9.2019 (English)

O2 Colored Girl 7 / G2 English Christian 3.9.2019 (Afrikaans)

O3 Colored Boy 15 / G9 English Christian 11 children 3.9.2019 (Afrikaans)

O4 Colored Boy 8 / G3 English Christian Separated 9.9.2019 (Afrikaans) parents

O5 Colored Boy 11 / G6 English Christian Separated 9.9.2019 (Afrikaans) parents, 5 children

O6 Colored Girl 13 / G6 English Christian Separated 10.9.2019 (Afrikaans) family, 3 children

O7 Colored Boy 15 / G9 Afrikaans Muslim Mom 10.9.2019 (English) passed away

O8 Colored Boy 7 / G2 Afrikaans Muslim Separated 12.9.2019 (English) parents

O9 Colored Girl 13 / G7 English Christian 6 children 12.9.2019 (Afrikaans)

O10 Colored Boy 15 / G8 Afrikaans Christian 3 children 12.9.2019 (English)

Khayelitsha, Mandela Park

Name Race Sex Age / Mother Religion Family Date grade tongue

K1 Black African Boy 15 / G8 Xhosa Christian 8 children 22.8.2019

K2 Black African Girl 11 / G5 Xhosa Christian 27.8.2019

K3 Black African Girl 13 / G7 Zutu Christian Mother 27.8.2019 (Xhosa) passed away

K4 Black African Girl 13 / G7 Xhosa Christian 2 children 27.8.2019

K5 Black African Boy 10 / G5 Xhosa Christian 5 children 28.8.2019

K6 Black African Boy 11 / G5 Xhosa Christian 6 children 28.8.2019

K7 Black African Girl 13 / G7 Xhosa Christian Separated 28.8.2019 parents

K8 Black African Girl 11 / G6 Zutu Christian 4 children 28.8.2019 (Xhosa)

K9 Black African Girl 13 / G6 Xhosa Christian Separated 29.8.2019 parents

K10 Black African Boy 12 / G6 Xhosa Christian 29.8.2019

Africa Jam youth workers

Name Race Sex Age Mother Religion Date tongue

LRC1 Coloured Woman Around 40 Afrikaans Christian 18.9.2019

LRC2 Coloured Woman Around 35 Afrikaans Christian 18.9.2019

OC Coloured Man 27 Afrikaans Christian 17.9.2019

KC Black African Woman 26 Xhosa Christian 17.9.2019

4.1.3. Mental maps

The third methodology used for this research are the mental maps. Mental map is a visual way to understand subjective realities of space, and to valorise how an individual imagines a part of space. For the past few decades, mental maps have been a source of renewed interest in cultural, social and environmental geography. Mapping can help to collect and analyse representations of space and to understand interviewees, and it is often used to complement interviews. Moreover, mental maps can be an effective way to get to the source of the dialogue with the interviewee (Gueben-Venière, 2011).

Each individual has different perceptions of their environment about the exact same world they live in. For this reason, these maps give more information about how the person senses his/her environment rather than the environment itself. For geographical research purposes, mental maps are helpful, because they facilitate seeing how people interact with their surroundings.

As mentioned earlier, I planned and prepared a workshop of mental mapping and applied it in the afterschool programs in the three communities. During the workshops, children produced 55 mental

29 maps describing their everyday spaces, favourite and safest places in their neighbourhoods and in the city of Cape Town.

4.2. Positionality

It is important to reflect my positionality and personal background as a researcher while working with these communities. As coming from a white, middle-class family from a Nordic country, it has an impact on the access of data as well as to the nature of the collected data. As having a history of travelling to many places as well as for living in many countries, it is important to acknowledge my personal approach towards diversity and encounters towards difference as a possibility and an “adventure”, while the people from these communities don’t necessarily share the same background. Furthermore, coming from a homogeneous country such as Finland where diversity is not a norm, I might lack an understanding of co-living in a city of many groups of people from different ethnic backgrounds, and especially have a lack of experience of living in a post-apartheid city as an unprivileged and even discriminated citizen.

My personal background has made the chances to access the data more difficult and may also affect the quality of the data gathered. Not sharing the same mother language (Afrikaans and Xhosa) and being unfamiliar of the cultural habits determined the topics discussed with the children. Furthermore, my whiteness and wealthier background placed me in a power position with the children that cannot be overlooked. This has an impact on the social interaction with the children, as well as on the understanding of the data gathered.

Another limit of the research is the short time of my stay in Cape Town. I stayed two months in total, spreading it over two to three weeks in each neighbourhood, which is a limited amount of time to understand the local conditions fully.

Furthermore, being a young woman had a limiting impact on my possibilities to commute to the afterschool programs and hence made my data gathering less flexible. To ensure safe commuting to the youth programs I rented a car. I participated in the afterschool programs only during the daytime and when someone was waiting for me at the destination. During the two months I could recognize the change of my own perceptions towards the neighbourhoods I worked with: the fear towards the unknown decreased during the time in each of the communities and at the end it was easier to see the reality beyond the fear and uncertainty.

Being an outsider, it indeed complicated my profound understanding of the realities of the children. Although my unfamiliarity of the local conditions as well as my European background narrowed down

30 my chances with the data gathering, it nevertheless seemed to have also a positive impact on the children. As I was an outsider, the children as well as the youth workers seemed to have a certain natural feeling of trust towards me from the beginning.

4.3. Data analysis

After collecting the data from Cape Town, I returned to Brussels and transformed my field diary as well as the mental maps to a computer file. Then I transcribed 34 audio recordings and organized the answers both by computer (by creating a data set of all the questions), as well by creating a collage summary on paper of the main discourses standing out. The data is analysed by following the threefold research question:

1. Where do children have encounters with difference in the City of Cape Town? 2. Which forces mediate these encounters? 3. How does this affect social relations with difference?

As a reminder, this research focuses to approach difference from cultural, racial and socio-economical aspects. Furthermore, the concept of difference is stretched to point simply the unknown people that children encounter in their everyday live so that the perceptions of these encounters can be observed.

The methodology uses a mixed qualitative case study approach, especially discourse analysis. The primary data source is the interviews. Secondary data sources are mental mapping and the participant observations that are used to support the statements. Data is formed to reach conclusions by mapping it by themes in to an Excel file as well as manually by using different colours to a large piece of paper.

The collected data is divided into three elements to investigate. The first focus point is to understand the places where encounters with difference take place. This is answered by interviews and mental mapping. The second dimension is about the forces that affect the encounters. This is done by mapping the elements from the interviews that are mediating the nature of the social encounters. The third focus is the effects of these forces on the social relations across difference for the children. This dimension is analysed mainly from the interviews.

The goal of the research is to find connections between these three elements and in this way understand better the factors that have a positive and negative effect on the social interaction of the children in urban spaces, and how these connections could be used to increase tolerance in the encounters across difference in urban realms.

5. Findings and results

In this chapter, the research question is investigated through a three level analysis process. Firstly, places are categorized through social realms. Secondly, the mediating forces are analysed from the discourses of the interviews and finally the effects are drawn together (see figure 5)

Figure 5 Analysis map

5.1. Places of encounter

In this chapter, the results of the first research question children encountering difference in the city of Cape Town, is analysed. In addition, this chapter contains information about the everyday movement and the favourite and safest places of the children. Further, places that the children don’t feel safe in and/or and dislike are introduced. To do this, the chapter is subdivided into Lyn Lofland’s social realms. This information is collected from the mental maps as well as from the interviews.

Small comparisons can be drawn between the children in three respective communities. The children of Ottery and Lotus River are very similar since the neighbourhoods are next to each other and are mixing together due to blurry borders. Children in Ottery had the strongest discourse of fear of gang violence in their interviews compared to the two other neighbourhoods. This can be reflected in the

32 recent shootings that were happening around Ottery during the time I was collecting the data. Children in the Khayelitsha afterschool program seemed to act at first more shy. This may be a consequence of having English as a secondary language after Xhosa.

The favourite places of the children seem to follow the same answers with the safest places. Besides their own home, the favourite places of the children are mainly shopping malls (7 of the interviews), the after school program (6), the beach (6), the church (3), McDonalds (3), the centre of the Cape Town (3). Furthermore, there is a remarkable number of favourite places outside of their own communities, for example other family member homes, summer camps, shopping malls and the city centre. These places all had in common the feeling that children experienced something nice there outside of their everyday routine. The beach was painted in mental maps especially by the children of Khayelitsha (4 times).

