Category

CORC

Practices of women’s saving and lending groups: Bath University students exchange to Cape Town, South Africa

By CORC, FEDUP, Learning Exchanges, News, Resources No Comments

Nabaa Zaynah, Sophie Moody, Kate Hunt, Hien Le (Bath University Students)

On the 5th of September, SA SDI Alliance facilitated an exchange between International Development with Economics students from the University of Bath and three Federation of the Urban Poor (FEDUP) savings groups. The exchange took place with three different Federation savings groups based in Philippi and Samora Townships – Cape Town – Siyazakha savings group, Hlala uphila, and Thubalethu loan group. The focus of the day was to learn about the micro financing schemes of the Federation of the Urban Poor and understand how the women of Philippi and Samora township are working in small groups to encourage saving and provide access to credit.

Bath University students with Federation of the Urban Poor savers in Phillipi, Cape Town.

Savings groups in Cape Town

The first group visited was Siyazakha savings group based in Siyahlala, Philippi. The second savings group was Hlala uphila based in Philippi a few streets away from Siyazakha savings group. The third and final group visited is Thubalethu loan group in Samora. The former saving group is part of the Federation Income Generation Programme, which assist members to start small businesses, and enabling the movement to generate its own income through landing small amounts of money to FEDUP members to start businesses. 

Siyazakha savings group and Hlala uphila saving group have been around since 2007 and 2009 respectively, and Thubalethu loan group was established in 2014. On average, each of the group’s members ranged between 30 to 40 people, largely all women, ranging in age, both young and old, and included housewives as well as working women who had their own small businesses. Some of the more experienced members of the group take positions of chairpersons or collectors, conducting the group meetings, assisting others and facilitating intake into the groups, as well as liaising with official bodies such as the municipality. 

Federation leaders explaining the origin of their saving scheme and early challenges.

The practices of the Cape Town women’s saving group

The support from FEDUP provides urban and rural poor women with an effective way to keep track of money in terms of both saving and lending. The roles of the different members of the group are also crucial in ensuring the smooth transition process of money, for example the collectors in the group gather the monies due each meeting and ensure its safe arrival in a bank deposit fund.

The savings group began with the organisation teaching one member the numeric skills needed to fill out a saving record book, which lead to that individual teaching others and so on. This depicts the snowball effect FEDUP triggers as its practice result into the doubling and tripling of members in the saving groups, without the need of many resources or support. It shows how if given the chance people can take control and empower themselves.

The FEDUP saving programme demonstrates that it is possible for people to take control in changing their lives. Control, which is difficult to find in a context where one can quickly become unhopeful due to a unresponsive government that has given such women empty promises and little support in these times of hardship. The savings group are built on community trust and unity; also used as a tool by the community to mobilise around the issues affecting the community. One of the savings group, Siyazakha mobilised around formal toilets in Siyahlala informal settlement and electricity. Through engagement and planning the community received formal toilets and electricity. 

Thubalethu savings group members collecting their monthly savings.

Saving groups as a tool for women empowerment

Savings group financially empower women since most households rely on limited income. In most times this income does not cover all house expenses. The formation of savings group has given the women some financial freedom, they are able to contribute to the income of their household and that has balanced out the dynamics at home. The savings gave the women a sense of hope, and encouragement to continue saving as they could see the impact the saving made in their lives.  

Savers of Phillipi emphasis the social benefits or the able to build social capital through saving groups. Since groups meet weekly this gives them an opportunity to be open and honest to each other in discussing issues. Some of the shared information revolved around personal matters such as domestic violence, mental health and other daily concerns, however the women also described how discussing larger matters such as an unreliable electricity supply could drive improvements.

As a group they felt more empowered to make a stand and take action collectively against problems, whereas for an individual it is easy to feel that your problems are only relevant to you and no-one else and therefore the progress of change is likely to be slower without these kind of interactions. Moreover, the opportunity to meet up with other women who are likely to be facing similar challenges is within itself an empowering concept, and generates a space for open discussions which in a busy restrictive society can be difficult to create.

The relationships between members are consequently genuine as a result of the discussions which take place at the weekly meetings. This helps create the trusting relationships between the women of the group which is vital in scenarios like this one which involve peer to peer financial matters such as lending. Interactions between group members help them gain trust among each other which allows them to become more understanding in the way the group lends money.

The “gooi gooi” system, for example is used to support those in the group who need immediate financial assistance. This system describes the way in which each month all group members will pay into a communal pot that is then distributed in full to one member, with each person taking turns in receiving this lump sum. If  one member is in difficulty and struggling to pay back a loan they would dedicate the next month’s “gooi gooi” money to that member. This demonstrates the sense of community and humanity that is evident across the scheme.

Through saving Nontombi (depicted in the picture) has managed to grow her clothes selling business.

Conclusion 

What struck us across all the groups we met with was how passionate and resourceful these women were and we found their stories truly inspiring. We have gained so much admiration for these women who have achieved incredible things despite facing the harsh reality of post-apartheid South Africa. The day forced us to reflect on our personal goals and aspirations in life, to focus on what truly matters. It doesn’t quite feel right simply buying a tea towel sold by these women and saying goodbye as I feel so strongly now that I want to help more. We really hope that one day we will be in a better position to do this not just for the women we met, but for all those in similar positions across Cape Town, South Africa, Africa and the world.

We walked away from three homes feeling inspired, fulfilled, enriched, and hopeful. We learnt so much about how human values can make a major difference in someone’s life. These women have definitely improved their life, not through monetary value, but through a system of love, humanity and compassion. We also found their system of saving scheme interesting to contrast with the United Kingdom’s banking system as overall the understandings of financial services on an individual’s family and private matters is overlooked dramatically unless you are wealthy enough to have a private banking account.

Therefore, we think the United Kingdom and other developed countries could learn a great deal from these schemes in order to deliver a more understanding financial system which takes into account personal circumstances and utilises the community’s knowledge of one another.

Everything Fell into Place: Generations of Saving and Community Participation in Ruo Emoh

By CORC, FEDUP, ISN, News, Savings No Comments

The following narrative is part of a broader and in-depth documentation of the Ruo Emoh project. This documentation includes a video and booklet and is the result of collaborative efforts between the SA SDI Alliance, People’s Environmental Planning, UCT & University of Basel Master students (part of the City Research Studios hosted by African Centre for Cities), and the community of Ruo Emoh. A more detailed description of the Ruo Emoh project can be found here.

Interviewee: Ismaaeel & Mymoena Jacobs
Interviewers and Text: Kaylin Harrison, Lea Nienhoff, Israel Ogundare

The Jacobs (Kaylin, Lea, Israel)

Recently married Mymoena and Ismaaeel Jacobs are expecting their first child -a baby girl- together this year. Having a home in Ruo Emoh came at the most significant time for the Jacobs Family. For Mymoena, it is simply a case of “everything fell in place”. For Ismaaeel, as the first son to get married, he felt he needed this space.  A place of his own and it happened despite all the uncertainty and ups-and-downs of the Ruo Emoh project. The place became available to the growing Jacobs family tree.

“Never mind how small the place is, we got our own space, it’s a home, we can make a home out of this, so, that for me is more important than living in a mansion, or like not appreciating what we have here.” – Ismaaeel

The Jacobs know the burden and expense of renting on someone else’s property since they previously rented in Rylands. They also know what it means to share a house with many family members. In Ruo Emoh, they have a space of their own and Mymoena says, “It’s a nice stepping stone for any new couple.” 
Mymoena was born in Johannesburg and lived there for most of her life. Ismaaeel is from Cape Town and grew up in Lentegeur, where his family still resides. The place is what the Jacobs have constructed and made home for themselves. With Ismaaeel’s expertise lying 
in renovation, tiling and general construction, he took the structure and renovated it into a beautiful home. The beneficiary
 of the house in Ruo Emoh is Ismaaeel’s mother, Jasmine Jacobs. This home plays a significant role in not only the Jacobs currently residing there, but also for any other Jacobs family members. The house may be a home to future generations to come. This is the story of the struggle and the steps taken to finally get the house, in the words of Ismaaeel Jacobs.

