CORC Archives - SASDI Alliance

Oct 16

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

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

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

On the 5^th 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.

May 05

Love0

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

By Yolande Hendler 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.

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.

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.

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 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”.

Apr 03

Love0

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

By Yolande Hendler 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.

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:

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

Jul 26

Love0

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

By Yolande Hendler 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

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.

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.

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.

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

Jun 30

Love0

Co(mmunity)-finance facilities as a tool for local democratic space

By Yolande Hendler CORC, Publications No Comments

By Yolande Hendler (on behalf of CORC)

With the 2016 municipal elections around the corner, the relationship between elected representatives and local citizenries could not be more topical. For some, the relationship is a largely passive space, which has lead to mistrust between different groups. For others it is a space that requires the building of meaningful partnerships, participation, and an active citizenry. As a member of the Good Governance Learning Network (GGLN), we have joined fellow civil society organisations in exploring these questions in the 2016 State of Local Governance Publication: (Re)claiming Local Democratic Space.

CORC’s contribution (on behalf of the SA Alliance) engages with the notable lack of community participation and in-situ practice in the national Upgrading of Informal Settlements Programme (UISP). The paper is titled Co(mmunity) finance as a tool for local democratic space: The Cape Town City Fund and is based on robust experiences of community saving as a lever for co-finance and an enabler of inclusionary practice (See p.51-61). It suggests the need for an innovative co-finance instrument that enables a collaborative platform between urban poor communities, intermediary organisations and local governments to co-navigate in-situ informal settlement upgrading projects.

The GGLN is an initiative that brings together civil society organisations working in the field of local governance. Once a year the network produces the The State of Local Governance Publication which presents a civil society based assessment of the key challenges, debates and areas of progress with regard to governance and development at the local level in South Africa.

http://ggln.org.za/state-of-local-governance-reclaiming-local-democratic-space-2016.pdf

May 27

Love0

A Photo Story: Community-led Enumeration in Action

By Yolande Hendler Community-led Data Collection, CORC No Comments

By Ava Rose Hoffman and Yolande Hendler (on behalf of CORC)

A variety of methodologies exist for gathering data on informal settlements. The SA SDI Alliance follows the practice of community administered enumerations and community-led settlement mapping using GIS technology. An enumeration refers to a detailed household level surveys that engages community members on socio-economic and demographic data. For the Alliance, the community-led process during enumerations is critical: when a mobilised community collects its own data, the data obtained reflects far higher degrees of accuracy than any census or survey run by ‘outsiders’ would.

In early 2016, the SA SDI Alliance partnered with the Western Cape Department of Human Settlements to conduct community-led enumerations of select informal settlements located along or near the N2 Highway. The settlements included in the ongoing enumeration project are: Kanana, Barcelona, Europe, Vukuzenzele, Lusaka, GxaGxa and Kosovo. The socio-economic information gathered through the enumeration includes demographic data, employment status, education, access to government grants, access to basic services and access to government, social and community infrastructure, among others. The mapping of GIS coordinates includes logging GPS coordinates for every household, for existing basic services, communal facilities, economic points of interest and transport routes.

The enumerations therefore provide an updated settlement profile that can form the basis for any future upgrading plans. The data collection exercise serves as a means of mobilising communities, equipping members with accurate information that can be used to advocate for development priorities. When enumerations are conducted in partnership with organised poor communities, governments gain accurate and more comprehensive data that can be used as a basis for future upgrading plans.

This photo story depicts the enumeration process, from shack numbering and service mapping to training sessions of community enumerators and household-level surveying.

Despite the rain, the numbering team gathers in Kosovo to review their plan of action with CORC’s enumerations coordinator, Blessing Mancitshana.

The numbering team in Kosovo convenes with Blessing on another day.

The numbering team in Kosovo convenes with Blessing on a sunny day before setting out to number shacks for the day.

Before setting out to number shacks, the numbering team reviews the settlement layout map.

One team reviews the settlement layout map.

Each shack in the community is spray-painted with a number. In this case, the number is preceded by “A” to refer to the section of the settlement, given Kosovo’s large size.

Shack by shack, the numbers are marked on the community layout map.