5.1.1. Public realm

The children have social interactions daily in the public realm and occasionally encounter differences there. The public realm takes place mainly in public spaces; streets while commuting from place to another. Every child goes regularly from home to school, to the afterschool program as well as to the church or mosque, 20 of interviewees go to religious activities at least once a week. Every child spends most of the leisure time in his/her home street, where most of their social interactions occurs with other children.

Children commute daily between three main places: from home to school and to the afterschool program. Also the local shop to buy snacks is nearly daily place to visit. Children move mostly by foot: the distance to school is very short and 26 of them are always walking there in pairs or in groups with their siblings or friends. 10 of the interviewees have a car in their family, which they use mainly to go to church on Sundays or to see their other parent in another community. The other 20 occasionally use other family members’ vehicles, for example their uncles’, or they use public transportation like trains or taxis. Mainly everything that children do in their everyday life is within walking distance.

The picture of the urban public landscape of the children can be outlined form the mental maps as well as from the interviews. What is common in the neighbourhoods of Lotus River, Ottery and Khayelitsha, is the remarkable amount of car traffic and the importance of car roads. 24 of 55 mental maps have car roads in them and 10 of the paintings have a car in them. Furthermore, the narratives of the children’s cars are dominant in the descriptions of their neighbourhood and public spaces. 12 of the interviews describe their neighbourhood as having a lot of cars and car accidents. This can hint that the public space is a space of transit and constant move, instead of social interaction and

33 encountering difference. Besides the nature of transit, because of the remarkable amount of traffic, the public space has dangerous elements for children who wish to socialize spend time and encounter difference.

Mental map 2 Ottery

Mental map 3 Khayelitsha

Besides the constant traffic in the urban realm, 9 of the 56 mental maps have people represented in the streets. Mainly the people painted are representations of their friends or other children. This supports the idea that the public realm in the communities is also a space for social interaction. Especially when children commute to school and afterschool programs, they encounter other children as well as people they don’t know. In all of these communities, besides cars, the streets are always filled with people in the daytime. Hence, the streets have a meaningful role to play in encountering difference for the children in the public realm.

The mental maps of the children have remarkably green elements in public spaces, 23 of the maps have trees, flowers, grass and parks (see mental map 4). These three communities don’t have many greenery areas and they are not regularly maintained. Furthermore, the parks that exist in these communities are not used by children. This could hint at the wishes of the children for greener and cleaner spaces for social interaction to feel more comfortable to encounter difference. Besides mental maps of their own community, the children painted places that are outside of their community, like an uncle’s office in the city centre or an imaginary house with a green garden.

Mental map 4 Lotus River, painting with green elements

Besides from the children’s interviews, one element that stands out also from my field diary is a constant need to be on the move and to have a purpose to transit in the public space.

Waiting in places you weren’t planning to wait in were the most uncomfortable moments in the city in these two months. For example, on the first day to go to LR I waited for the boss of the Africa Jam on a street (in my car) for 15 minutes and it felt very uncomfortable to look like being lost and getting the wrong attention. Another similar experience was in Khayelitsha, while waiting for a colleague 20 minutes in front of an afterschool program, or if you look lost or when you are waiting for the bus in a bus station for a long time and attention is increasing. In all these situations I’m alone, under transition to somewhere, being under influences not created by me. Field diary 4.10.2019.

5.1.2. Private realm

Besides the public realm, the other important element standing out for social interaction is the private realm. One of the safest places is a child's own home (21 times) in mental maps and 14 times in the interviews. Houses facilitate the social interaction and encountering difference for the children in private realms. Houses and homes are represented 25 times in mental maps. There can be identified differences between the neighbourhoods; the maps of Ottery and Lotus River have 5 representations of larger housing complexes with multiple family units when Khayelitsha has flats mentioned 3 times in all 38 paintings.

Family ties play a significant role in the social encounters of the children in the private realm. Family means a broad concept of people for the children. Besides the nuclear unit, family members include: grandparents, cousins, uncles, and aunts. Furthermore, certain family friends and neighbours can be part of a child's family as an “auntie” or “uncle”. Closest and best friends of the children are often counted as part of their family, as being their siblings or cousins. Children tend to trust their family ties stronger than friends who come from outside their families.

Encounters of the previously unknown people are made in this private realm, mainly due to the family events. Five children say that they get to know new friends through family events. Many of the houses painted were homes of the friends or family members of the children, where they often go for visits and where encounters of difference can occur. When children make new friends, they often tend to be previously unknown cousins that they meet at birthday parties or weddings. These encounters seem to happen mainly in private spaces, in one’s own home, or in the houses of other family members or friends.

Furthermore, family ties are facilitating encounters beyond children's own neighbourhoods. Most of the children have family members in other surrounding communities, where they might visit monthly for example. 12 children say that their family facilitates the encounters outside of their own neighbourhood. Go to my cousins, sleep there, go to my daddy and sleep there… go to my uncle. (O4) As many as 24 of the children say that they have friends from other communities mainly due to family ties and hobbies. Furthermore, a distant parent’s home is mentioned three times as a safest place for the child in the city.

Social interaction in the private realm happens also in public spaces. For instance in the home streets when a family is grilling together, or when going to eat in a restaurant. Often a bigger number of participants attend this kind of activity and many of them can come outside from the closest family

36 ties. Hence, these private events in public spaces facilitate encounters between people unfamiliar to each other.

5.1.3. Parochial realm

Children have encounters across difference in the parochial realm, which happens in both public and private spaces. 26 of the children encounter people they don’t know through parochial activity. Parochial activity is mainly made by playing games, like soccer and handball together, travelling to school (5) and the afterschool program (6), summer camps (4), church (3) and through music (2).

The community culture and hobbies provide situations for social encountering. Seven of the interviewees say that they get to know new people through their hobbies. Children mainly play soccer (20) and handball (7) in their free time, but some play music or sing (7), bicycle (5), play video games (2) or skipping rope (2). In Khayelitsha besides soccer the children dance (7), and in Lotus River and in Ottery children play mainly soccer (17) together. This parochial activity happens often in public spaces like streets and open soccer fields, but also in private spaces like the afterschool building or school. Still, the encounters made through hobbies occur mainly between the children from the same community, and their socio-economic as well as racial background are the same.

School as a parochial realm in private space plays a significant role in social interaction of the children. The schools of the three neighbourhoods follow the same pattern as the neighbourhoods in general, they mainly consist of one race, either coloured or African. Children engage in similar activities in school as they do at home or on their street play games and hang out.

Boys are playing American football and basketball. Girls are walking in pairs or in small groups and are watching around. Everyone seems very active, running, moving, laughing and having fun. Field diary, Lotus River, Sid G. Rule Primary school, 13.8.2019.

Mental map 5 Lotus River, soccer game

Mental map 6 Khayelitsha, handball game

Furthermore, corner shops from where snacks can be brought are a big element of the children’s urban landscape (9). These shops in public space facilitate a parochial realm for social interaction. Shops can be seen as knot points of social interaction, facilitating a space to encounter unfamiliar people. Shops are one of the only places where children are allowed to go by themselves even in the evening time. Encounters in these corner shops are supervised by adults working in the shop, which makes it a more comfortable space for encounters. Often children as well as their parents know the people working in these shops in person. Still, the people encountered in these shops come mainly

38 from the same community and home streets and are often familiar on some level for the children. This means that even if children encounter “strangers” in the shops, children might not be exposed to the difference.

When considering the safest places in the city, for nearly all of the children the safest places are mainly places where social interaction happens in the parochial realm. Children feel safe to encounter difference in church, shops and during common activities, like while playing soccer. “I love food and, in the malls, it's quite big so I can do a lot there, like a shop or to play games you know, playing in stores.” (LR9) Almost every child plays soccer in their free time (20 from the interviews), 17 children from Lotus River and Ottery mention soccer as a hobby in the interviews, while only 3 play soccer in Khayelitsha. 6 of the mental maps include soccer fields.

Although children like to play soccer, it is still happening mainly in their own home streets instead of soccer fields. Soccer fields as public spaces are mentioned as unsafe spaces where children have to be careful and be in groups.

“No cause’ you can't trust who is coming there (soccer field).” (O8)

The afterschool program is a meaningful parochial realm for social encounters. The Africa Jam afterschool centre as a private space is mentioned as a safest place for the child in mental maps (14 times) and in interviews (9 times). Besides these, the interviews mention 5 times schools, and 5 times the centre of Cape Town as safe places n, as well as hospitals three times.

Mental map 7 Khayelitsha, Africa Jam center

Besides the Africa Jam centre, two of the children mention the church as a place to meet new friends. The Church and the Africa Jam centres provide hobbies like dancing, singing, handball, and other games.