It Was Almost Like a Movie

“It is 20 years ago, when the project started, and my mother was there right from the beginning. She was on the board for housing. I was a little boy, when all of this started. Every rand they had put together made a difference at the time. They were raising money with little food fairs. My mother was preparing cakes and boerewors rolls to sell. Later, I became the running guy for her; whenever they were meeting and other things, I would go. Sometimes, I was working, but then you hear at 3 o’clock is a meeting and you have to be there, we had no choice, we just had to move. When I came 
back home from the meetings I told my mother what was happening, what the next steps are, and I also picked up who is trying to run the show. We had so many challenges and everyone of us had their ticks. But nothing major. I remember when I went to the first meeting for my mother. Some of the other members were from around the area and I had known them by face, but not on a personal level. But after going to the meetings more and more, I was befriending people. Obviously, we were going to live together soon. At the time we were hoping to be neighbours soon, but eventually it just went on for a little while. In the recent years there were no fundraisers or these things any more, but when we met we were discussing how things progressed and how we could secure our property, since it was already our land. The challenge was to handle with the delays. Sometimes we needed to put in large sums of money and the committee would promise certain things on certain days, but it just wouldn’t be possible. The issues would linger for a few days, but the committee would sort them out in the end. I respect them a lot for that.”

We Stood Security Ourselves

“We had to put up a fence around the land. But it didn’t take long until parts of the fence were stolen. We had to take it off again. I played a part in that as well. We came in on a Saturday and we just took it off. At some point it was just the two of us, myself and Archie. Then the infrastructure came in and we knew we have to start to stand security ourselves. We came after work, on the weekends, 
to stand security at our grounds – day and night. I think this was when people got a more positive mind-set towards the project again. In the beginning this was an issue, but over time we had the feeling of ‘this is our ground’, we claimed it. If we want to stand security we will stand security because we own this now. Once people heard, once they got the go-ahead that things are happening now, things are going to happen, people had enough of the empty promises. Once things started… I can tell you people were really positive towards everything.”

The hope and aspiration that comes with owning a house, especially after
 a long period of waiting is unmatched. This house has a great significance for Ismaaeel’s whole family. Ismaaeel expresses how he and his brother looked forward to having the house. To both of them it was an aspiration and now it has become a reality, and at the same time a financial security.

Looking towards the future, Ismaaeel hopes to build up the security for the community and can imagine a complex typology. Mymoena has a plan in mind that when the baby arrives and things have settled, she will try to petition for better measures to reduce speed on the roads, for example getting a speed boundary.

When asked about lessons learned in the process the Jacobs responded, “I think to stand more together as a community. Don’t, because you are disappointed by one person, not help the community. That whatever challenges you get, let’s face it together. Don’t leave it to one.”

Together We Can Achieve More: Solidarity as a Key to Community Building

By CORC, FEDUP, ISN, News No Comments

The following narrative is part of a broader and in-depth documentation of the Ruo Emoh project. This documentation includes a video and booklet and is the result of collaborative efforts between the SA SDI Alliance, People’s Environmental Planning, UCT & University of Basel Master students (part of the City Research Studios hosted by African Centre for Cities), and the community of Ruo Emoh. A more detailed description of the Ruo Emoh project can be found here.

Interviewee: Farida Gester
Interviewers and Text: Majaha Dlamini & Janine Eberle

Farida_Gester

 “Not waiting for others to help you out, but working together for a common goal, that is the key to Ruo Emoh’s success.”

Farida Gester grew up in Wynberg where her parents rented a place. She was happily living with her happy big family. Farida chuckles when thinking back of that time staying with her parents, four brothers and three sisters.

In about 1980 – Farida was around 21 years old – her family was pushed to live further outside the city. “The owners of the house in Wynberg claimed it for themselves. My parents only rented it and that time it was still apartheid.” Farida explains. The whole family moved to Lentegeur in Mitchells Plain, where they lived together for 30 years. When Farida talks about that time, she speaks of her father as a very sociable person, who welcomed all people into their home, regardless of their skin colour. There would always be visitors around the house, especially when her brothers scouted teammates to play football with them. When Farida’s two sons were old enough, they would also play football in her father’s team, with people from different townships. Her mother used to cook for all the people and everybody would have a good time.

Her parents also supported her after she had a bad accident on her way to work. That is now 20 years ago, her children were still little. Farida was working as a machinist in a factory at that time, but after the accident she was forced to live off a disability grant from the state. It was very difficult for her to get by without her regular income, but her parents always supported her, like they did with all their children. With the years, her parents got ill and after her mother’s death, Farida did the cooking for everyone who visited their house or came by to play football. When also her father died, Farida decided to move out. The house in Lentegeur had only 3 rooms and was very crowded. With her siblings, nieces, nephews and in-laws living there all together, she had wanted to find a more spacious place for a long time, but she stayed for the sake of her parents, whom she cared for and looked after. It was important to them that the family stayed together. So after they passed away, Farida’s oldest son who was living in a two-room house in Portland, asked her to move in with his family. That is now 8 years ago. In Portland, Farida shared a room with the 3 grandchildren, two girls and one boy. Meanwhile, her younger son and his family were staying in the backyard of other people in Lentegeur.

A community that might become a family

In December 2017, when Farida could finally move into her house in Ruo Emoh, she decided to take her younger son and his family with her. Farida is very happy to finally have her own house and her family is excited to live there. It will still take a while for her to see how this move will change her life in the long run, she says. For her, the move from Portland to Ruo Emoh was not such a big change, since she was already living in a house before. Also, they’re sharing a room with her other grandchildren. The living situation did not significantly change her everyday life. For her younger son’s family it is different because their former place in Lentegeur was not as spacious and they had to pay a high rent to be able to stay. Their move from the backyard to Ruo Emoh marked a significant shift in their lives. Certainly, everyone is more comfortable here than where we lived before, Farida says.

It was 6 or 7 years ago when Farida joined the Ruo Emoh community. She heard about the project from the beginning when her neighbours in Lentegeur were talking about it. But since she was still living in her parent’s house with her whole family, she preferred to stay there. She cared for her parents when they were not longer fit and needed someone to look after them. It was only when she moved to Portland with her oldest son, she decided to join the community. It wasn’t easy, but her family supported her so that she could contribute to the saving scheme. When there were functions or meetings, she would always be there and help to push forward the project. She appreciates all the hard work everyone in the community has put into its success. The biggest obstacle in the process, in her view, was the city not cooperating with them. It is hard to see why the city didn’t let them build their own houses; why they had to make it such a long and hard struggle. The neighbourhood ratepayers also added to the problem; they did not want Ruo Emoh to be built. Farida says that they thought the new houses would be low-class houses and this would be bad for the area. Their resentment was nothing personal and Farida is positive that the relationship will improve over time, now that they can get to know each other. “It has to.” she chuckles.

Farida has visions for her house, but it will take time to really decide on what to build. For now, she is very happy with how everything look. At some point she would like to extend a veranda, build another wall outside the house and add another room. It is even possible that they will add a second floor at some point. Time will show- for now, they like it as it is. She hopes that this project will spread so that more places like Ruo Emoh will exist in the future.

Social cohesion and the feeling of solidarity are very important for Farida. This is how she grew up living with her family and also how she explains the success of Ruo Emoh. Everyone is like family here and looks after one another. This is how Ruo Emoh has been able to achieve so much. “Not waiting for others to help you out, but working together for a common goal, that is the key to Ruo Emoh’s success,” Farida says.

