DOCSLIB.ORG

An Exploration of RDP Housing in Johannesburg

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

State ambitions and peoples’ practices: An exploration of RDP housing in Johannesburg Thesis submitted in fulfilment of the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Town and Regional Planning at the University of Sheffield. Sarah Charlton August 2013. ABSTRACT South Africa’s RDP housing programme has delivered ownership of a house and serviced land to millions of first time home-owners since 1994. Intended to both provide shelter and address poverty, the housing programme is typical of improvement initiatives of the modern state aimed at advancing the physical, economic or social situation of a target population. Yet little is known about the results of the South African housing programme for recipient households, except that some beneficiaries attract state censure for interacting with their houses in unexpected and unwelcome ways. Despite the lack of clarity on its effects, the large-scale costly housing programme continues to be implemented. This study investigates the programme’s outcomes in Johannesburg through the perspectives of both RDP beneficiaries and state housing practitioners. Findings transcend the denigration of RDP housing as ‘poorly located’, revealing people’s complex interactions with their housing which show its flaws and limitations but also their attachment to it. To minimise the shortcomings of the housing benefit RDP settlements are appropriated, adapted and transformed, households composition may be re- configured and alternative accommodation off-site brought into play. In general the state has limited insight into this intricacy, little institutional appetite to explore it and holds contradictory positions on the outcomes of the programme. Despite the evident resources and power of the state, it is confounded by the complexity of people’s practices. More broadly, the study contributes to housing and planning literature through its focus on the interface between state and beneficiary practices. Peoples’ responses to RDP housing emphasise both the state’s limited capacity in addressing the housing need, but also the catalytic value and potential its intervention triggers. Rather than portraying the state and the subaltern as clashing over conflicting rationalities, it illuminates their overlapping aspirations and mutual shaping of space. Page 2 of 400 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I am deeply grateful to all of the following people, who in various ways have helped me produce this thesis: Claire Benit-Gbaffou, Bob Charlton, Diana Charlton, Julia Charlton, Nathalie Charlton, Robin Charlton, Natasha Erlank, Ed Ferrari, Bronwen Findlay, Clive Glaser, Phil Harrison, Shireen Hassim, Marie Huchzermeyer, Aly Karam, Garth Klein, Neil Klug, Claire Loveday, Alan Mabin, Miriam Maina, Vanessa Mello, members of the Wits-UJ Reading Group, Eulenda Mkwanazi, Eugene Ndaba, Pam Notununu, Edgar Pieterse, Margot Rubin, Melinda Silverman, Alison Todes, Tanja Winkler and Tanya Zack. Particularly heartfelt thanks are due to: Daryl Glaser, Elsje Bonthys, and Paula Meth; my skilled and patient research assistants and translators Lerato Motlaung and Mawabo Msingaphantsi; the respondents interviewed for this research, who were enormously generous with their time and insights. I am profoundly indebted to Glyn Williams, who has provided unfailingly wise and deeply skilful supervisory guidance and encouragement. With sincere thanks to the National Research Foundation (South Africa), the University of Sheffield and the University of the Witwatersrand for generous financial support. Page 3 of 400 ABSTRACT ........................................................................................................................................... 2 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ...................................................................................................................... 3 LIST OF FIGURES, MAPS AND TABLES ............................................................................................... 10 ACRONYMS ....................................................................................................................................... 12 1 CHAPTER 1 - INTRODUCTION................................................................................................... 13 1.1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 13 1.2 The research question ...................................................................................................... 18 1.3 The approach .................................................................................................................... 19 1.3.1 Housing issues .......................................................................................................... 19 1.3.2 State-society relations .............................................................................................. 23 1.3.3 Method ..................................................................................................................... 26 1.4 Structure of the thesis ...................................................................................................... 28 2 CHAPTER 2 - STUDYING STATE AND PEOPLE INTERACTIONS WITH A HOUSING BENEFIT ...... 32 2.1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 32 2.2 Improvement, modernity and development ................................................................... 36 2.2.1 Modernisation and modernity ................................................................................. 36 2.2.2 Varying outcomes ..................................................................................................... 40 2.2.3 What attracts state attention in reviewing improvement interventions? ............... 42 2.3 Seeing from the state ....................................................................................................... 52 2.3.1 Seeing from the bureaucracy ................................................................................... 52 2.3.2 Mechanisms and techniques .................................................................................... 59 2.4 People ............................................................................................................................... 67 2.4.1 Considering the applicability of literature on the everyday ..................................... 68 2.4.2 Organising along a spectrum .................................................................................... 71 2.5 Conclusion ........................................................................................................................ 89 Page 4 of 400 3 CHAPTER 3 – METHODOLOGY ................................................................................................. 96 3.1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 96 3.2 A case study: peoples’ interactions with RDP housing in Johannesburg and how this is viewed .......................................................................................................................................... 97 3.2.1 Geographic ............................................................................................................... 97 3.2.2 Institutional .............................................................................................................. 99 3.2.3 Experiential ............................................................................................................. 100 3.2.4 The case as a whole ................................................................................................ 100 3.3 Location of the case within literature ............................................................................ 102 3.4 Research design .............................................................................................................. 104 3.5 Data gathering activities ................................................................................................. 106 3.5.1 Interviews ............................................................................................................... 106 3.5.2 Interview analysis ................................................................................................... 125 3.5.3 Policy documents and analyses of policy ............................................................... 125 3.6 Personal positionality and ethical considerations.......................................................... 126 3.7 Limitations of the methodology ..................................................................................... 128 3.8 Conclusion ...................................................................................................................... 129 4 CHAPTER 4 - SOUTH AFRICA’S RDP HOUSING PROGRAMME ................................................ 131 4.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................... 131 4.2 The nature of the housing benefit ................................................................................. 131 4.3 Locating the South African housing approach ............................................................... 138 4.4 Diverse housing instruments .......................................................................................... 141 4.5 The aims of the RDP housing programme .....................................................................
Recommended publications
  • City of Johannesburg Ward Councillors: Region F