Yes, like in church or in AJ, like in a day camp, when you do competitions you team up with someone you don’t know. So I think that is an opportunity to make friends because you have to get to know the person. (K3)

Religion, especially Christianity plays a significant role in the encounters through the parochial realm in the local communities of Cape Town. All the children interviewed are religious: 27 of them are Christian and 3 of them Muslims. In the Lotus River and Ottery the afterschool program starts with prayers, and in Khayelitsha gospel singing is practiced regularly. All of the children go regularly to church or to the mosque, and 20 of them attend every week. In Ottery the number was highest, nine out of ten children go every week regularly to practice their religion.

Mental map 8 Lotus River, church as a safe place

Religion creates safe spaces for parochial activity to happen. Church is mentioned the safest place for the children 8 times in both mental maps and in interviews. Because the religious events feel safe for the children, they feel comfortable to interact with people they don’t know. Furthermore, the people attending these events have a common goal and way to behave in these events. This is uniting strangers through a parochial activity. A girl from Ottery answers the question of the safest place:

“The church. Because God, God always has a line where he guides us and always supports us.” (O6)

Here, Grassy Park, cousin’s place, in church I meet new people. (O4)

The youth workers of Africa Jam see religion as a medicine against violence and gang activity in the communities. Religion is seen as one of the strongest elements bringing hope to the lives of the children and their communities.

“People fall into gangs if they don't fall in a space of religion. That is why religion plays a big part in our community, it is people wanting and finding something. And that's one of the many, other alternatives like playing soccer…you are actually safe if you have dedicated your time to something. And in our community that is one of the biggest principles. So, if you're not part of the gang, and you're not part of a group, like any organization, part of a soccer club, part of a religious movement, then you are in danger.” (OC)

Although religion creates parochial spaces where people feel safe to encounter difference, it doesn’t necessarily facilitate the presence of difference in these three communities. The people who attend to the church service and afterschool program are coming mainly from the same community as the children and they are often familiar from the past. Still, even if the number of these strangers attending the religious activity is small, religion enables frequently unknown people and strangers to attend to these activities. The afterschool program especially has volunteers from other parts of the city as well as around the world. Furthermore, there are previously unknown people attending the religious service, and new children come for the afterschool events.

To understand the social interaction of children with unknown people and difference, it is essential to understand the friend making process in these communities. 21 of the children often make new friends, however for 9 of them it is very difficult or non-existent. The main reasons children do not make new friends are bullying and/or lack of occasions to meet new people. Children mainly get to know new friends through afterschool programs (4), summer camps (3), soccer (3), school (3), and church (2). What is common with all of them is that there is parochial activity made in public as well as private spaces.

Parochial activity facilitates social interaction also beyond one’s community. 16 of the children interviewed have been in summer camps organised by Africa Jam, where they travel to a new city and meet children outside of their community. In summer camps children from the three communities

41 meet each other once a year in the camps. They also encounter kids from other communities of Cape Town as well as international youth workers from America or Europe who come from different cultural backgrounds.

Also shopping malls like the Blue Route mall in the community of Retreat or Canal Walk in Century City facilitate social encounters beyond a child's own neighbourhood: 6 of the interviewees mention shopping malls as a place for social interaction.

5.1.4. Limited conditions to encounter difference

Although social encounters are made in these realms, it is not guaranteed that children will encounter difference there. It seems that there exists big differences between the places for children to have a chance to encounter difference. The communities where children live are strongly homogeneous, and spaces like school, church, and soccer fields include people mainly just from their own community and cultural background.

Children mainly socially interact with the people with whom they share the same skin colour and cultural habits. 14 children answered the question if they have friends from another race than their own. 7 of the children have friends beyond their own race and the other 7 don’t. The ones who had friends from other races had only a few, mainly from school. Mainly coloured and Black African children had Black African or coloured friends respectively, and almost none of their friends were white. The presence of white population is nearly non-existent, besides the ones who are commuting to the neighbourhoods as project leaders, teachers, social workers or in other higher positions.

Children spend most of their time in their own community and in their home-school axel, and the chances to encounter difference outside of their community are limited. Hence, it seems that children encounter difference in very few places. The main reason to go outside of their community is when they travel to other surrounding communities to visit their family members. In this light the summer camps organized by Africa Jam are meaningful occasions for the children to change the neighbourhood and spend time with children from other communities and cultures. In addition, the visits to shopping malls are valuable occasions to encounter difference.

5.2. Forces mediating the encounters

This chapter analyses the main factors that mediate the social encountering of difference for the children. This is done by analysing interviews of the children as well as the interviews of the Africa Jam youth workers.

5.2.1. Gang violence

As analysed in the previous chapter, the use of public space of the children is limited in their own communities. This is limiting their possibilities to have meaningful encounters of difference in the public realm. The force that is significantly mediating there is gang violence which is stronger than ever before in the city of Cape Town, as demonstrated in the chapter of the case studies.

Data reveals that the main reason why urban spaces are not nice or safe for the children is because of gang related activity. All 30 children know people from their family or from their circle of friends who belong to gangs. Every child hears gunshots frequently in his/her neighbourhood and knows the procedure of to follow when shootings start. 21 of the interviews describes gang violence as a reason to be afraid in urban places. 12 don’t feel safe in their own neighbourhood because of the gang violence, and 6 are worried by gang activity in their neighbourhood. A girl commenting her own neighbourhood, Ottery:

I like everything here but just the gangsters and the shooting stuff not, lots of people did die here, on the field. Yeah, most people on that side, uhm they just come in the road, over the bridge here, and then they shoot, they come on the field and they shoot everything. There was a boy that they shoot off from the bike. Everybody light candles. (O6)

A difference in the narratives of the children can be identified about gangs and violence between the three communities. For the children from Khayelitsha, gang related activity is not that strong a discourse in the interviews, while in Lotus River and Ottery gang violence strongly determines the feelings of urban space for the children. K10 states how in Khayelitsha there is a lot of gang violence, but when he goes for school in Mitchell’s Plain (coloured neighbourhood next to Lotus River and Ottery) there is even more.

Gangs are mediating the chances for meaningful social encounters of difference by dominating the urban spaces in the public realm. Nearly every child mentions gangs dominating the public spaces in their neighbourhoods. For example parks, that were originally intended to be the space for children to spend time, is a no-go area in all three communities, since the gangs spend much of their time there. One example of gang dominance in public space is a big field in Ottery, located between flats, a local library and the afterschool program (see Figure 6). This space has a fearsome name, Battlefield, and it is mentioned many times in the interviews of the children in Ottery. Every child in Ottery has heard shootings from there and some of them have even experiences of witnessing crime there. The

43 shadow of the shootings in Ottery was present in the narratives of the children as well as the staff of Africa Jam Youth Outreach.

Figure 6 Ottery, Battle field

Mental map 9 Ottery, Battle field

A colleague from Ottery describes the shooting situation in Battlefield:

I don't know if you've been in a shooting. It is like your whole world... there are two ways: people get excited and run towards the shootings, crazy! Others will run away to another way…it’s crazy, I don’t know if you have heard a loud noise, there's a level of chaos and a level of silence, it's like another zone, everything is slow! Yeah, so part of the kids are carrying that trauma and it cripples you in a way, I don't even know how to overcome that. (OC)

Gangs are mediating the social encountering of difference also in spaces for parochial activity. Corner shops where children go sometimes to buy sweets by themselves are spaces, where they also witness robberies and drug dealing.

“I know the people, the guy standing on the corner… like we as youngsters, used to admire those guys, because the way they dress, their style. But there's one thing I never understood. If they are selling these drugs to these people who are doing the drugs… and I thought to myself, okay they are selling, they are seeing these people coming to buy it like, every hour, or what, so my brother also used to smuggle drugs and he started using and he started becoming aggressive, fighting with my parents over money. As well as the guys on the corners, they also started doing it and then they just became the guy that was they are all now, I don't know.” (O3)

Furthermore, some private places where parochial activity is made, for example schools are sometimes unsafe areas because they are not as well guarded as they should be.

“Not safe in school. They (gangsters) would jump over the fence and then they would open the gates and all the stuff and then they will just get the children.” (LR7)

Additionally, gang activity is mediating in the private realms of the children. Many of the children have family members who belong to gangs, and this can have a strong effect on the social encounters of difference. If a child is taught to lie to the police to protect their family member, the trust is being eroded towards the local authority as well as anyone who doesn’t belong to the closest community of the child. This can exacerbate the increasing feelings of isolation and decreased interest to encounter difference, because strangers are seen as potential threats to one’s safety.