Restarting and Regaining Momentum: The Persistence of the Ruo Emoh Community

By CORC, FEDUP, ISN, News, uTshani Fund No Comments

By Mariel Zimmermann and Jaclyn Williams (on behalf of CORC)

Looking back at the two decade history of the Ruo Emoh housing project, we outline the primary political and social challenges the community faced and how they overcame these obstacles together. The main takeaways from the success of the Ruo Emoh housing project allow us to better understand how communities unite and why they continue to persist in the face of constant challenges. (Read the full project profile here.)

Project Overview

The success of the Ruo Emoh housing project was celebrated
 on December 22nd, 2017, when 49 families moved into new homes, built on a well-located piece of infill land on the corner of Weltevreden Parkway
 & Caesars Drive in Colorado Park, Mitchells Plain. The houses are located adjacent to public transport and nearby schools, a community hall, shops and a hospital. The process to bring the project to completion was, however, complex and contested, marked by the community’s persistent battle with government’s administrative and political hurdles, and contestation from the neighboring ratepayer groups.

Obstacles, Restarting, and Regaining Momentum

The struggle of Rou Emoh began in 1997, when backyarders and tenants strained by poor living conditions in Manenberg and Mitchells Plan created the Ruo Emoh Housing Savings Scheme. The savings scheme, established under the South African Homeless People’s Federation (now know as the Federation fo the Urban and Rural Poor), identified strategies to access land and later housing through the People’s Housing Process (PHP), a program initiated by the then Department of Housing.  

The Ruo Emoh group was convinced that they could build more appropriate houses than the contractor and government-led RDP approach. In June 1999, they demonstrated what a people’s housing approach could entail and within  3 days, they built an illegal, formal “show house” on vacant land in Mitchells Plain (read the whole story here). Neighboring residents (who were skeptical of the Ruo Emoh group) approached the Federation about the show house and saw that it offered a real alternative to contractor supplied housing. The next day, however, a bulldozer demolished the show house within 3 hours.

“We built the house as a practical statement. Of course we knew that it was illegal. We knew that we would have to suffer the consequences…. We did not try to interrupt negotiations – at every time we were ready to talk. All we wanted…was to ask them to come and look at the house… to see that the people’s process is better.” – Janap Oosthuizen (cited in People’s Dialogue on Land and Shelter, Negotiating for land: the construction and demolition of Ruo Emoh’s show house in Cape Town in August 1999.)

Archie Olkers presenting the model of the show house that was built in 1999.

Archie Olkers presenting the model of the show house that was built in 1999.

In 1999, the Ruo Emoh group, supported by the South African Homeless People’s Federation and uTshani Fund purchased a piece of undeveloped land in Colorado Park. At approximately 10,000m2 in size, the purchase of the plot enabled the community to begin designing, planning, coordinating and managing their own housing development. Applications for rezoning and subdivision were submitted to the city council and to the provincial government of the Western Cape. This initiated a slow engagement with statutes and regulations necessary to obtain subdivision clearance so that the land could be used for residential purposes.

At this stage, however, the Colorado Ratepayers Association (CRA) and other neighbours raised numerous objections. These were based on the assumption that the Ruo Emoh development would lower property values and strain basic service infrastructure for water, electricity and sewage. They also linked backyard dwellers with criminal activity. Ironically, many who objected had erected informal structures in their own back yards to accommodate children and relatives. Finally, after five years of back and forth, the subdivision was approved on 26 June 2006. 

From 2006 to 2010 the project was put on hold due to ongoing objections by neighbors and ratepayers. After 12 years of multiple setbacks, groundwork infrastructure was installed on the Ruo Emoh site on 8 June 2011.Shortly after the contractor initiated the groundwork infrastructure installation, ratepayers supported by
 the local councilor attempted to
 disrupt construction.Under political pressure the city reneged on the in-principle agreement and in July 2011 uTshani Fund (as the developer) received a “cease works order” from the city. The project was stopped at significant cost (and penalties) to the developer with half the infrastructure left incomplete in the ground.

As a result of these objections, the developer and Ruo Emoh community reluctantly ceded to a lower density 
for the project. Whereas the land was originally slated for 100 two-story houses, the project was reduced to 49 single-story houses. This compromise meant that fewer housing beneficiaries 
in the Ruo Emoh group would receive 
a house as part of the project, and those who did would need to pay more. It also meant that at a time when there was a cry for medium to high-density housing across South Africa (which would incorporate cross-subsidization and innovate building methods when using state subsidies), an opportunity was lost to create a people-centered project and process.

Impact

Despite the financial and emotional setback, the Ruo Emoh community, assisted by FEDUP, uTshani Fund, and Peoples’ Environmental Planning, worked to find funding, re-unite, and overcome the institutional and administrative hurdles needed to continue the Ruo Emoh project. After 18 months, the city council’s Spatial Planning, Environment and Land Use Management Committee (SPELUM) approved the extension of subdivision in November 2012. A series of drawn-out internal negotiations between the Ruo Emoh residents and support NGOs followed which resulted in a financial agreement to submit a new application to the Provincial government for an increased subsidy quantum. This amount was approved at the end of 2015. This left just one year to meet the conditions of subdivision that lapsed in early 2017. The most vital of these conditions were:

  1. An approved beneficiary list submitted and accepted by Province
  2. The installation of all infrastructure (civil and electrical)
  3. The construction of a boundary wall (around the development) at the cost of the developer
  4. The submission of a homeowner’s constitution with the local land use management department

What is noteworthy is that the cost of many of the above requirements was born by the community (e.g. constructing the boundary wall and ensuring site security).

Installation of the groundwork and building process of the Ruo Emoh housing project

Installation of the groundwork and building process of the Ruo Emoh housing project

Due to delays in releasing the subsidy and a number of onerous administrative tasks, housing construction only began in August 2017. Given the nature of the project, short time-frames and restriction on state finance, a “sweat equity”
or PHP self-build option was never going to be feasible. Community input in the design and layout was extensive. Mellon Housing was appointed as contractor and all houses were completed by December 22nd, 2017. On the same day, families received their title deeds and moved into their new homes. The Ruo Emoh residents paid the R6 500 per title deed, through a loan provided from People’s led fund, which will be paid back full within one year.

Ruo Emoh residents and PEP celebrating the happy end of the project with a community braai

Ruo Emoh residents and PEP celebrating the happy end of the project with a community braai

Whose Land is it Anyway? Unity and Divisions in the Development of Joe Slovo

By Archive, CORC, FEDUP, News, Resources, SDI No Comments

By Evelyn Benekane (on behalf of FEDUP) and Kwanda Lande (on behalf of CORC)

The “land issue” is probably the most debated topic in South Africa today. This is after a motion was passed by the parliament of South Africa to establish an ad hoc Constitutional Review Committee, to “review and amend section 25 of the Constitution to make it possible for the state to expropriate land in the public interest without compensation”. Currently, debates are reduced to land expropriation and neglect related issues such as land management challenges.

In this piece we share what some of these land management challenges look like for FEDUP in the Eastern Cape, where the Joe Slovo community has been struggling to access land for housing. In particular, the Federation experience highlights how conflicting interests around the Joe Slovo Communal Property Association (CPA) acted as a major impediment for Joe Slovo community members to access houses and title deeds.

“For the past 20 years the community of Joe Slovo was divided between two groups contesting the status of the Joe Slovo CPA. This left people without houses. People are struggling to buy electricity because they are not registered owners due to maladministration. There are no individual title deeds…”

(Evelyn Benekane)

This piece is an outcome of desktop research and interviews with Evelyn Benekane (FEDUP regional coordinator), who also wrote down the original content for this piece. She has been a community activist in Joe Slovo since the beginning of the settlement and she led the mobilising process to acquire land for housing since in 1995. Evelyn Benekane also acted as a signatory on behalf of the community when the Joe Slovo Community Property Association (CPA) was established in 1997 as part of the land restitution programme of South Africa . She was also elected as a spokesperson of the land committee, a platform for negotiating with the landowner and the municipality.