    City of Johannesburg Ward Councillors: Region F

    CITY OF JOHANNESBURG WARD COUNCILLORS: REGION F No. Councillors Party Region Ward Ward Suburbs: Ward Administrator: Name/Surname & Contact : : No: Details: 1. Cllr. Sarah Wissler DA F 23 Glenvista, Glenanda, Nombongo Sitela 011 681- [email protected] Mulbarton, Bassonia, Kibler 8094 011 682 2184 Park, Eikenhof, Rispark, [email protected] 083 256 3453 Mayfield Park, Aspen Hills, Patlyn, Rietvlei 2. VACANT DA F 54 Mondeor, Suideroord, Alan Lijeng Mbuli Manor, Meredale, Winchester 011 681-8092 Hills, Crown Gardens, [email protected] Ridgeway, Ormonde, Evans Park, Booysens Reserve, Winchester Hills Ext 1 3. Cllr Rashieda Landis DA F 55 Turffontein, Bellavista, Lijeng Mbuli [email protected] Haddon, Lindberg Park, 011 681-8092 083 752 6468 Kenilworth, Towerby, Gillview, [email protected] Forest Hill, Chrisville, Robertsham, Xavier and Golf 4. Cllr. Michael Crichton DA F 56 Rosettenville, Townsview, The Lijeng Mbuli [email protected] Hill, The Hill Extension, 011 681-8092 083 383 6366 Oakdene, Eastcliffe, [email protected] Linmeyer, La Rochelle (from 6th Street South) 5. Cllr. Faeeza Chame DA F 57 Moffat View, South Hills, La Nombongo Sitela [email protected] Rochelle, Regents Park& Ext 011 681-8094 081 329 7424 13, Roseacre1,2,3,4, Unigray, [email protected] Elladoon, Elandspark, Elansrol, Tulisa Park, Linmeyer, Risana, City Deep, Prolecon, Heriotdale, Rosherville 6. Cllr. A Christians DA F 58 Vredepark, Fordsburg, Sharon Louw [email protected] Laanglagte, Amalgam, 011 376-8618 011 407 7253 Mayfair, Paginer [email protected] 081 402 5977 7. Cllr. Francinah Mashao ANC F 59 Joubert Park Diane Geluk [email protected] 011 376-8615 011 376-8611 [email protected] 082 308 5830 8.
  • 7.5. Identified Sites of Significance Residential Buildings Within Rosettenville (Semi-Detached, Freestanding)