Dominance of the gangs has an effect on the social encounters across difference also in the public realm. When children are walking in the streets, they have to stay alert because of the fear of gang

45 violence. This affects the perceptions of the unknown people they encounter. Children carefully understand the behaviour and appearance of the strangers and they know how to describe the looks of a person who belongs to a gang.

“When I see the person, so I don't know what to do or what he is gonna do or what. So my reaction is that I just move away across the road. Cross to the opposite side he is walking from.” (LR10)

The word stranger seems to be a synonym for the word gangster and has a negative connotation for 18 of the children interviewed. When the question of a stranger was put to the children, 18 children described the behaviour of the gangster, how “they shoot” and “rob people” and “do bad things”. For 10 of the children the word stranger has neutral connotation and only for two of them it had a positive connotation.

“When I see a stranger, it doesn’t feel safe for me, I rather not stay outside, when I’m close to my friend’s house I usually run to my friend’s house, and I tell my mom.” (LR3)

Furthermore, the dominance of the gangs is mediating differently the social encounters during different times of the day. In the daytime children have more positive encounters with strangers, for example when they guide someone to the shop, or when someone gives them sweets. 16 of the children have had positive experiences with strangers, for example when greeting someone or guiding a way to the store, or meeting youth workers like me. Instead, when it is evening and dark, children have stronger perceptions towards difference and they feel more afraid of strangers, because they fear that the strangers want to hurt them. For example, it is different to walk in certain parts of the street in the night than in the day, or a park, like Battlefield in Ottery, can be crossed with a group but not alone.

“Yes, when I’m far from home. Because when I’m walking and I see strangers coming, like gangsters coming close by so, I take a shortcut. Like if I see, like a street coming there then I go there. Because they (gangsters) first look at me if I’m scared. Then they look at what I’m wearing. Is it like, like expensive stuff or cheap stuff. If you have expensive stuff they would take it and go sell it. Once when they were coming closer, then another neighbour came out and scared them away.” (K10)

Hence, because of the risk of gang violence, children seem to have knowledge of where and when they can go and where they shouldn’t enter in the city. Instead of physical borders between

46 communities, the no-go areas in the city are more socially constructed by experience, depending on the time of the day and scale.

It’s good because I know it and I know the places to go to. And the places to not go. Like, the places where there are gangsters. That’s why I don’t want to go to other places. (K6)

From the interviews with colleagues and the children a pattern can be found, where the use of public spaces by children has been narrowing down over time. Parks are no-go areas for them and what is left in the public space is often just the home street. One of the reasons for the children’s limited use of space and to encounter difference is the lack of safety. 8 of the 30 children don’t feel safe in their own neighbourhood and have sometimes fear in their home street. Safety issues exist mainly in public spaces, such as streets (7), parks (6) and soccer fields (2). In addition, 8 of the children don’t feel safe in certain communities outside of their neighbourhood, like Lavender Hill (2) and Khayelitsha (3). The places that the children don’t find nice are in line with the answers for the question of safety. Children avoid spending time in (empty) streets (10), parks (6) and outside of one’s community (4), as well as a community called Lavender Hill (2).

Safety issues exists as well in parochial realm like in school (4) and shops (3). Places that children don’t find nice are schools (2) and libraries (2). Even if common activity is done in these spaces with other unfamiliar people, the lack of safety can make children stick with their friends and to be less open to approach new people.

Still, it seems that in the parochial realm, the dominance of gang activity is not as common as in the public realm. For example, during religious activity, hobbies and family events children don’t seem to be concerned about gang violence, even if they most probably know some people attending who belong to gangs. Compared to the encounters in the public realm, children can rely on the fact that the people are committed to do the same activity together. Furthermore, the nature of these parochial activities are often well organized and structured, and based on social and cultural expectations of certain behaviour. For example a church mass, or a soccer game include certain rules of social interaction from where intercourse seems to be more peaceful.

5.2.2. Family and hobbies

Family plays a role in the social encounters of difference by facilitating a platform for social interaction for the children both inside the child's neighbourhood but also beyond one’s community. These regular comings and goings to other communities facilitate social encounters of difference in

47 the public realm. Children travel to these other communities by public transport like taxis and buses, but some of them use private cars. Entering to other parts of the city gives an opportunity to witness different lifestyles and cultures.

One reason why many family members live in other communities is the high instances of separated families in the interviewees’ lives. 13 of the interviewees have a broken family mainly because of separation but also as a result of one or both parents having passed away. As a consequence, children often visit the other more distant parent, who is the often father, in other communities. It is important to remark that the children tend to admire these other communities. In the interviews they are seen to be cleaner and safer, and with green areas. This could hint that the communities of their distant parents are wealthier than their own. Some children from separated families don’t know their other parents, mostly fathers, and there is a hint that these distant parents come from higher socio- economic class.

I don’t have a father and my mother died. So my grandmother is my mother now and grandfather is my dad. But my oldest sister has a father but she knows him and I think he knows her too but she has never seen him face to face. So I don’t even know if my dad is colored or Xhosa or something. And my grandparents don’t even know him either. It was only my mom who knew him. (K3)

Besides family activity, hobbies in leisure time mediate the encounters of the children. Most of the children do their hobbies without costs, mainly by playing games in the home street or attending an afterschool program activity like handball or music lessons. Some children go to karate, soccer and bicycling lessons. These paid activities are often outside from the normal home-school axle of the child, even in other neighbourhoods, which enables encounters of difference.

Besides facilitating the encounters of difference, some of the family ties prevent possibilities for meaningful encounters due to social problems of the family members. Avoidance of certain family members and their behaviour can reflect alertness towards other people. Besides avoidance, negative experiences in the private realm inside one’s family can affect the feelings of trust towards others in parochial and public realms. Some children have lost their family members due to gang violence or drugs.

Mommy, Daddy, my daddy… I trust my daddy but my daddy steals now. And my mommy cry. (O4)

Yes, (I feel safe) cause’ most people know me. My other uncle and his friends are drug addicts, but I know they wouldn’t harm me because they are scared of my grandfather. He has a weapon under the bed. So, my uncle used to take it and then my grandfather was very angry. But he (grandfather) promised that he would never take the weapon because he will need it someday, for protection. (K3)

5.2.3. Presence of adults

What is common between most of the children’s meaningful encounters of difference is the feeling of safety in the situation. When children feel unsafe in public or parochial realms, encounters seem to stay distant and fear is dominating their perceptions. Previous chapters have demonstrated how the fear of gang violence can decrease the possibilities for meaningful encounters, and on the other hand both religion and family can create social relations across difference.

Feelings of safety for the children are strongly connected for the presence or absence of trustworthy adults in the public, parochial as well as private realms. The safest spaces of the children, home, church, shops and afterschool programs, are all parochial realms where adults who children know well are coordinating the situation and activity. The presence of adults in the parochial realm seem to be increasing the feeling of being in safe hands for the child. Instead of being strongly alerted and careful, children can focus on engaging in the common activity with previously unknown people.

Public spaces like parks or streets are not often safe spaces for the children. In general, empty streets at any time of the day seem to be a sign for the child to be careful. The public realm transforms itself into a safe environment with the presence of familiar as well as unfamiliar adults:

“I feel safe in the streets, where there are old people and they watch me when I’m playing. Because if there are old people and something is wrong and something happens, they are there to watch me.” (K6)

“Yes, when there is no one on the streets and I’m walking alone, then maybe my mom wants me to go shop. Then when I get out of the house and see that no one is in the streets I go to tell my mom that no one is in the streets. So, I will be safe.” (K4)

Additionally, the public realm seems to feel different at different times of the day. None of the children are out when it gets dark. When it is evening people leave the public realms.

“But it (night) feels a little different because there are not enough people outside.” (O8)

Adults, and more generally, citizens, are a mediating force for the encounters of difference for the children in these three communities. Firstly, the presence of the adults in the parochial realm facilitates the encounters of the children, by coordinated activity and by creating a safe space to encounter. Secondly, on the other hand, the absence of adults in public spaces is strongly limiting the movement of the children and encounters with difference, because of the increased feeling of alertness and fear towards the unknown.

It is important to notice that the encounters that children do are often depending on their adults. Especially for the younger ones, parents affect children’s movements. Mainly parents are facilitating the encounters across difference, for example when the family makes daytrips to other communities. In some cases, the habits of parents can prevent children to do encounters because she or he has not facilities or interest to expose children to the difference, for example because of poverty.