Joe Slovo Context and Its Development History

Joe Slovo is a settlement established in 1995 by organised members of the FEDUP. The settlement started as an informal settlement and was later developed into a formal housing (RDP) settlement. It is located on the outskirts of Port Elizabeth CBD and in proximity to the small CBD of Dispatch. The Joe Slovo community has attracted new residents over the past 21 years, mostly coming from the nearby rural areas in the hope of finding a better life in the city.

Taken in 2016 by Joubert Loots, this panorama picture of Joe Slovo demonstrate some of the housing typology and infrastructure.

Taken in 2016 by Joubert Loots, this panorama picture of Joe Slovo demonstrate some of the housing typology and infrastructure.

The idea of establishing Joe Slovo began in 1994, when residents of Veeplaas (an informal settlement in Port Elizabeth) became aware of the idea of coming together to save. This was a result of an exchange organised by FEDUP in the Eastern Cape to bring different informal settlements in Port Elizabeth to share experiences to alleviate poverty. In this meeting FEDUP introduced savings as a pivotal tool for alleviating poverty and accessing housing. In 1995 Injongo Zama Afrika savings scheme was started by informal residents of Veeplaas with the objective to acquire land and build housing by using their savings.

One of the important moments in the existence of the Injongo Zama Afrika savers was in 1995 when they identified 263 hectares of land. This land, owned by Sunridge Estate and Development Corporation (a big land developer that owned land in the area), had been lying unattended for 50 years. As a result, Injongo Zama Afrika members decided to occupy the plot and then, establish their shacks on it. In parallel, members formed the land committee as a platform for negotiations with the owners and Evelyn Benekane was elected as group spokesperson. Sunridge Estate and Development Corporation priced the land at R2million, a price that was too high for the community.

In the meantime, the municipality wanted to evict the people living in the settlement but they managed to stay since they had already started negotiating with the landowner. As the community did not have money to purchase the land, it was assisted by People’s Dialogue (a support organisation to the Federation at the time) that made contact with the Department of Land Affairs (DLA). The community had developed a Residential and Agricultural Plan that they  submitted and which was accepted by DLA. The outcome of this process was the formation of a Communal Property Association named by members as the Joe Slovo CPA.

Community Led Development in Joe Slovo

In 1997, a deed of transfer was granted by the DLA to the Joe Slovo CPA with Evelyn Benekane as the chairperson and signatory on behalf of the CPA. This encouraged the community to start designing their layout plan and, with the support of People’s Dialogue, hired Ulwazi Engineering services to formalise the plan and submit a proposal for housing and infrastructure development. This comprised water and sewer installation, and a total of 1940 houses, which were to be built in different phases. The members wanted to demonstrate how much could be done with little money in a short period of time, as the municipality did not make further plans for development.

The Joe Slovo community meets in 1997. Pictured in the white shirt on the left is community leader Evelyn Benekane.

The Joe Slovo community meets in 1997. Pictured in the white shirt on the left is community leader Evelyn Benekane.

In order to start phase one, Injongo Zama Afrika members accessed R1 million from uTshani Fund in 1997 to finance water and sewer installation for 340 structures. In the same year, the land was rezoned for township and agricultural use. The funds for bulk infrastructure and high mast lights were also approved by uTshani. To assist in paying this loan, the community decided to negotiate with the National Department of Human Settlements and Department of Land Affairs. This was after the community began experiencing some difficulties in repaying their loan to uTshani Fund. 

After 2000, the Injongo Zama Afrika saving scheme struggled to encourage members to save, as the ward councillor convinced people, that the development of Joe Slovo should be taken over by the Nelson Mandela Bay Metro. By this time, the infrastructure for the 340 sites was already installed for phase one but not complete. Struggling to pay back the borrowed money for the infrastructure development, the savers decided to approach the National Department of Human Settlements (DHoS). They explained that the municipality had not made immediate plans for infrastructure development for Joe Slovo. The request was for the community to be given money to install infrastructure as there was no agreement with the municipality to install infrastructure.

Subsequently, the DoHS considered a policy that says all communities that were given land through CPAs must be given money to install infrastructure for the duration that there is no agreement with municipalities. By the time an agreement would be reached with municipalities, including approval of plans to install infrastructure, the money allocated can then be given back to the DoHS. As a result, the R1 million borrowed from uTshani Fund was paid back by the DoHS. Nevertheless, uTshani Fund decided to plough the money back, so that the installation of phase one – water and sewage – could be completed.

Divisions in the Community

Since then, internal conflicts in the Joe Slovo CPA have created challenges. Since 1999, the community became more divided. On the one hand there was a group, led by CPA members that pushed for the CPA to go forward with applications for housing and title deeds. On the other hand, there was a group led by a local ward councillor that wanted to dissolve the CPA and hand over responsibilities for the land and housing project to the Nelson Mandela Bay Metro Municipality. 

Meanwhile, in Joe Slovo, the CPA had already negotiated for phase one infrastructure and pursued agricultural projects. By 2000 the application for service installation in the second portion of the 1600 sites was already complete. However, the remainder who had not received services were getting impatient that it would take a long time to access services through loans. Instead they wanted the municipality to do the installation. This was fuelled by a promise from the local ward councillor that the municipality would install services only after the Joe Slovo land was transferred to the municipality. At one point the community even stopped saving, as word got around that government was giving away free houses.

At the time, the CPA had already applied for Provincial Institutional Subsidies to fast track housing delivery for those that had not received houses. An institutional subsidy is a government grant designed for institutions that provide the option of tenure arrangements to beneficiaries instead of immediate ownership. This housing subsidy was in the process of being approved, but the community did not accept it, because they wanted immediate ownership of their houses with title deeds. After the community had amended their initial application, they applied for People’s Housing Process (PHP) housing in the year 2003, which was approved. PHP is a process where beneficiaries are actively involved in the decision making over the housing process, product and make a contribution towards the building of their own houses.

Taken by Saga, in 2016 shows one of the agricultural project in Joe Slovo and incomplete houses.

Taken by Saga, in 2016 shows one of the agricultural project in Joe Slovo and incomplete houses.

In 2004, when the members of the CPA were preparing to implement phase two of the housing project – conducting beneficiary administration, dividing sites and preparing the community for development – the councillor opposed the initiative. His reason was that he wanted the development to be run by the Nelson Mandela Bay Metro municipality. He argued that the community would lose out on development provided by the municipality, as the community privately owned Joe Slovo. In the community people increasingly believed what the local councillor was saying. This was compounded by the fact that there was an increasing number of new residents in Joe Slovo, who did not understand the history of community organising through savings in Joe Slovo.

Joe Slovo CPA vs. Nelson Mandela Bay Metro Court Case

It was clear by 2005 that there had been a shift of power/influence in the settlement. As a result there was a growing voice demanding the handover of the Joe Slovo land to the municipality. This culminated in community dialogues that were initiated and facilitated by mediators employed by the municipality. A report conducted by the mediators concluded that the community approved that land should be given to the municipality in 2005. This statement, however, did not include the voices of the original founders of Joe Slovo and CPA members who refused to hand over land to the municipality. Additionally, members questioned the neutrality of the municipality-employed mediators.

Soon after the report was published the municipality requested hand over of the title deed, but some members of the CPA refused. Due to these events, the municipality took the refusing members to the Eastern Cape High Court in 2006. Accordingly, the CPA members required support and assistance from Legal Aid for representation. As Legal Aid advised the community, they prepared a memorandum detailing reasons for the refusal as well as a clear statement that members would only release the title deed for the sake of progress of development without letting go of their land.

The High Court welcomed the handing over of the title deed and ruled, however, that both the CPA and municipality would need to follow a process to hand over land. This would mean that CPA members must sign for de-registration of the CPA, however, this never took place. By the time the court case was closed, the councillor was appointed as chairperson of the CPA.