    7.5. Identified Sites of Significance Residential Buildings Within Rosettenville (Semi-Detached, Freestanding)

    7.5. Identified sites of significance_Residential buildings within Rosettenville (Semi-detached, freestanding) Introduction Residential buildings are buildings that are generally used for residential purposes or have been zoned for residential usage. It must be noted the majority of residences are over 60 years, it was therefore imperative for detailed visual study to be done where the most significant buildings were mapped out. Their significance could be as a result of them being associated to prominent figures, association with special events, design patterns of a certain period in history, rarity or part of an important architectural school. Most of the sites identified in this category are of importance in their local contexts and are representative of the historical and cultural patterns that could be discerned from the built environment. All the identified sites were given a 3A category explained below. Grading 3A_Sites that have a highly significant association with a historic person, social grouping, historic events, public memories, historical activities, and historical landmarks (should by all means be conserved) 3B_ Buildings of marginally lesser significance (possibility of senstive alteration and addition to the interior) 3C_Buildings and or sites whose significance is in large part significance that contributes to the character of significance of the environs (possibility for alteration and addition to the exterior) Summary Table of identified sites in the residential category: Site/ Description Provisional Heritage Implications
  • Noordgesig Social Cluster Project Heritage Impact Assessment & Conservation Management Plan

    Noordgesig Social Cluster Project Heritage Impact Assessment & Conservation Management Plan

    tsica – the significance of cultural history Noordgesig Social Cluster Project Heritage Impact Assessment & Conservation Management Plan Draft for public comment Prepared for: CITY OF JOHANNESBURG Johannesburg Development Agency No 3 Helen Joseph Street The Bus Factory Newtown Johannesburg, 2000 PO Box 61877 Marshalltown 2107 Tel +27(0) 11 688 7851 Fax +27(0) 11 688 7899/63 E-mail: [email protected] Attention: Ms. Shaakira Chohan Tel +27(0) 11 688 7858 E-mail: [email protected] Prepared by: tsica heritage consultants & Jacques Stoltz, Piet Snyman, Ngonidzashe Mangoro, Johann le Roux 41 5th Avenue Westdene 2092 Johannesburg tel/fax 011 477 8821 [email protected] th 25 of June 2016 Monika Läuferts le Roux & Judith Muindisi, tsica heritage consultants 2 Office: 5th Avenue, 41 – Westdene – 2092 – Johannesburg; Tel: 011 477-8821 [email protected] Acknowledgements Tsica heritage consultants would like to thank the following community members for their assistance during the compilation of this report: Patrick Randles, George Rorke, Alan Tully, Terence Jacobs, Delia Malgas, Sister Elizabeth “Betty Glover, Bernice Charles, Rev. Stewart Basson, Nolan Borman, Councillor Basil Douglas, Burg Jacobs, Ivan Lamont, Charles Abrahams, Raymond Benson and Jeff Modise and everyone else who attended our meetings, opened their doors for us or talked to us in the streets of Bulte. Monika Läuferts le Roux & Judith Muindisi, tsica heritage consultants 3 Office: 5th Avenue, 41 – Westdene – 2092 – Johannesburg; Tel: 011 477-8821 [email protected] Important notice The assessment of the heritage impacts of the proposed developments contemplated in this report is strictly limited to the developments detailed in the Noordgesig Precinct Plan of the City of Johannesburg (June 2016).
  • Economics of South African Townships: a Focus on Diepsloot