Even if the presence of any adult often seems to make the social interaction more meaningful in all three realms, it seems that the reason for this is not the adult itself but the connection to a more structured way of behaving and interacting. It is important to note that there seems to be a lack of places for children to spend time where trustworthy adults are taking care of security. Children are dependent on the presence of certain adults in their lives so that social interaction and playing in a safe space can happen.

5.2.4. Post-Apartheid city

Although over 20 years has passed since the end of apartheid in Cape Town, the racial segregation still exists in the city in multiple forms and is therefore reflecting on the social encounters of difference for the children. As demonstrated earlier, neighbourhoods where children live are mainly inhabited by only one culture and skin colour. Besides physical boundaries, segregation can be recognized in socio-economic as well as from cultural aspects of the lives of children.

Hence, the history of apartheid and the racial segregation can be recognized as a mediating force in the social encounters. Children identify themselves by their own skin colour and by association with the neighbourhood they live in, and they tend to feel more comfortable to approach people from similar backgrounds. In the narratives of the children a feeling of belonging in their own community can be recognized, and the feeling of uncertainty towards other neighbourhoods:

I feel so safe when I'm in my community, now no one can do anything to me. In another community, I would feel scared, because I don't know the place. (O9)

Furthermore, the perceptions towards other cultures and races can be recognized in children’s narratives. Some of the children have prejudices and even fears towards neighbourhoods that differ from their own skin colour or culture. Explanations for these feelings are, that a child doesn’t trust white people or that a child is afraid of Black African people. Children have experiences of being bullied because of their skin colour:

“I have white friends here and brown friends. They make me happy. But sometimes they call us names, butterfingers. Because our nails come out like butter. I feel sad because people, the children call us names.” (LR5)

It seems that the uncomfortable feelings towards difference as well as feelings of alertness in different neighbourhoods are obstructing in some situations the social relations with difference.

“For example, if I would move to live in the black neighbourhood, I wouldn’t feel so comfortable. I would be an outsider; I couldn’t relax and trust. That is why I live in a coloured neighbourhood, with my community and habits”. Field Diary, LRC1, 18.8.2019.

What is important to notice is that these feelings of uncomfortability are not equally shared in all neighbourhoods but are focusing especially on neighbourhoods of coloured or Black African population. Tension can be seen between Black African and coloured communities as well as a supremacy of whiteness in the social encounters. Conflictuality can be recognized when the discussions go to the topic of trust and feelings of safety. When children describe the neighbourhoods populated mainly by white people, the lack of belonging to that world and feelings of being an outsider stand out from the narratives.

5.2.5. Poverty

South Africa is an unequal country, only one fifth of its inhabitants belong to the middle class and most of them are white. As demonstrated earlier, Lotus River, Ottery and Khayelitsha are all less wealthy neighbourhoods where the communities don’t own much and the unemployment rate is higher than average. This strongly affects the social encounters of the children by decreasing their possibilities to encounter people beyond one’s community and makes encounters difficult as hobbies that are often too expensive to participate in are common in richer neighbourhoods.

While being here, my own socio-economic class becomes very visible. I have used to live and see homes and cafes with “nice things”, but the priorities here are very

different. Many of the children I work with, are surviving. “Pay rent, fill stomach” as the Uber driver said to me yesterday. People’s homes are plain, with basic things, and TV is mainly reminding of leisure time and entertainment. Field Diary 30.8.2019.

There is an unevenness between children inside one’s community. Children often encounter other children who have dropped out from school or who are begging on the streets.

I saw my friend at the shop. He asked for one rand and I gave him. For me it doesn't feel right asking my schoolmates for money … But you know it's also poverty, but it doesn't mean that we are living in poverty, we have poverty and we have to love the our lives. Yeah, because as youths, we are supposed to make the change. (O3)

“I like to go to the beach, but not often there, we don't have money to go.” (LR6)

Besides racial perceptions towards people, the effects of inequality and poverty can be recognized from the perceptions towards the neighbourhoods. The feelings of alertness and comfortability seem to be stronger in lower socio-economic neighbourhoods than in wealthier communities. The areas that children have the biggest negative perceptions are in communities like Lavender Hill (O1, O3), Philippi and in certain areas in Khayelitsha like Enkanini (K9). All three communities investigated carry heavy stigmas of poverty and crime. These territorial stigmatizations are projected also on the people living in the communities, which affects social encounters in a negative way.

Most people, when you tell them you come from Ottery, think she is rude and, look at how she looks. Now cuz most of the people think it's an unsafe area. But sometimes they shoot over here, but Ottery is a very good place, people talk bad about Ottery but it is a very good place. (O9)

On the other hand, children seem to be more open to encounters of difference in wealthier areas. Many children answered how their favourite places in the city are the communities like Waterfront, Sea Point of Century City, which are all wealthier communities. Interviews hint that wealthier areas seem to have in common also the feeling of safety in the encounters, when in less wealthy areas uncleanliness and gang violence seem to have stronger discourses in the children’s stories.

Still, social encounters are mostly limited to the child’s own neighbourhood. As these neighbourhoods are very homogeneous, it means that very few encounters across race, class or culture can occur.

5.3. Effects on social relations with difference

This chapter answers to the third research question: How do the forces affect social relations with difference? This is done by using the interviews as well as the participant observation. Previously analysed forces that are mediating the social encounters of children have different consequences on perceptions towards difference, strangers, and towards the children’s own community. This question is answered by reflecting on the encounters through Lofland’s (1998) three social realms: public, private and parochial realm.

5.3.1. Encounters with difference in public realm

After analysing the spaces as well as the forces that are connected to the social encounters of difference for the children, the role of the public realm in these encounters become visible. When children commute in their daily routines, or when they make weekend trips or holiday visits, they are being exposed to people they don’t know in the public realm.

However, children spend most of their time in their own communities, where the encounters with difference are not that remarkable due to the homogeneity of their neighbourhoods. Even if they encounter people in the public realm, most of them come from the same community and cultural background and share similar values.

Nevertheless, children regularly frequent other neighbourhoods to visit their family members, going for hobbies or for leisure time, and here the encounters with different cultures and lifestyles are being made. This happens for instance when making a day trip to the Table Mountain, to the centre like Sea Point, or to their cousin’s neighbourhood like Gugulethu.

Public spaces do not seem to be inviting encounters with difference in the public realm. Analysis has demonstrated how public spaces are limited for the children to spend time in. Indeed, public spaces in the city often seem to be zones of transit rather than zones of interaction. There exists a need to fill the purpose in the streets by doing something or heading somewhere, and it can be recognized both from the interviews as well as from the field diary. Furthermore, traffic affects the social encounters of children in public spaces by making the encounters shorter.

Although the public realm is facilitating most of the encounters with difference, it doesn’t seem to be the most efficient way for meaningful encounters to happen. Children do greet unknown people, and sometimes even guide strangers to the closest shops et cetera, and many children see these moments in a positive light, yet these encounters stay superficial and the increased tolerance is not remarkable.

Some of the encounters in the public realm have a negative effect on the encounters with difference, which results in a decreased trust towards difference and strangers. Trust decreases when encounters happen in the public realm without the feeling of safety, or when a child faces crime or hostile behaviour. For example children have learned to cross the street when they see someone approaching for whom they may have negative perceptions. K4 hears men shouting at her in public spaces and that’s why she doesn’t trust men easily in the public realm. In addition as demonstrated in the chapter of mediating forces, the traffic, gang violence, and the impact of racial segregation are all resulting in constant alertness in public spaces.

Furthermore, trust issues come from under-resourced policing in the communities. Most of the children don’t trust the local police. The main reasons being that it takes too long for police to get to help, and that police are often too afraid to intervene. Moreover, both interviews from the children as well as youth workers demonstrate how police are often supporting gangs and providing guns for criminal activity.

Not (trust) most of the police. Because if you go to the police and you want to open a case, like an abusing husband or so, then, they will say no, don’t open it. Then you ask why and they don’t tell you the reason why. (K4)

The effect of the encounters in the public realm seem to depend on the nature of the public realm itself. The nature of the realm is dependent on a number of factors, for example the wealth and the familiarity of the neighbourhood, the time of day, the feeling of safety and the presence of adults. The effects of encounters seem to be meaningful and seem to increase tolerance towards difference, when the feeling of safety and trust is ensured in the public realm. On the other hand, encounters in the public realm can stay superficial or even create feelings or fear, when the situation is unknown, when it is night, or there are no trustworthy adults present. Moreover, there can be recognised differences between neighbourhoods depending on their reputations. Children seem to be open to encounters in wealthy neighbourhoods (e.g. Sea Point), and more alerted and suspicious in neighbourhoods with bad reputations (e.g. Lavender Hill).