Community enumerators learn the basics of conducting a household-level survey using a data collection device called the Trimble during an enumerations training workshop.

Community enumerators participate in an a training workshop, guided by Blessing.

The Trimble is a device used for data capturing during household-level surveying

For the first time, enumerators make use of the Trimble, a device used for data capturing during household-level surveying

Blessing reviews how to work the Trimble device with a community enumerator in Gxagxa

The enumerations teams in Gxagxa get to work, going from shack to shack to conduct the detailed household-level survey.

A community enumerator begins the survey.

The survey includes socio-demographic information about members of the household and their livelihoods.

May 19

Love0

Reflections on re-blocking: Why community participation is key

By Yolande Hendler CORC, ISN No Comments

By Ava Rose Hoffman (on behalf of CORC)

In this blog, the SA SDI Alliance speaks with Nkokheli Ncambele—ISN Coordinator of the Western Cape—to learn about how the participation process functions on the ground during informal settlement upgrading, and in particular, reblocking initiatives . Reflecting upon the Alliance’s early experiences with re-blocking in Sheffield Road (2010-2011) and Mtshini Wam (2012-2013), Nkokheli highlights the value of building partnerships between informal settlements, support NGOs, and local governments.

How has the re-blocking process enabled residents to better engage with city officials or service providers in the long run? Has the re-blocking process enabled citizens to become more knowledgeable about how to interact with the state?

In our project called Sheffield Road, the government was saying [to community members] that they can’t do anything in the road reserve. But when the community started engaging with the municipality, the community learned how to negotiate with the city, [using] their tools—starting from profiling and enumerations. The enumeration is what helped them identify their problem, and then they start engaging [with the City]. Through the engagement they decided to start reblocking cluster one. When they finished Cluster One, everyone in the community was saying, ‘This thing is working, we want this thing [reblocking.’ Then they started rolling it out in the community. While they were in Cluster 3, the government saw the value of re-blocking, and then they came and installed 15 toilets that were not there before. So, that exercise [served to] teach a lesson to the government, and teach a lesson to the community.

Community members discuss the re-blocked design in Sheffield Road

In Mtshini Wam, each and every winter they [the community] experienced flooding. And when they went to government, government was saying they can’t do anything [improvements] there because there is no space. And the community started organizing their general meetings, and trying to find a solution. Because, remember, they are the ones living in those conditions, so they had to come [up] with the solutions, and their solution was re-blocking. They went on an exchange to Sheffield Road to see what other communities were doing. When they came back, they started engaging with the people [in their community], and the technical teams of CORC and ISN went to Mtshini Wam and started helping them [with] how to design their community [reblocked layout]. At the end of the day, even if you can go today to Mtshini Wam, they will tell you that this re-blocking, it helped us a lot because, they were living in bad conditions. They were affected by their health because of the gray water that was smelling.

How did that engagement or negotiation with the state play out after the re-blocking was complete? Was there any continued engagement between the community and the state after the process was complete?

There is always a question of, ‘What else after this? What are we going to do?’ Obviously engagement is still happening between the community and the municipality, because, remember, these people, they don’t have a title deed. So they have to negotiate for the title deed. So now, their engagement is on another level. It’s not on the level of shelter; it’s on another level of getting houses, adequate houses. I remember they finished their design, where they said what they want: double stories where everyone can fit. And they even went to Joe Slovo in Langa to see how the design of Joe Slovo looked like, because it’s what they want to implement in their community.

Do you think the re-blocking projects have helped to change power dynamics within communities or empower more vulnerable members of communities?

I think firstly, what re-blocking brings to the community is security. It brings the trust between the community itself, because where they were residing before, no one would know their neighbours. But after the re-blocking, now, everyone is known in the community. It’s a community, its not an informal settlement anymore, it’s a community where the people of that community have pride in what they did. It also brings trust to the leadership—the leaders are the ones who will take us to the house.

Who would you define as vulnerable members of a community? Do you think that re-blocking has helped those vulnerable members get more of a voice in their communities?

I’m not going to answer your question directly, but I will always come out with an explanation.