    Economics of South African Townships: a Focus on Diepsloot

    A WORLD BANK STUDY Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized Economics of South African Townships Public Disclosure Authorized SPECIAL FOCUS ON DIEPSLOOT Public Disclosure Authorized Sandeep Mahajan, Editor Economics of South African Townships A WORLD BANK STUDY Economics of South African Townships Special Focus on Diepsloot Sandeep Mahajan, Editor WORLD BANK GROUP Washington, D.C. © 2014 International Bank for Reconstruction and Development / The World Bank 1818 H Street NW, Washington, DC 20433 Telephone: 202-473-1000; Internet: www.worldbank.org Some rights reserved 1 2 3 4 17 16 15 14 This work is a product of the staff of The World Bank with external contributions. The findings, interpreta- tions, and conclusions expressed in this work do not necessarily reflect the views of The World Bank, its Board of Executive Directors, or the governments they represent. The World Bank does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this work. The boundaries, colors, denominations, and other information shown on any map in this work do not imply any judgment on the part of The World Bank concerning the legal status of any territory or the endorsement or acceptance of such boundaries. Nothing herein shall constitute or be considered to be a limitation upon or waiver of the privileges and immunities of The World Bank, all of which are specifically reserved. Rights and Permissions This work is available under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 IGO license (CC BY 3.0 IGO) http:// creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/igo. Under the Creative Commons Attribution license, you are free to copy, distribute, transmit, and adapt this work, including for commercial purposes, under the following conditions: Attribution—Please cite the work as follows: Mahajan, Sandeep, ed.
  • Proposed New 15Ml Reservoir and 1.2Km Pipeline, Lenasia South, Gauteng Province Draft

    Proposed New 15Ml Reservoir and 1.2Km Pipeline, Lenasia South, Gauteng Province Draft

    PROPOSED NEW 15ML RESERVOIR AND 1.2KM PIPELINE, LENASIA SOUTH, GAUTENG PROVINCE DRAFT PROPOSED NEW 15ML RESERVOIR AND 1.2KM PIPELINE, LENASIA SOUTH, GAUTENG PROVINCE ENVIRONMENTAL SCREENING REPORT DRAFT MAY 2014 Environmental, Social and OSH Consultants P.O. Box 1673 147 Bram Fischer Drive Tel: 011 781 1730 Sunninghill Ferndale Fax: 011 781 1731 2157 2194 Email: [email protected] Copyright Nemai Consulting 2014 MAY 2014 i PROPOSED NEW 15ML RESERVOIR AND 1.2KM PIPELINE, LENASIA SOUTH, GAUTENG PROVINCE DRAFT 1 TITLE AND APPROVAL PAGE Proposed new 15Ml reservoir and 1.2km pipeline, Lenasia South, PROJECT NAME: Gauteng Province. REPORT TITLE: Environmental Screening Report REPORT STATUS Draft AUTHORITY REF NO: N/A CLIENT: Johannesburg Water (011) 688 1669 (011) 11 688 1521 [email protected] P.O. Box 61542 Marshalltown 2107 PREPARED BY: Nemai Consulting C.C. (011) 781 1730 (011) 781 1731 [email protected] P.O. Box 1673 Sunnighill 2157 AUTHOR: Kristy Robertson REVIEWED BY: Sign Date APPROVED BY: Sign Date MAY 2014 ii PROPOSED NEW 15ML RESERVOIR AND 1.2KM PIPELINE, LENASIA SOUTH, GAUTENG PROVINCE DRAFT AMENDMENTS PAGE Date Nature of Amendment Amendment No. Signature 28/05/14 First Draft for Client Review 0 MAY 2014 iii PROPOSED NEW 15ML RESERVOIR AND 1.2KM PIPELINE, LENASIA SOUTH, GAUTENG PROVINCE DRAFT TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 TITLE AND APPROVAL PAGE 2 AMENDMENTS PAGE 3 TABLE OF CONTENTS 4 List of Figures 5 List of Tables 5 1 INTRODUCTION 7 2 SCOPE OF WORK 9 3 SITE LOCATION 10 4 BIOPHYSICAL FACTORS 11 4.1 Topography 11 4.2 Geology
  • Johannesburg Spatial Development Framework 2040