The Aftermath of the Court Case

The local ward councillor in Joe Slovo, as the chairperson of the CPA, further advocated for hand over of the land to the municipality. However, he was faced with a contradiction that made it difficult for him to sign for deregistration of the Joe Slovo CPA. The contradiction was that he was accepted and embraced by the Department of Rural Development and Land Reform as someone who can sign on behalf of the CPA since he was a member of the Nelson Mandela Bay Metro council.

Additionally, the Department of Rural Development and Land Reform requested that if the Joe Slovo CPA elects a new committee it must not only have new members. The request was that the chairperson must add five more people to the top executive from the outgoing committee for continuation. But this was not done. It seemed the councillor was not interested in building the Joe Slovo CPA. 

Between 2005 and 2010 the Joe Slovo CPA did not convene any general meetings. This means that the community did not receive any formal feedback about the CPA. As a result, it became clear later that the local ward councillor did not succeed in deregistering the CPA as a result of the contradiction he was faced with. One can assume that the reason why there was no reporting back to the community by the local ward councillor/chairperson was because he did not want to tell people that he did not succeed in deregistering the CPA.

In 2009 it was evident that not everyone on the beneficiary list had received a house. As a result, FEDUP engaged with the Eastern Cape Department of Human Settlements and, via uTshani Fund, submitted an application for subsidies for beneficiaries on the housing list. Some members’ subsidies were never approved, as they needed an agreement of sale from the landowner. At this stage it was not clear to the community who owned Joe Slovo land, between CPA and Nelson Mandela Bay Metro, since there was never a community report back about the status the CPA.

Nevertheless, FEDUP approached the local ward councillor to seek assistance and clarity. The ward councillor replied by referring FEDUP to the municipality as the “owner” of the land. Based on the property register database of the municipality, FEDUP was told that the Joe Slovo land was never transferred to the municipality and that it is still owned by the CPA. Indeed, a copy of the original title deed received from the deeds office in Cape Town demonstrates that the land belongs to the CPA.

Governemental subsidy housing in Joe Slovo picture: saga

Governemental subsidy housing in Joe Slovo picture: Saga 2016

Uniting a Divided Community

Today in Joe Slovo there are people who have not received title deeds. Some never had a chance to receive houses and subsidies to build their houses. This is a direct consequence of conflicting and opposing interests in the Joe Slovo CPA, which are coined by two opposing parties, contesting the status of the Joe Slovo Community Property Association. Despite immense pressure to hand over the land to the municipality, the community was able to retain land ownership in Joe Slovo, which is legally registered under the Joe Slovo CPA.

The main problem in Joe Slovo today is political rather than legal. The question therefore is: How do you ensure that people are supported to access housing and title deeds? Today the community of Joe Slovo believes that this question can be answered by building a united community. Presently, there is a new ward councillor in Joe Slovo and this opens up new opportunities to support community led initiatives.

FEDUP is planning to conduct a community survey and the councilor is providing assistance. This community led survey will involve everyone who was a role player as a step to unite the community. It will show the houses that have been built and who built them. It will reveal who received the house, because some of the people living in these houses are not the owners. 

There is a case whereby provincial housing subsidies were approved and given to Thubeletsha Homes, which was a government-housing agency mandated to build low-cost housing. However, Thubeletsha Homes is no longer building houses and was taken over by the Housing Development Agency (HDA) due to being in “financial distress”. The community survey is the first step towards conducting a follow up on subsidies given to Thubeletsha Homes. The new ward councilor has arranged for the team from the office of the MEC of Human Settlements to provide some assistance in this regard.

Based on the meeting that was held between the community and officials from the office of the MEC of Human Settlements there was a general suggestion to request presidential intervention, since the community has engaged both local and provincial structures with limited success.

Conclusion

The Joe Slovo housing development project has existed for over 20 years. The experiences to date provide vital lessons especially in the current time, where the “land issue” is the most debated topic in South Africa. In the debate of amending laws the experience of FEDUP does not dispute the debate of legal instruments as impediment to access land/housing. However, FEDUPs experience contributes to the debate by demonstrating that there is a political layer which can be an impediment to accessing land/housing. This means that it is not enough to concentrate only on legal instruments and that there is a need to also understand the role of socio-political dynamics on the “land issue”.

Women Transformers: More Than Meets the Eye

By CORC, FEDUP, ISN, Partnerships, SDI, uTshani Fund No Comments

By Skye Dobson (On behalf of SA SDI Alliance and SDI Secretariat. Original post here)

Durban-blog-post

As the Black Panther movie continues to smash box office records and enthrall the world with fearless female African superheroes, a meeting in eThekwini last week suggests we brace ourselves for Women Transformers – coming to a city near you.

The words stretch out across her bosom: Women transforming the slums of our cities, the jet-black shirt and white lettering convey the same no-nonsense, bold authenticity as the woman with the sky-blue doek (headscarf) and thick wooden walking stick. Sitting at the shiny boardroom table in the Mayor’s parlor of the eThekwini Municipal Council offices, wiping the sweat from her brow, she looks decidedly like someone who understands that transformation is not a development cliché, but an overdue national imperative.

Mama Mkhabela, (full name, Nombulelo Anna Estevao) joined the shack dwellers federation (now called FEDUP) 30 years and one month ago. She recalls the first time she sat in on a savings group meeting in Lindelani informal settlement and heard women from the settlement talking about the need to come together to solve their problems. She says the women were telling each other that poor people can’t wait for government to give them things, but must start making change themselves. Shy and quiet back then, she recalls sitting back and listening to figure out what was going on. She soon joined the Sophumelela Savings Group and quickly gained the trust and respect of her fellow savers.

At first her husband was suspicious of her work with the federation. She recalls him secretly following her to a meeting in another community one time. The meeting lasted so long that he had to stay the night and help everyone get back to their places the following day. “From then on, he stopped fighting with me. He saw that I wasn’t up to any trouble and we were just working!” she says with a chuckle. The Sophumelela Savings Group secured housing loans from Utshani Fund – a part of the South Africa SDI Alliance – in 1999 and the women in the group set about building their own houses. Mama Mkhabela managed the loan repayments and moved from a bookkeeper to a treasurer and is now the regional leader of FEDUP in Kwa Zulu Natal. The region has 70 savings groups with 9,672 members and has built over 2,500 houses.

Mama Mkhabela had not come alone to see her mayor. Two comrades from FEDUP, Rose Molokoane and Emily Moholo, accompanied her. The three women have been engaged in the struggle to transform the lives of the poor for decades.

When apartheid ended and commitments were made to house the poor, there was a sense in many communities that the battle was won. Of course, it was soon painfully clear to communities living in shacks that the structure of society rather than the lack of houses was the true cause of their deepening poverty and exclusion. FEDUP and SDI supported communities in KZN to understand the need to shape policy and practice in the city – to support people-driven housing as well as informal settlement upgrading, improved livelihoods and savings, and better access to land and tenure security. “When we started”, says Mama Mkhabela, “there were very few women in city council. The officials were all men and they were very, very difficult. Only the late Patrick (former leader in FEDUP and the Informal Settlements Network) could penetrate the city.”

But times are changing.

Rose Molokoane, President of FEDUP and the Coordinator of SDI, grew up in an informal settlement called Oukasie in the South African town of Brits. Today Rose sits on a plethora of national and international bodies tasked with shaping land, housing, and urban policy and practice. Last year she was elected Chair of the World Urban Campaign where she champions the role of grassroots communities and local government partnership for implementing global agendas. On the international stage, eThekwini’s leadership frequently encounters Rose and other SDI community leaders. SDI’s unique local to global presence has slowly but surely convinced the city of the need to partner with shack dwellers in eThekwini and has quite literally secured these women a seat at the mayor’s table.