If you go to Mtshini Wam, there were people that were not having income, not even a cent—so they were vulnerable in the sense that they don’t receive anything— [while] other community members were working, and received income. When we started, there were people that were vulnerable, and you can see that their situation is very bad, but once we brought the re-blocking concept, where we manage to employ 45 people, those that were vulnerable earn something. It’s where they change their lives, you know. And now, there is no one—I can guarantee to you today—that is very vulnerable. Everyone is in the same level because of re-blocking. That’s why I’m saying, re-blocking, it brings a lot of things. It brings job opportunities, it brings basic services, it’s not only about changing the structure, it’s about what government can play in your community when you say, ‘I want re-blocking.’

A community where no one is working, and no one is receiving a grant—that is what I call a vulnerable community, because there is no income.

Community members at work in Mtshini Wam re-blocking

Community members at work in Mtshini Wam’s re-blocking process

How did communities and the City change through the process of re-blocking? What was that mutual learning process like?

What I can say is that, the city has changed through the system that the people brought… The government at that time would tell the community: ‘We are going to put the toilet here.’ But the challenge of that community is not a toilet. The community wants electricity. So, once we start engaging with the government, in 2010, it’s when the government started listening, now that the people know what they want. We are not fighting with their ideas, but we want them to listen to us. Because we are the ones who are residing in those conditions. We are the ones who are walking in the dark at night.

It shows that people learn a lot and the city learned, because the city put a lot of basic services in different communities. The communities that started before 1994, they’ve got basic services now. It shows that the city learned how to listen to the people. And the people know how to engage with the city now. Because the leadership—you will find different leadership going to see the mayor, you will find that the mayor is going to the communities—there is that engagement now. Re-blocking and engagement—having the ISN involved—changed a lot of people.

Deputy Minister of Human Settlements, Ms. Kota-Fredericks, visits the newly re-blocked Mtshini Wam in 2012

May 13

Love0

Scaling Up Informal Settlement Upgrading: The CODI Model Thailand

By Yolande Hendler CORC, FEDUP, ISN, SDI No Comments

By Yolande Hendler (on behalf of CORC)

While the value of in-situ informal settlement upgrading is increasingly recognised by national and global actors, its implementation as a co-productive approach rooted in meaningful community participation is inadequate. An exception, however, is the Community Organisations Development Institute (CODI), a finance facility of the Thai government that has facilitated community-led informal settlement upgrading in more than 250 cities and towns in Thailand, demonstrating how a national government not only engaged with ‘pro-poor’ development but also managed to institutionalise an approach and implement at scale.

Somsook Boonyabancha, Former Director of CODI

In early May, the South African SDI Alliance together with Shack / Slum Dwellers International (SDI) had the pleasure of hosting Somsook Boonyabancha, the founder and former director of CODI for a seminar in Johannesburg and Cape Town on ‘Scaling up informal settlement upgrading: The CODI model, Thailand’. ISN and FEDUP coordinators additionally used this opportunity to share current partnership and project implementation challenges with Somsook during a visit to Khayelitsha. Her visit to the Alliance occurred in the context of a broader meeting* with representatives of the South African National Treasury concerning CODI’s approach and its value for the South African context.

Jubilant welcome by FEDUP and ISN

CORC director Bunita Kohler offers a warm welcome

Informal Settlement Upgrading in South Africa

The upgrading context in South Africa is marked by a tension between policy and practice. Part three of the National Housing Code states that the Upgrading of Informal Settlements Program (the national policy and finance instrument for upgrading) set out to “facilitate the structured in situ upgrading of informal settlements as opposed to relocation(s)”. The aim: to achieve tenure security, deliver basic services and build ‘social capital’ in communities through participatory processes.

In practice, however, municipal application of UISP has been weak, especially in terms of community participation or alternative approaches to tenure security beyond freehold (See NUSP). Even after the National Upgrading Support Programme (NUSP) was introduced in 2010 to support municipalities in addressing these shortfalls, the lack of meaningful community engagement or in-situ upgrading of informal settlements persisted. This is largely due to inadequate municipal capacity for meaningful participation, a recurring preference of relocating shack dwellers to greenfields sites (the Joe Slovo judgement is a case in point) or repackaging reports on greenfield relocations as UISP projects (see State of Local Governance, p.64-65).