    Johannesburg Spatial Development Framework 2040

    City of Johannesburg Metropolitan Municipality Spatial Development Framework 2040 In collaboration with: Iyer Urban Design, UN Habitat, Urban Morphology and Complex Systems Institute and the French Development Agency City of Johannesburg: Department of Development Planning 2016 Table of Contents Glossary of Terms.................................................................................................................................... 5 Abbreviations and Acronyms .................................................................................................................. 8 1. Foreword ....................................................................................................................................... 10 2. Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................... 11 2.1. Existing Spatial Structure of Johannesburg and its Shortcomings ........................................ 11 2.2. Transformation Agenda: Towards a Spatially Just City ......................................................... 12 2.3. Spatial Vision: A Compact Polycentric City ........................................................................... 12 2.4. Spatial Framework and Implementation Strategy ................................................................ 17 2.4.1. An integrated natural structure .................................................................................... 17 2.4.2. Transformation Zone ...................................................................................................
  • Comparative Study of Land Administration Systems with Special Reference to Armenia, Moldova, Latvia and Kyrgyzstan

    Comparative Study of Land Administration Systems with Special Reference to Armenia, Moldova, Latvia and Kyrgyzstan

    LAND ADMINISTRATION REFORM: Indicators of Success, Future Challenges Tony Burns, Chris Grant, Kevin Nettle, Anne-Marie Brits and Kate Dalrymple Version: 13 November 2006 A large body of research recognizes the importance of institutions providing land owners with secure tenure and allowing land to be transferred to more productive uses and users. This implies that, under appropriate circumstances, interventions to improve land administration institutions, in support of these goals, can yield significant benefits. At the same time, to make the case for public investment in land administration, it is necessary to consider both the benefits and the costs of such investments. Given the complexity of the issues involved, designing investments in land administration systems is not straightforward. Systems differ widely, depending on each country’s factor endowments and level of economic development. Investments need to be tailored to suit the prevailing legal and institutional framework and the technical capacity for implementation. This implies that, when designing interventions in this area, it is important to have a clear vision of the long-term goals, to use this to make the appropriate decisions on sequencing, and to ensure that whatever measures are undertaken are cost-effective. This study, which originated in a review of the cost of a sample of World Bank- financed land administration projects over the last decade (carried out by Land Equity International Pty Ltd in collaboration with DECRG), provides useful guidance on a number of fronts. First, by using country cases to draw more general conclusions at a regional level, it illustrates differences in the challenges by region, and on the way these will affect interventions in the area of land administration.
  • In the Aquatic Ecosystems of Soweto/Lenasia

    In the Aquatic Ecosystems of Soweto/Lenasia

    Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) in the aquatic ecosystems of Soweto/Lenasia Report to the WATER RESEARCH COMMISSION by Wihan Pheiffer1, Rialet Pieters1, Bettina Genthe2, Laura Quinn3, Henk Bouwman1 & Nico Smit1 1North-West University 2Council for Scientific and Industrial Research 3National Metrology Institute of South Africa WRC Report No. 2242/1/16 ISBN 978-1-4312-0801-2 June 2016 Obtainable from Water Research Commission Private Bag X03 Gezina, 0031 [email protected] or download from www.wrc.org.za DISCLAIMER This report has been reviewed by the Water Research Commission (WRC) and approved for publication. Approval does not signify that the contents necessarily reflect the views and policies of the WRC, nor does mention of trade names or commercial products constitute endorsement or recommendation for use. © Water Research Commission ii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY BACKGROUND Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) consist of fused benzene rings and the congeners have varying numbers of benzene rings, usually between two and six. They have a widespread distribution due to their formation by incomplete combustion of organic materials and are continuously released into the environment making them ever-present. The US EPA has earmarked 16 congeners that must be monitored and controlled because of their proven harmful effects on humans and wildlife. Anthropogenic activities largely increase the occurrence of these pollutants in the environment. A measurable amount of these PAHs are expected to find their way into aquatic ecosystems. RATIONALE In a previous study completed for the Water Research Commission (Project no K5/1561) on persistent organic pollutants in freshwater sites throughout the entire country, the PAHs had the highest levels of all of the organic pollutants analysed for.
  • CITY of JOHANNESBURG – 24 May 2013 Structure of Presentation