5.3.2. Encounters of difference in private realm

Compared to the public realm, the encounters of difference that happen in the private realm seem to be rarer, but with more profound effects. The private realm often creates a safe platform for the encounters with difference. Often the private realm is connected to the familiar, private space, (e.g. home) as well as the presence of the trustworthy adults. Furthermore, new friendships that children make are being done in private realms like a distant family member’s home.

However, the private realm can also decrease meaningful encounters with difference and feelings of tolerance. As the trust issue can be recognized as having an effect on the encounters of the public realm, the same effect is visible also in private zones. The effects of the apartheid are emerging in private realms and in family units. This becomes transparent when values are being taught to the children as well as when the social conditionings of the people are being observed.

There seems to be a fundamental trust issue towards one’s own neighbourhood and familiar people living there. From the 30 interviews, almost none of the kids fully trust their friends or their own community. Children are constantly alerted to be cautious while socially interacting, since others can "turn against you", "bully you" or "spread your secrets to the others". This trust issue needs to be taken seriously and it is a fundamental factor determining the social encounters of the children. Most of them are wary of children they don’t know yet because of fear of stealing and sharing one’s secrets.

Not so much, cause friends can stab back. Yes, one day they stabbed this one girl, yea they fight with knives, such stuff. They are gonna be gangsters, they shoot guns, such stuff. (O6)

In Ottery, there are not good friends. They swear and that stuff. They don’t think others. Most of the children like, they play with me, but when their cousins comes, they don’t want to play with me. (O5)

The lack of trust seems to be cultivated from the family units. Many families of the children have problems with drugs or crime, and many children have family members who are connected to gang activity. This can make it harder for a child to trust strangers in a meaningful way that could increase tolerance towards difference. Some children don’t trust their own parents, for example if something bad happens O10 doesn’t have anyone to talk to since he doesn’t trust his parents.

I don't nowadays trust, I don't even trust my own parents. Because not even family… because family, the ones, they can hurt you the most. Sometimes by trusting them, you tell them everything about you, and what you told them would be hard by someone else... (O3)

Social values are mainly being taught to the children in the private realm. If the parents of the child teach them not to trust the other parts of the society, for example other communities or police, it is difficult to act against this warning while encountering difference.

5.3.3. Effects of encountering through parochial realm

Analysis of the social behaviour of the children demonstrates how the parochial realm plays a meaningful role in three communities in the encounters with difference. It seems that encounters which are done through parochial activity, have mainly a positive impact towards tolerance and trust towards difference. Hobbies, religion and school all create parochial platforms for the children in these three communities. Positive experiences of increased tolerance and letting go of the feelings of fear and prejudice towards racial difference happen mainly through parochial activity.

“Khayelitsha, we went with Africa Jam there, camping. Sometimes I feel like they are gonna be rude to us, but they are very kind to us, even if they are from different cultures, different skin colors… Sometimes, other children, they judge people about their skin color. And I feel so sad about it. I tell them no, it's wrong. All of us are human. I can't help with it that there is different skin colours.” (O9)

Playing a game. they will ask like, “can I play?” and I say yes you can play, and then at that moment when I say you can play with we can become friends. (LR10)

Strangers that children see in a negative light and as a threat on the streets in the public realm become people with whom they do certain activity within the parochial realm. The parochial realm seems to cultivate feelings of curiosity and interest towards strangers instead of feelings of alertness. Perceptions of unknown people decrease when encounters are made in some kind of familiar space, or during a common activity.

Yes, like in church or in AJ, like in a day camp, you have to like when you do competitions you team up with someone you don’t know. So, I think that is an opportunity to make friends because you have to get to know the person. (K3)

I made a friend. So, I wanted to go to him, so, he looked at me, like a bad look. And I gave him one back, but I go to him and ask his name, and it was ok. (O10 in school)

I go to them when I see them sitting alone, then I go and talk to them, I tell them my name, where I live, and my school. And I ask them their names. (K6 when playing outside)

The social interactions made in public spaces are happening mainly on the roads, when children temporarily occupy the space of transition for them to engage in parochial activity. This happens for

56 example when children come to the street to play soccer and other games, or when they transit from school to home in the afternoons.

As demonstrated in previous chapters, it seems that because of the homogeneity of the neighbourhoods the number of the encounters with difference also through parochial activity is not significant. Most of the parochial activity is made inside one’s community, and the people attending the activity are mainly from similar cultural backgrounds. Therefore, even if parochial activity is creating a meaningful platform for encounters with difference, the effect of creating tolerance towards the unknown is not necessarily on the children.

Furthermore, the effect of the encounters in the parochial realm seem to be dependent on the presence of adults. Meaningful encounters are more likely to happen in situations that are coordinated by trustworthy adults. For example afterschool programs or summer camps seem to inspire more fruitful encounters with the difference than moments when children are playing soccer by themselves in a park.

6. Critical reflections and conclusion

This research has tried to understand the nature and the effects of the everyday encounters with difference of the children in Cape Town. To do this, the paper has divided the problem into three research questions. Firstly, the paper has examined where children have encounters with difference, secondly, which forces mediate these encounters and thirdly, how this affects the social relations with difference. In this concluding section, the main findings are brought together and connected to a wider academic discussion in the studies of geography of encounters. Finally, possible policy implications are introduced. Figure 7 demonstrates the findings of this research.

Figure 7 Findings from analysis

The first research question of the paper tried to understand where and how children have encounters with difference. To understand this better, encounters were analysed through three social realms by Lynn Lofland (1998). As expected, children are exposed to encounters with difference in the public realm while they are commuting from home to school and hobbies or to visit their family. The places for the encounters in the public realm are often the children's own home street, the centre of Cape Town or shopping malls. Still, public spaces are challenging for the children to spend any meaningful time to encounter difference either due to traffic, limited facilities like green spaces, and the lack of safety.

Besides the public realm, children encounter difference at some levels in the private realm. Mainly this happens when they have family events or when they play with their friends. The places where encounters in the private realm occur are mainly in private spaces like homes as well as the houses of the family and friends of the children. Encounters in the private realm happen also in public and parochial spaces like weddings in local churches, in the restaurant or in shopping malls. However, children are less exposed to difference in private realm compared to public or parochial realms.

Hence, children are having social interactions daily in the parochial realm where also encounters with difference happen. This happens when children engage in parochial activity, for example when they play football and other games together or attend an afterschool program, or summer camps with other children. The parochial realm happens often in private and parochial spaces such as afterschool activity locations, school and church, and also in public spaces like streets, shopping malls and on the beach.

The second research question, the forces that are mediating the encounters with difference have been investigated. The forces analysed in this paper are gang violence, family ties, and the presence of adults, the post-apartheid city and poverty. Gang violence, poverty as well as the lack of the presence of trustworthy adults are all mediating forces for the decreased encounters with difference, when again, family ties and the presence of trustworthy adults are often facilitating the encounters and create a safe platform for a meaningful interaction to happen. In general, safety issues can be recognized as a cross cutting mediating force in the encounters of the children, and especially apparent in the encounters in public realm.

Finally, the third research question, the effects on the social relations with difference have been analysed. However, in all public, private as well as in parochial realms the outcome of encounters with difference is significantly dependent on the nature of the situation. Feelings of safety and comfortability are significant factors which encourage the child to encounter difference. For example, places to play soccer might depend on the time of day or presence of adults.

This paper was expecting to find differences in the nature of encounters with difference of children between the three neighbourhoods because of the geographical and socio-economic factors. In the end it seems that the possibilities to encounter difference are relatively similar in all three communities. Furthermore, because the data comes from the same source, Africa Jam Youth Outreach organization, there seems to be more similarities between the children than I was expecting. For example, besides the dominance of gang violence, religion and culture play a big role

59 in the lives of youths in each neighbourhood. However, there seem to be significant differences in the outcomes of the encounters, depending on where, how and when these encounters are being made.

Analysis demonstrates how the possibilities for the children to encounter difference are limited. The profound issue limiting the chances to encounter differences is the cultural and socio-economical homogeneity of the neighbourhoods. Even if children encounter people in all three realms in their everyday life, the people they interact with are mainly coming from the same cultural background. As Muyeba & Seekings (2010) state, the strong centralization of racial groups, who share the same socio-economic background is still very dominant in Cape Town after over 20 years since the end of the apartheid. During the stay in the three neighbourhoods, the almost non-existent presence of other racial groups was very visible. Lemanski’s (2004) ’new apartheid’ can be recognised in the urban social construction.