Emily Moholo, meanwhile, was born in Mafikeng and is a member of Ithuseng Savings Group. She is a regional leader of FEDUP in the Free State and chairperson of the provincial joint working group on partnerships between the municipality, provincial government, and the Federation. She is also a member of the SDI Management Committee, and supports the SDI affiliates throughout the Southern Africa region to build strong slum dweller federations and partnerships with local government.

Mama Mkhabela, Rose and Emily invited one of the Directors of the SDI Secretariat (a woman) and the Chief Executive Officer of Global Infrastructure Basil (another woman) to accompany them. The women’s joint mission was to: a) update the Mayor on the South African SDI Alliance’s work, b) request that their MOA with eThekwini Municipality’s Human Settlements Department be expedited and signed before the close of the financial year, c) request that the Know Your City campaign be recognized by the city as an important strategy for collaborative informal settlement action to build resilience and guide climate-friendly investment in infrastructure and upgrading, d) introduce the city to GIB and share an update on the SDI/GIB partnership, and e) to demonstrate SDI and the SA Alliance’s intention to increase support to city efforts to become a leader in inclusive climate and resilience informal settlement action and to accelerate implementation of commitments made in the New Urban Agenda towards the SDGs.

“We don’t come to the mayor looking for handouts” says Rose. “We’re bringing ideas, partners the city needs, and we’re ready to work.”

From the City’s side, there were three strong women at the table. Mayor Zandile Gumede is among a growing cadre of female mayors leading global discussions to ensure that the poorest and most vulnerable urban citizens are at the center of climate change responses. She currently serves as the Chair of C40 Africa where she advocates this approach. Globally, the number of women mayors is rising rapidly, which many believe bodes well for inclusive resilience planning and implementation. Indeed, the Resilience Strategy of eThekwini Municipality, formally adopted by the eThekwini Municipality Council in August 2017, is spearheaded by an all-female team comprising Debra Roberts (award-winning global climate change leader), Jo Douwes, and Manisha Hassan, is a product of a four-year consultative process with a broad and diverse group of Durban’s stakeholders. The SA SDI Alliance provided critical inputs to one of the two critical Resilience Building Options of the Strategy, namely: collaborative informal settlement action.

The Mayor said that it was refreshing indeed to engage with groups so clearly seeking positive change. She expressed confidence in the Human Settlements team’s ability to get the MOA signed quickly to ensure stronger communication and implementation at greater speed. She recommended that implementation of the MOA involve the convening of administrative and political officials in order to strengthen leadership capacity at all levels. She highlighted the need to work together to advance the city’s 5 year agenda and to ensure eThekwini, the SA SDI Alliance, and SDI continue to collaborate at the local and global level to showcase the power of community-government partnership for implementation of global urban and climate agendas.

Chairing the meeting was former Head of Department for Human Settlements at eThekwini Municipality, and recently appointed Deputy City Manager for Human Settlements, Infrastructure and Transport, Beryl Mphakathi. Beryl has been a tireless champion of the partnership and MOA between the SA SDI Alliance and the Human Settlements Department. At the request of the team, she committed herself to ensuring the MOA is signed before the end of the current financial year. Beryl explained that the MOA is necessary to “formalize our partnership…to pull all our efforts together and to commit our capacity and time.” Beryl invited the Acting Head of Department for Human Settlements to attend the meeting and ensure the MOA is tabled in time.

When Mama Mkhabela speaks of Beryl she says, “Truly speaking I’m so happy. We are very lucky to have a woman in that position. I can say, she respects me. I respect her. She took a while to understand the federation, but when she did she started to call me her mother. Even if I call her at night she has to respond. If she can’t answer your question right away, she will call you back. We work hand in hand.” When women can forge authentic, humble, thoughtful relationships such as these, institutional partnerships between the city and communities that are based on respect and practical action emerge. Such partnerships have the potential to mitigate the overinflated egos, political turf battles, short-sighted and self-serving approaches that have characterized male-dominated city politics in eThekwini and beyond.

While the centrality of women’s social relationships as a critical resource in community-based political mobilization has long been recognized in South Africa and abroad, city decision making remains dominated by males. If the walls of the Mayoral Boardroom could talk they would have countless tales of hustlers hustling on behalf of their own personal interests. But these women are hustlers acting in the interest of their community. Women transformers from the community, the city, and the international development sector have the opportunity to generate practical collaborations and partnerships to shift the status quo through new models of leadership and pragmatic action aimed at improving the lives of communities. Critically, women transformers from the community must not devalue the power within themselves by elevating leaders or partners – male or female – above the grassroots collectives from which they emerged.

Let’s keep an eye on eThekwini’s community, professional, and government Women Transformers and see if, indeed, they can transform city governance and the slums of their cities as the t-shirt promises.

Epilogue

SDI is often asked, What about the men? Of course, men are an integral part of the SDI movement and the struggle for inclusive and resilient cities. In the meeting described, there were inspiring and committed male leaders and professionals: namely, Jeff Thomas from Utshani Fund, Ndodeni Dengo from Informal Settlement Network (ISN), and Arnotte Payne from CORC (all part of the SA SDI Alliance). These men toil hand-in-hand, day-in and day-out with the women mentioned in this blog. As a leader from SNCC (Civil Rights Movement in the USA) once said of working with strong women leadership, “you come to realize that manhood isn’t the ability to knock someone down but finding your own humanity.” Jeff, Ndodeni, and Arnotte embody this viewpoint and understand that it is not heroic individuals but committed organizers that will sustain a movement and transform the status quo.

Social and Physical Impact of Re-blocking: California Informal Settlement, Mfuleni (Cape Town)

By Archive, CORC, ISN, News, Press, Publications, Resources No Comments

by Kwanda Lande and Mariel Zimmermann (on behalf of CORC)

We decided to do re-blocking because we were living in a very congested settlement, we wanted our settlement to be rearranged, we wanted services –  we wanted to have roads, toilets, electricity and water. We also wanted this project because it is going to mitigate fire in the settlement, and we have been careful with the building material we have used to build our structures. (Lindiwe Noqholota, community member and member of the project steering committee) 

In the upgrading of California there is an advocacy purpose, resources were used for the community to demonstrate good practice around upgrading of informal settlements. The project was done so that the community can build itself as a community that is able to come together around issues because re-blocking is just the start, it’s not the end, it’s the starting point to say what’s next? (Oscar Sam, ISN Mfuleni subregional coordinator) 

The story of California informal settlement in Mfuleni, Cape Town is a story of many challenges, but also of many victories and hope. It is through this story where we begin to grasp nuances and multi-layers that capture the impact of re-blocking to the community.This story is told by community members, who have been engaged in a struggle for basic services, land and and housing since 2008.

Look over California informal settlement before and during implementation

Look over California informal settlement before and during implementation

 

California is an informal settlement located in the midst of formal houses in the Township of Mfuleni, Cape Town. The settlement occupies a space of 2,239 m2 between the streets of Umzumbe on the North, Mgwanda on the West, Dutywa on the South, and M Baba on the East. The community of California has been subjected to some threats since 2008, when the settlement started. This includes the fact that the community existed until 2012 without any services. It became worse in 2012 when there was fire that destroyed almost all their houses threatening their existence.

I remember in 2012 after almost all our shacks were burned down we had to build our shacks again because we had nowhere to go. People from this church in our area did not want  us to build our shacks in this area again. After the municipality had intervene the church then told us that each household should at least pay R50. But we refused because the municipality had told us that the church does not have rights to do this. This is how we fought to stay in this settlement, after which everything became easy and we were also given house/shack numbers. (Nokuthula Mazomba, community member and member of the project steering committee) 

Some of the first signs of collective action and self-reliance

Since 2008 the community of California did not have any legal water source and toilets, people were forced to use water taps provided to people in formal houses. This lack of water and sanitation services led to anxiety and the feeling of insecurity, when using the ‘toilet’ at night. Consequently, there was an attitude that led to restricting access to water from people living in formal houses. The community had to do something as a result they decided to make contributions of R10 each household and installed one water tap for the whole community.  