    CITY of JOHANNESBURG – 24 May 2013 Structure of Presentation

    2012/13 and 2013/14 BEPP/USDG REVIEW Portfolio Committee CITY OF JOHANNESBURG – 24 May 2013 Structure of Presentation 1. Overview of the City’s Development Agenda – City’s Urban Trends – Development Strategy and Approach – Capex process and implementation 2. Part One: 2012/13 Expenditure – Quarter One USDG expenditure 2012/13 – Quarter Two USDG expenditure 2012/13 – Quarter Three USDG expenditure 2012/13 – Quarter Four USDG expenditure 2012/13 – Recovery plan on 2012/13 USDG expenditure Part Two: 2013/14 Expenditure – Impact of the USDG for 2013/14 – Prioritization of 2013/14 projects 2 JOHANNESBURG DEMOGRAPHICS • Total Population – 4.4 million • 36% of Gauteng population • 8% of national population • Johanesburg is growing faster than the Gauteng Region • COJ population increase by 38% between 2001 and 2011. JOHANNESBURG POPULATION PYRAMID Deprivation Index Population Deprivation Index Based on 5 indicators: •Income •Employment •Health •Education •Living Environment 5 Deprivation / Density Profile Based on 5 indicators: •Income •Employment •Health •Education • Living Environment Development Principles PROPOSED BUILDINGS > LIBERTY LIFE,FOCUS AROUND MULTI SANDTON CITY SANDTON FUNCTIONAL CENTRES OF ACTIVITY AT REGIONAL AND LOCAL SCALE BARA TRANSPORT FACILITY, SOWETO NEWTOWN MAKING TRANSPORTATION WORK FOR ALL RIDGE WALK TOWARDS STRETFORD STATION BRT AS BACKBONE ILLOVO BOULEVARD BUILD-UP AROUND PUBLIC TRANSPORT NODESVRIVONIA ROADAND FACING LOWDENSGATE CORRIDORS URBAN RESTRUCTURING INVESTMENT IN ADEQUATE INFRASTRUCTURE IN STRATEGIC LOCATIONS
  • Towards Applying a Green Infrastructure Approach in the Gauteng City-Region