As a hypothesis for the second question, the paper expected to find a lack of opportunities to encounter difference due to the segregation and enclave living in the city, in other words, remarks of Bauman’s ‘city of fears’ in urban planning. As demonstrated in the analysis chapter, it seems that children in these three communities indeed have limited chances to encounter difference. Spatial segregation plays a role in this, but analysis demonstrates that significant reasons for this are the challenges that are occurring inside one’s own community. Poverty is one important element in encounters of the children and follows Bauman’s (1998b) explanation of the postmodern polarization of groups in today’s globalized world. Children are fixed to their locality, and the possibilities for them to commute to different places and encounter difference beyond their neighbourhoods are very limited.

Hence, the analysis demonstrates how the use of public space of children has been narrowing down during this time, and the public spaces and places that were fundamentally designed for children are today no-go areas for them. Children seem to define areas as safe or unsafe zones, as Reay & Lucey (2002) state. In other words, streets and public spaces don’t serve the function for social interaction for the children in the three communities. The impact of apartheid and poverty have created a generational snowball effect of a strong lack of trust towards people inside one’s community, which can be seen in the numbers of gangs dominating and protecting their own territories. As Pinnock (2016) also states, the streets don’t play a common playground and the conjugal family itself has become the focus of solidarity, shifting the social activity from streets and public spaces to small houses. Citizens are stained by perpetuating fear towards the other and the only way that the streets are used for social life is by driving through them in cars during the daytime.

Instead of spatial factors like physical borders affecting the encounters with difference, it rather seems to be the strong mental and cultural borders affecting the social interaction. The mediating force that is influencing the encounters seem to be socially constructed experiences and knowledge of ‘the other’. Following the thought of Nayak (2019) and Wacquant (2008), strong territorial and cultural, but also racial identities and even stigmas are mediating the social interaction of children. Many children are not interested or curious to know about life outside of their communities.

Diken (1998) emphasizes how the fear towards others depends on the level of strangeness of the other. I would like to add that the nature of the encounter itself has an effect on the feeling of strangeness. The nature of the social realm in encounters, as well as mediating factors such as and poverty are reflected in the perceptions of the other. For example, scary or unsafe encounters in the public realm seem to have an effect of decreased trust towards the other. As Pinnock (2016) also states, there is a strong lack of trust towards the other among the children of Cape Town. It seems that there is a lack of trust both between different communities as well as within the communities in the city. Nearly every child concerned in this research expressed their suspiciousness towards strangers as well as towards their friends.

Similarly, there exists clear forces that are mediating the feelings of safety towards spaces as well as encounters of strangers. The presence of adults and coordinated parochial activity in familiar settings helps to increase meaningful encounters and has a positive impact when interacting with unfamiliar people. Furthermore, encounters with difference beyond one’s neighbourhoods seem to be increasing curiosity towards difference. Encounters outside of one’s neighbourhood happen when visiting one’s family members, going for summer camp, visiting shopping malls and the centre of Cape Town.

The last hypotheses followed the statement of many scholars of urban sociology and geography (e.g. Lofland, 1998; Peterson, 2017; Amin, 2002; Valentine, 2008) and was expecting to find the link between parochial activity and increased tolerance towards the unknown as well as towards meaningful encounters with difference. Indeed, meaningful encounters of difference happen more likely in parochial realms, both in public and private spaces. Summer camps where children attend every year is one of the most powerful parochial activities in their narratives. There they encounter children from different communities and cultural backgrounds, and share the same egalitarian conditions for social interactions that Muyeba and Seekings (2010) stress are necessary for the seeds of feelings of belonging and tolerance to flourish.

To conclude, as both Teppo (2018) and Muyeba & Seekings (2010) have stated, increasing racial tolerance and reduced prejudices are more present in South Africa today. However, there are elements such as poverty and safety that are significantly determining the social activity of children in the local communities. These mediating forces need to be taken care of to ensure the trend of tolerance to continue. Instead of focusing only on preventing gang violence, a more profound question in urban policy planning should be how to increase the trust between these groups of people as well as between individuals. In this sense I support Zuma’s (2014 and Erasmus’ (2010) request for fundamental and basic needs like safety first to be taken care of, both on the governmental level as well as locally. It is important to ensure the opportunity for current young generations, to ensure the ample opportunities to live a meaningful and safe life in their own communities, and gradually give their own input to the next generations:

Well, something I actually wanted to do is move out eventually and then come back, you know, because this is a place I'll never forget cause this is where I grew up. And I just, like give back to the community, as the community served me well. Like, even it wasn't good for some people, in my life, I would probably be a gangster by this time already. So the community served me well you know, they have uplifted me and what I would like to do is to give back to them, like the little ones. Keep them off the street, you know, tell them that is not the life you need to live, chase your dreams man, I just want to give back for my community as a thanksgiving, like in the form to say thank you. (O3)

6.2. Limitation of data and further research

There are various factors that are setting limitations for this research. Firstly, there are issues with data sample and selection. Because of the data access, the profile of the children interviewed doesn’t necessarily represent the average child of the neighbourhood. The children participating in the research are mainly Christian. As the youth worker from Ottery states and what can be found from the comments of the children from the interviews, the children attending the program is a very small part of the neighbourhood and there are children with different backgrounds, for example the ones who don’t go to school and are running around the streets. Furthermore, having 10 interview samples from each neighbourhood is not enough to draw conclusions of the children’s lives. This is why this research does not make strong generalisations about the community itself, neither make comparisons between the children from different communities or age backgrounds, but is expressing observations as an aim to understand the nature of their encounters.

Furthermore, time constraints were limiting the access to the data. The possibility to stay two weeks in each neighbourhood was enough to gather the data, but not enough to get a deeper understanding of children’s everyday encounters in their neighbourhoods.

Moreover, while this paper is focusing on the safety issues in the communities, it is important to highlight that in my capacity as a researcher, I am nevertheless an outsider, coming from global-north with a different cultural background. This has an effect on the research by overemphasizing certain aspects of neighbourhoods over others. The communities discussed in this research are stigmatized as being places with high crime rates, poverty and unemployment. The concept of telescoping urbanism (Amin, 2013) explains how these ‘negative’ aspects might be overemphasized and overrepresented compared to other aspects characterizing the city. Therefore, the cultural bias cannot be avoided and is characterising the outcome of this research on some levels.

As a suggestion for the further research it is relevant to examine more profoundly the forces that affect the outcome of the parochial activity increasing feelings of belonging, such as levels of coordination of the activity (presence of adults) and the nature of the space (public, parochial, private). Moreover, one finding of this research is the lack of trust within one’s community. Building on this finding, this paper suggests future research into more profound analysis of the degrees of trust in different social situations. I also agree with Kwan’s (2013) statement to support expanding the theory of encounters beyond a space towards examining the movement of encounters and in this way liberate the theory from one space.

Declaration of authorship

I hereby declare that the thesis submitted is my own unaided work. All direct or indirect sources used are acknowledged as references. I am aware that the thesis in digital form can be examined for the use of unauthorized aid and in order to determine whether the thesis as a whole or parts incorporated in it may be deemed as plagiarism. For the comparison of my work with existing sources I agree that it shall be entered in a database where it shall also remain after examination, to enable comparison with future theses submitted. Further rights of reproduction and usage, however, are not granted here. This paper was not previously presented to another examination board and has not been published.

Bibliography

Allport, G. W. (1955). The nature of prejudice. Cambridge, Mass: Addison-Wesley Pub. Co.

Amin, A. (2002). Ethnicity and the multicultural city: Living with diversity. Environment and Planning A, 34, 959–980.

Amin, A. 2013. “Telescopic Urbanism and the Poor.” City 17 (4): 476–492.

Arthurson K. 2012. Social Mix and the City: Challenging the Mixed Communities Consensus in Housing and Urban Planning Policies. Collingwood, CSIRO Publishing.

Bauman, Z. (2003). City of fears, city of hopes. London: Goldsmiths College.

Bauman, Z. (1998a). Work, Consumerism and the New Poor. Buckingham: Open University Press.

Bauman, Z. 1998b). Globalization: The Human Consequences. Cambridge: Polity Press.

De Backer, M. (2019). Class, Style and Territory in the Drari Microcultures of Brussels. Societies, 9(3), 64.

Diken, Bülent (1998). Strangers, Ambivalence and Social Theory. Aldershot: Ashgate.

Dixon, J., Tropp, L. R., Durrheim, K., & Tredoux, C. (2010). "Let them eat harmony": Prejudice-reduction strategies and attitudes of historically disadvantaged groups. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 19(2), 76-80.