The installation of water tap is one of the first signs of collective action and self-reliance by the community. After which the community organised itself and went to the ward councillor demanding further access to water, in which they were successful. However, the settlement was still lacking services such as toilets and electricity, and the community needed a partner to intensify their struggle to access better services and improve their lives. Against this backdrop, the community of California meet with the Informal Settlement Network (ISN) in 2015 to enforce their voices.

Community members of California, and SA SDI Alliance leaders working together in implementing the project.

Community members of California, and SA SDI Alliance leaders working together in implementing the project.

 

Community using Data Collection and Community Exchanges

The Informal Settlement Network, partner in the SA SDI Alliance, brought a number of tools to assists the community in their struggles. This includes the data collection tool, which helped the community to engage municipality with facts and community-determined priorities. As a result, seven toilets were installed for the community, through the assistance of ISN, which helped to do data collection that helped the community to negotiate and to demand all these services.

Community of California doing enumeration of their own settlement

Community of California doing enumeration of their own settlement

 

Based on the data collected (profiling and enumeration) in 2015, the population of California is made of 47 households with 108 residents. Furthermore, this profiling and enumeration exercise done by the residents of California assessed community prioritise, which include electricity, water and sanitation. As a result, the community also went to the City of Cape Town to request electricity. Their first request was, however, met with disappointment. The municipality explained that it could not install electricity because of congestion and limited space for installing electricity.

 Through ISN, in 2016 we went on an exchange to another settlement that was re-blocked by the SA SDI Alliance called Flamingo Crescent. We went to that settlement and saw how that settlement was built and how the settlement was redesigned and reconfigured to create space that would ensure the provision of services. After a year without interacting with ISN we also learnt that the City of Cape Town had made some budget for re-blocking in California and this was through the work of ISN that negotiated for budget to be made available for upgrading California. (Lindiwe Noqholota, community member and member of the project steering committee) 

However, when the community leaders who visited Flamingo Crescent were reporting to the community some members were not convinced about this project and rejected it as they felt that they were not sufficiently informed. After several meetings and explanations of how the project will look like and what the benefits for the residents will be, the community voted for the implementation. The community also knew that if they will not make use of the budget from the city, these resources would be taken elsewhere.

How has the project impact the Settlement?

The implementation of re-blocking in California begun in May 2017 and 47 structures were upgraded and specific building material that reduces the risks of fire was used. Paved access roads were implemented throughout the settlement. Furthermore, a stormwater drainage system has been implemented and electricity is in the process of being implemented. In the case of funding for the project, there was an agreement with the municipality that they will provide services, including water, electricity, and toilets.

Work in progress that involves structures before implementation and the last phase of the project

Work in progress that involves structures before implementation and the last phase of the project. 

 

The community contributed 20%, and supported by Community Organisation and Resource Centre (CORC) with 80% towards building their structures. Yet, the community is still waiting for the implementation of toilets and water taps per household from the municipality. The community also managed to negotiate for extra piece of land. This municipal land is located adjacent to the settlement but the community was not allowed to use it before. This extra piece of land has helped the community to have more space for access walkways and space for people to dry their clothes after washing them.

The re-blocking project of California allowed people in the community to ‘break walls’, and start learning and talking to one another. It allowed people to take ownership of the process and start personalising their environment where they have change their community and houses to suit their personal taste. Through this re-blocking process, it became evident that compromises are at the centre of re-blocking, and although some might not like an idea and approach, it is important that people compromise on their differences for the sake of development.

I learned that as residents of California, we do not really know each other, as I though before this project. This project has created a chance for us to learn about each other and to tolerate one another because we differ in a lot of things. As a result, it is helpful that we have community leaders that can speak for everyone and that people can raise their issues through and not to one another or direct to government one by one.(Buhle Mthimkhulu, community member and member of the project steering committee) 

What can the future for the community look like?

In regard to the future of the community, the kind of experience that the community has went through is essential because re-blocking is not the end but a starting point. It is a start for individuals to recognise themselves as part of a community. It is a start for the community to establish itself as part of a broader network of informal settlements. The project presents an opportunity for the community to start a saving scheme that will build social capital of the community and allow community members to support each other not only financial but also socially. This project is a start for the community to investigate and make sure that community prioritise are part of government budgets and use that to hold them accountable.

TB community hall – A foundation for community organising

By Archive, CORC, FEDUP, ISN, News, Resources No Comments

By Kwanda Lande (on behalf of CORC)

We would like a type of a hall that can accommodate a lot of activities, like church services, cultural activities and office space for the Informal Settlement Network (ISN). It will be a shared space with other communities, but this will depend on the kind of activities they plan to do. We want to encourage activities that are about community development, and activities that would impact people’s lives in a positive way.

Through these words, one community leader of TB Section in Khayelitsha’s Site B explains how the priority of the community was having a shared space for four different communities located in the area (TT, UT Litha park, UT and TB section). The community of TB section have, for some time relied on a community hall that was in a very bad condition, a community hall that was not able to take care of the many of the activities and needs of the community.

The building of a hall for us was very important because the one that we used to have, was in a very poor condition. It was difficult to have meetings when it is raining because of a hall that was leaking, and this prevented us from discussing community issues. We also have our youth that want to do a lot of things but they could not because we did not have a place for them to meet. We also wanted to use this hall as a place that people can be relocated to when it is raining – as a temporary shelter.

IMG-20170401-WA000

Community members, ISN leadership and contractor for the TB community hall

On 24th of June 2017 the community of TB section had an inauguration event to launch the new structure, however the idea around this hall started in 2015 and the actual construction begun in February 2017. Between 2015 and 2017 the community of TB section spent time on mobilising other residents through saving and data collection, and engaging with the City of Cape Town. Thus, after community profiling and enumeration, TB residents used their data to identify that they want a public space that contributes to their activities and, as a consequence, to community building and strengthening.

We wanted to build the TB hall in 2015, but we had to explain to the community how the Federation of the Urban and Rural Poor (FEDUP) and ISN work, for example, we had to explain to people that they support communities that are prepared and committed to organising and building themselves through saving and contributing to their development. This was necessary since people in this community did not know much about ISN and FEDUP.   

We also had to engage with the City of Cape Town about building a partnership – not only for this project, but for long term planning and development of the community of TB section. This include engagements that we had with the city’s officials – about asking for permission to build the hall, installing electricity and other services. We also had engagements with our ward councillor who endorsed the building of this structure. 

WhatsApp Image 2017-06-24 at 14.56.18

Community members with FEDUP and ISN leaders during inauguration event to launch the new structure

ISN has been working with the community of TB section since at least 2011, and the building of the hall came out of the process of mobilising through the tools of saving, collecting data, and partnership. The utmost achievement of this work by both ISN and FEDUP is that the community has begin to organise itself, identify priorities and established some sense of self-reliance. These are aspects which the community can hold onto and use long after the construction of the hall is complete.

The existence of this hall in an informal settlement like this also makes it easy for us to challenge the municipality and tell them that if we can do something like this with FEDUP and ISN what is stopping you from doing something of the same level like building houses for us?

People on the ground are really motivated and they now understand that you do not have to wait for government for your things to happen. We are now aware that community development only happen for people that work for themselves, if you are sitting at home you do not go out and demand things very limited chances that you will get those things.

FullSizeRender 19

Community members working together with contractor to build their own hall.

This community hall represents a building block for the ‘formalisation’ of the whole sub-region over time. It is a space for this community and surrounding communities to start building themselves as organised communities and start discussing the next step for their community. The community is in a better position, it has developed confidence to confront public issues that have direct and indirect impact on their lives.