    Towards Applying a Green Infrastructure Approach in the Gauteng City-Region

    GCRO RESEARCH REPORT # NO. 11 TOWARDS APPLYING A GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE APPROACH IN THE GAUTENG CITY-REGION DECEMBER 2019 Edited by Christina Culwick and Samkelisiwe Khanyile Contributions by Kerry Bobbins, Christina Culwick, Stuart Dunsmore, Anne Fitchett, Samkelisiwe Khanyile, Lerato Monama, Raishan Naidu, Gillian Sykes, Jennifer van den Bussche and Marco Vieira THE GCRO COMPRISES A PARTNERSHIP OF: TOWARDS APPLYING A GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE APPROACH IN THE GAUTENG CITY-REGION DECEMBER 2019 Production management: Simon Chislett ISBN:978-0-6399873-6-1 Cover image: Clive Hassall e-ISBN:978-0-6399873-7-8 Peer reviewer: Dr Pippin Anderson Edited by: Christina Culwick and Samkelisiwe Khanyile Copyright 2019 © Gauteng City-Region Observatory Contributions by: Kerry Bobbins, Christina Culwick, Published by the Gauteng City-Region Observatory Stuart Dunsmore, Anne Fitchett, Samkelisiwe Khanyile, (GCRO), a partnership of the University of Johannesburg, Lerato Monama, Raishan Naidu, Gillian Sykes, Jennifer the University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, van den Bussche and Marco Vieira the Gauteng Provincial Government and organised local Design: Breinstorm Brand Architects government in Gauteng (SALGA). GCRO RESEARCH REPORT # NO. 11 TOWARDS APPLYING A GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE APPROACH IN THE GAUTENG CITY-REGION Edited by Christina Culwick and Samkelisiwe Khanyile Contributions by Kerry Bobbins, Christina Culwick, Stuart Dunsmore, Anne Fitchett, Samkelisiwe Khanyile, Lerato Monama, Raishan Naidu, Gillian Sykes, Jennifer van den Bussche and Marco Vieira
  • Alexandra Urban Renewal:- the All-Embracing Township Rejuvenation Programme

    Alexandra Urban Renewal:- the All-Embracing Township Rejuvenation Programme

    ALEXANDRA URBAN RENEWAL:- THE ALL-EMBRACING TOWNSHIP REJUVENATION PROGRAMME 1. Introduction and Background About the Alexandra Township The township of Alexandra is one of the densely populated black communities of South Africa reach in township culture embracing cultural diversity. This township is located about 12km (about 7.5 miles) north-east of the Johannesburg city centre and 3km (less than 2 miles) from up market suburbs of Kelvin, Wendywood and Sandton, the financial heart of Johannesburg. It borders the industrial areas of Wynberg, and is very close to the Limbro Business Park, where large parts of the city’s high-tech and service sector are based. It is also very near to Bruma Commercial Park and one of the hype shopping centres of Eastgate Shopping Centre. This township amongst the others has been the first stops for rural blacks entering the city in search for jobs, and being neighbours with the semi-industrial suburbs of Kew and Wynberg. Some 170 000 (2001 Census: 166 968) people live in this community, in an area of approximately two square kilometres. Alexandra extends over an area of 800 hectares (or 7.6 square kilometres) and it is divided by the Jukskei River. Two of the main feeder roads into Johannesburg, N3 and M1 pass through Alexandra. However, the opportunity to link Alexandra with commercial and industrial areas for some time has been low. Socially, Alexandra can be subdivided into three parts, with striking differences; Old Alexandra (west of the Jukskei River) being the poorest and most densely populated area, where housing is mainly in informal dwellings and hostels.
  • Twenty Years on Poverty and Hardship in Urban Fiji

    Twenty Years on Poverty and Hardship in Urban Fiji

    Bijdragen tot de Taal-, Land- en Volkenkunde Vol. 168, no. 2-3 (2012), pp. 195-218 URL: http://www.kitlv-journals.nl/index.php/btlv URN:NBN:NL:UI:10-1-101733 Copyright: content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License ISSN: 0006-2294 JENNY BRYANT-TOKALAU Twenty years on Poverty and hardship in urban Fiji Here [in Suva], if we work everyday we can feed ourselves. Five days or 7 days you have to work hard. In farms you don’t have to do much because once you have upgraded all the facilities on your farm it is easy for you. If you earn any amount of money here it will not be sufficient for your family. In Rakiraki [if] you’ve got $50 you earn every week you can provide for your family very well because [of] all the things you can get from the farm. But here if you go to the shop, $200 is nothing for you. Life is better on the farm. (Interview with Hassan 2007.) I was brought up by a single parent – my Mum only. When I was young my grand- parents looked after me in the village (in Rewa). I was educated in the village school from class 1 to class 6. My mum works at domestic duties. I was lucky to come to Suva for my further education. These families helped my Mum with school fees. Since I am not really a clever girl in school I left in Form 5, then I started to have a family at a very young age.