Erasmus, Z. (2010). Contact Theory: Too timid for “race” and racism. Journal of Social Issues, 66(2), 387–400.

Gueben-Venière, S. (2011) How can mental maps, applied to the coast environment, help in collecting and analyzing spatial representations?, EchoGéo, 17 | 2011, mis en ligne le 27 septembre 2011, consulté le 12 avril 2020.

Hallsworth, S. (2011). Gangland Britain? Realities, fantasies and industry. Youth in Crisis? (pp. 195- 209). Routledge.

Houssay-Holzschuch, M. & Teppo, A. (2009). A mall for all? Race and public space in post- apartheid Cape Town. Cultural geographies, SAGE Publications, 16 (3), pp.351-379.

Kwan, M. (2013). Beyond space (as we knew it): toward temporally integrated geographies of segregation, health, and accessibility. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 103 (5), 1078–1086.

Lehohla, P. (2017). Poverty trends in South Africa – an examination of absolute poverty between 2006 and 2015. Statistics South Africa.

Lemanski, C. (2006). Spaces of exclusivity or connection? Linkages between a gated community and its poorer neighbour in a Cape Town master plan development. Urban studies, 43(2), 397-420.

Lemanski, C. (2004). A new apartheid? The spatial implications of fear of crime in Cape Town, South Africa. Environment and Urbanization, 16(2), 101 112.

Lemanski, C. (2009). Augmented informality: South Africa's backyard dwellings as a by-product of formal housing policies. Habitat International, 33(4), 472-484.

L. H. Lofland (1998). The Public Realm: Exploring the City’s Quintessential Social Territory. New York: Routledge.

Mackellar, J (2013). Participant observation at events: theory, practice and potential. Centre for Tourism, Sport and Service Research, Griffith University, Gold Coast, Australia.

Muyeba, S. & Seekings, J. (2010). Inter-racial attitudes and interactions in racially-mixed low-income neighbourhoods in Cape Town, South Africa. Centre for Social Science Research, Social Surveys Unit.

Nayak, A (2019). Re‐scripting Place: Managing Social Class Stigma in a Former Steel‐Making Region. Antipode, 10.1111/anti.12525, 51, 3, (927-948)

Peterson, M. (2017). Living with difference in hyper-diverse areas: how important are encounters in semi-public spaces?, Social & Cultural Geography, 18:8, 1067-1085.

Pettigrew, T., & Tropp, L. (2008). How does intergroup contact reduce prejudice? Meta-analytic tests of three mediators. European Journal of Social Psychology, 38, 922–934.

Pinnock, Dоn (2016). Gang Town. Tafelberg, Cape Town.

Reay, D. & Lucey, H. (2002). ‘I Don't Really like It Here but I Don't Want to Be Anywhere Else’: Children and Inner City Council Estates. Antipode. 32. 410 - 428.

Reicher, S. (2007). Rethinking the paradigm of prejudice. South African Journal of Psychology, 37(4), 820–834.

Rieniets, Tim. (2012). Open city. Designing coexistence in the contemporary city. 61. 7-15.

Teppo, Annika (2018). Displaced, misplaced, re-placed. In search of an understanding of ’race’ and urban change – evidence from Cape Town. Routledge handbook of Anthropology and the City.

Schuermans, N. (2019). Spaces to Encounter: learning to live together in superdiverse cities. Handbook of Urban Geography. Schwanen, T. & Van Kempen, R. (eds.). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, p. 340-353.

Schuermans, N. (2016). Enclave urbanism as telescopic urbanism? Encounters of middle class whites in Cape Town. Cities, 59, 183-192.

Schuermans, N. (2013). Ambivalent geographies of encounter inside and around the fortified homes of middle class Whites in Cape Town. Journal of Housing and the Built Environment. 4, 28, p. 679- 688 10 p.

Sennett, R. (2003). Respect: the formation of character in an age of inequality. London: Penguin Books.

Pronkhorst, A., Provoost, M., & Vanstiphout, W. (Eds.). (2019). A City of Comings and Goings. Nai010 Publishers.

Valentine, G. (2018). Geographies of youth – a generational perspective. Children's Geographies.

Valentine, G. (2008). Living with difference: reflections on geographies of encounter. Progress in Human Geography 32(3) pp.323-337.

Valentine, G. & MacDonald, I. (2004). Understanding prejudice. London: Citizenship 21.

Wacquant L (2008). Urban Outcasts: A Comparative Sociology of Advanced Marginality. Cam-bridge: Polity.

Watt, P. and Stenson, K. (1998). ‘It’s a bit dodgy round here’: safety, danger, ethnicity and young people’s use of public space. In Skelton, T. and Valentine, G., editors, Cool places: geographies of youth cultures, London: Routledge.

Wenz, L. (2013). Changing Tune in Woodstock: Creative industries and local urban development in Cape Town/ South Africa. Gateways – International Journal of Community Research & Engagement, 5, pp. 16-34.

Zuma, B. (2014). Contact theory and the concept of prejudice: Metaphysical and moral explorations and an epistemological question. Theory & Psychology 24(1):40-57.

Zinganel, M. (2009). Crime does pay! The Structure-Building Power of Crime for Urban Planning and Urban Experience. Amsterdam, SUN.

Non-academic sources Business Day (2019). Cape Town murder rate unchanged despite army deployment.

Business Tech (11.6.2020). Cape Town now ranks as the 8th most violent city in the world.

City of Cape Town (2017). Community Survey, Cape Town Trends 1996 to 2016.

City of Cape Town (2017b). Socio-economic profile.

City of Cape Town (2013a). Census Suburb Khayelitsha.

City of Cape Town (2013b). Census Suburb Lotus River.

City of Cape Town (2013c). Census Suburb Ottery.

Chutel, L. & Kopf, D. (2018). All the charts that show South Africa’s inequality is only getting worse. Quartz Africa.

Democratic Alliance (2020). Cape Town has lowest unemployment rate of all metros.

Elitsha (2014). Youth unemployment in Khayelitsha.

Head, T. (2018). “Inequality has increased in South Africa since the apartheid” – World Bank. The South African.

Independent Online and Affiliated companies (10.10.2019). Number of weekly murders in Western Cape 'decline to thirties range'.

Appendix 1, list of figures

Figure 1 Structure of thesis ...... 3 Figure 2 Summary of the Geographies of encounter by Schuermans (2019) ...... 8 Figure 3 Afterschool programs in the city of Cape Town ...... 15 Figure 4 City of Cape Town (2013) Census Suburb Khayelitsha ...... 18 Figure 5 Analysis map ...... 32 Figure 6 Ottery, Battle field ...... 44 Figure 7 Findings from analysis ...... 58

Appendix 2, list of mental maps

Cover picture: Mental map 1 Khayelitsha ...... 1 Mental map 2 Ottery ...... 34 Mental map 3 Khayelitsha ...... 34 Mental map 4 Lotus River, painting with green elements...... 35 Mental map 5 Lotus River, soccer game ...... 38 Mental map 6 Khayelitsha, handball game ...... 38

Mental map 7 Khayelitsha, Africa Jam center ...... 39 Mental map 8 Lotus River, church as a safe place ...... 40 Mental map 9 Ottery, Battle field...... 44

Appendix 3, list of photos

Photo 1 Lotus River, 2019...... 16 Photo 2 Lotus River, Google street view (2014) ...... 16 Photo 3 Lotus River, Google street view (2014) ...... 16 Photo 4 Ottery, Google street view (2014) ...... 17 Photo 5 Ottery, Google street view (2014) ...... 17 Photo 6 Khayelitsha, Mandela Park Google street view (2014)...... 18 Photo 7 Khayelitsha, Mandela Park Google street view (2014) ...... 19 Photo 8 Khayelitsha, Mandela Park, 2019 ...... 19 Photo 9 Lotus River, street of the afterschool program, 2019 ...... 21 Photo 10 Lotus River, Church where the afterschool program takes place, 2019 ...... 22 Photo 11 Lotus River, mental maps painting, 2019 ...... 22 Photo 12 Ottery afterschool program, 2019 ...... 23 Photo 13 Ottery afterschool program, 2019 ...... 23 Photo 14 Ottery, mental mapping task, 2019 ...... 24 Photo 15 Mandela Park, Khayelitsha, street of afterschool program, 2019 ...... 24 Photo 16 Mandela Park, Khayelitsha, place of afterschool program, 2019 ...... 25 Photo 17 Khayelitsha, mental mapping task, 2019 ...... 25