The community of TB section, in the process of building the hall – has also demonstrated that it has capacity to collectively confront obstacles and can with time be in a position to do things for themselves with no external assistance. The community was able – during the implementation phase – to manage community dynamic on their own and there was almost no need for external intervention. The community was also able to collectively convince the ward councillor to support the project. As a result through this project a foundation for community organising has been formed and the community is build on it. 

VACANCY: Research & documentation intern with view to full time position

By CORC No Comments

CORC is looking to host a dynamic and self-motivated intern in the research and documentation department, which works towards CORC’s vision of strengthening the voice of the urban and rural poor. CORC and its community partners have a strong focus on documenting and disseminating lessons learned through community organising processes and precedent-setting projects in order to contribute to social and policy change.

CORC_LOGO_1

The main purpose: To raise the voice of the urban poor through producing documentation and publications; to assist with communication, advocacy and learning

Reporting to the: Research and documentation officer

Key responsibilities:  

  1. Gather and compile strategic qualitative documentation (narratives and visuals) based on field work engagements
  2. Co-produce in-depth written publications and qualitative research reports
  3. Produce shorter written pieces, presentations and newsletters aimed at different audiences (both online and hard copy)
  4. Conduct research into human settlements policy and practice
  5. Co-manage social media communication
  6. Contribute to updating website content, text editing and design work
  7. Manage archiving of qualitative data
  8. Manage relevant content recording in database
  9. Support research and documentation officer

Qualifications and experience:

  • Bachelor degree in social science, development or urban studies or related field. Postgraduate degree advantageous.
  • Experience in NGO, community organising or related field
  • Strong writing and research skills, ability to compile and assimilate content in short time frames
  • Proficiency in English: other South African languages (especially isiXhosa) advantageous
  • Experience in qualitative research: quantitative research experience advantageous
  • Sound conceptual and analytical abilities
  • Full computer literacy and proficiency in online communication and social media platforms,
  • Ability to file, organise and archive content
  • Interest / experience in photography and video-making advantageous

The successful candidate should have

  • A commitment to a bottom up, community-led, co-productive and participatory approach
  • Strong communication and interpersonal skills
  • Ability to work in a team and independently/take initiative
  • Ability to think creatively, analytically and critically
  • A good understanding of human settlements and local government (advantageous)
  • Ability to pay attention to detail, be systematic and meticulous
  • Ability to adapt and be flexible
  • Valid driver’s license

This is a full time internship based in Cape Town. The initial duration is 3-6months with a view to extend to full time employment.

Please send your CV and a motivation letter, explaining how you qualify for this position via email ONLY to finance@corc.co.za. Please state the position applied for in the email subject. Deadline for the application is: Friday 12 May 2017. 


The Community Organisation Resource Centre (CORC) is registered with the Department of Social Development of the Republic of South Africa as a Non-Profit Organisation (017-659 NPO) since 2002 with offices in Cape Town, Durban and Johannesburg.

CORC demonstrates alternatives to top-down service delivery and development projects by advocating for the central role of poor people in the planning and implementation of projects. CORC’s vision is “to strengthen the voice of the urban and rural poor in order to improve the quality of life in informal settlements and backyard dwellings”. We do this by supporting the social processes of community-based organisations that are willing to build on their collective assets and agencies, by facilitating engagements with formal actors like the State.

 

Community Voices: “In GxaGxa people know you. And mosquitoes bite your children”

By CORC, FEDUP, ISN No Comments

*By GxaGxa Community Members, Compiled by Shelby Lyons (on behalf of CORC)

This blog contributes to a series called Community Voices; a blog space that shares the words of community members themselves. These stories— diverse yet unified – highlight aspects of the history, challenges and daily experiences associated with life in informal settlements.

This blog draws its content from a storytelling workshop in GxaGxa informal settlement in Cape Town. In the post are the voices of: Nobuwe Biyane, Elizabeth Merane, Thembisa Magqaza, Nokwandisa Mhlandi, Peter Somina, Tlotliso Moses, Siphamandla Ntusi, Somila Shumi and Witness Qoqela

SAMSUNG CSC

In GxaGxa children play on the street

GxaGxa is a settlement located off the N2 highway in Gugulethu, Cape Town. Recently, community members here organised to complete household level enumerations of their settlement as part of gathering settlement wide data and identifying community priorities. Besides quantitative data gathered during the enumeration, qualitative accounts from settlement residents are crucial for understanding both the character of the settlement and social dynamics within it. Therefore on a chilly Tuesday, situated in a bright, turquoise room, a group of GxaGxa community members gathered together to tell their stories of life in the settlement.

Community members were first addressed by Akhona Malangeni, an engaging and passionate leader of the Informal Settlement Network (ISN), who explained to them the importance of storytelling in gaining a community-based account of life in GxaGxa. Below Akhona addresses the community.

SAMSUNG CSC

The first part of the dialogue focused on settlement history:

“The name GxaGxa stems from the birth name of the first man who settled there. As a lone settler, GxaGxa lived in this area for a few years until circumstance caused him to move back to the Eastern Cape”.

Community members seem to speak fondly of the late GxaGxa, who in 1987 was replaced by Mama Thembisa. Pictured below, Mama Thembisa now serves as a clear leader in the GxaGxa community.

SAMSUNG CSC

After a large group discussion, community members organised in smaller groups. In one conversation circle people were asked: What is the best part about living in GxaGxa?

“The best part of being in GxaGxa is that we are a family. A lot of young people [that] live in this place do things in unity. Everyone knows each other—if you arrive here, people know you before they see you. We live in spirit. Young people respect old people. Old people respect young people. People are also not worried about crime”.

The emphasis on community was echoed in many of the accounts coming out of GxaGxa. Correspondingly, people were asked: What is the difficult about living in GxaGxa?

“The rain is serious. When it get’s colder the children—everyone—get sick. The water comes into the houses. Dirty water causes rashes that later become sores. There is no electricity. Those who are unemployed are especially vulnerable during this time because they cannot afford heat”. –Siphamandla Ntusi

The conversation about life in GxaGxa continued, including stories about the more trying aspects of daily life such as challenges in access to adequate services, the lack of employment opportunities and the relationship with the municipality.

Some of these challenges regarding services are found below:

The section comes from: Peter Somina, Tlotliso Moses, Siphamandla Ntusi, Somila Shumi and Witness Qoqela

Toilets –“Services [in GxaGxa] are poor and we are struggling because it is hard to get into toilets here. Many people who have their own toilets lock them. It is common for people to have to ask others for the key to the toilet”.

Tap- “Sometimes the water is completely dry in the tap and there is no water all day. These days we don’t eat. So we have to travel very far for water. This can happen 2-4 times a month. It depends. It just happens”.

Electricity- “We don’t have electricity. People share electricity. It becomes a problem when people don’t have money for paraffin. The streetlights are also off, which means it’s completely dark”.

Management- “If it’s hot the sewage smells. There is also a pond in the middle of the settlement [behind Mama Thembisa’s house] that floods and brings in a lot of mosquitos. Drains are also blocked”.

Indeed, references surrounding the danger of the pond were a common theme in settlement accounts.

SAMSUNG CSC

Above is a photo of the pond in the middle of GxaGxa. Showing the proximity of the pond to her room, Nosipho Magqaza says, “It’s not healthy to live here”.

 After sharing about their daily experiences, GxaGxa community members shared what they would like to see happen in their settlement. Community leader Nobuwe Biyane shared her wishes for GxaGxa.

“I have two children ages 15 and 16. There is a lot of suffering in GxaGxa. There is no work. There is too little taps and they must fill the pond because mosquitoes bite our children. [We] want a house with electricity”. –Nobuwe Biyane

Another opinion came from Peter Somina, who shared his wishes for the community.

SAMSUNG CSC

Peter Somina as he addresses other community members.

“In my mind we must organise something that must be big… we must organise a big something for people to get jobs…maybe we open big things like construction that open doors for opportunity”. – Peter Somina