Community leader of TT Section, Site B Khayelitsha welcomes Somsook to her settlement

Where the SA SDI Alliance has implemented participatory upgrading projects in partnership with a local municipality (such as the City of Cape Town), these instances remain limited to a handful of settlements. Avenues for scaling up meaningful participatory practice in South Africa are rare, if not non-existent. In the experience of the Alliance, key challenges to scaling up relate to the disjuncture between lengthy bureaucratic processes and the pace of community preparation in informal settlements. For example, party political frictions may extend the time required to mobilise a community while lengthy municipal procurement processes regularly stretch project timeframes beyond the designated one year budget allocation period. When budget allocations are annulled or project dates postpoined, it is twice as difficult to restart and remobilise the community. Tools that intend to support community-led action (such as the UISP), can therefore have the opposite effect: they are often not flexible enough to adapt to project preparation and social facilitation processes in informal settlement communities.

How CODI Works

As an alternative, the CODI model offers relevant insights for the South African context. Formed in 2000 through the merging of the Urban Community Development Office and the Rural Development Fund, CODI is an independent public organisation under the Ministry of Social Development and Human Security. CODI functions as a revolving loan fund that enables direct access to grants for upgrading and loans for housing. As a national implementing agent, CODI manages the Thai government’s Community Development Fund that engages urban poor communities and networks who are organised in housing co-operatives and informally recognised community based savings schemes. CODI supports the building of community cooperatives, through sub-group clusters that manage community grants and wholesale loans. Such subgroups bring about collective action through group guarantee, helping eachother, and collective repayment. Read more about CODI here.

Somsook speaks about the CODI model in Thailand.

Thailand’s Upgrading Initiative: Baan Mankong

The Baan Mankong City-Wide Upgrading initiative is one of CODI’s most notable programs. Introduced in 2004, it focuses on poverty alleviation, community welfare, technical support and tenure security through promoting savings, credit, loans and planning support. Baan Mankong (which means “Secure Housing” in Thai) facilitates capital transactions through an infrastructure/upgrading grant from central government and a housing loan lent to borrowers organised in housing cooperatives. Since 2004, Baan Mankong has approved a total of 850 projects in 1660 communities and benefitted about 90 000 families. Geographically, its reach covers 286 cities in 71 of 77 provinces. The average housing loan per family amounts to US$ 5000 while the average upgrading subsidy grant averages about US$ 2500 per family. The total loans granted by CODI’s revolving fund (at 3% interest) amount to about US$ 185m with a repayment rate of 97.5% (Figures drawn from Somsook’s presentation).

In her presentation, Somsook highlighted the following as significant requirements for a city-wide, scaleable approach:

Active communities: support for urban poor communities as owners of projects
City-wide approach: changes at the real scale of the problem (i.e. that affect all poor communities in the city) will link scattered communities and their priorities to each other, contributing to a more systematised and sustainable approach
Building strong communities: through secure housing and integrated development that includes:
- collective land ownership or lease
- community savings and fund (acting as a community bank)
- welfare activities
- activating the link between community networks and city organisations in regular meetings
- collective management
Building partnerships: between community networks, local authorities and other development actors that enable deliberation and negotiation
New finance system: active community savings and credit, City Development Funds

FEDUP and ISN engage with Somsook around CODI’s approach

Scaling Up in South Africa?

With more than eighty representatives from NGOs, media platforms and think tanks in the sector, academic partners in planning and architecture and the Head of Department of Human Settlements in the Western Cape, the closing session of the seminar offered an opportunity for discussion. How does CODI straddle the tension between private and collective land ownership? Is collective land ownership/lease possible in South Africa? Is there government appetite for alternative finance mechanisms? While engaging with these points, Somsook continually pointed to the value of collective action:

“The key thing is to bring all actors to work together. Community is important to support each individual for a certain period of time. And land is an important factor [so we need] collective land as a project. Poor people will be weak otherwise. Its insufficient to just do one or two projects here and there… Let poor people at a big scale be the key actors to make a big change”

Thando Mguli, HoD of Human Settlements in the Western Cape

Similarly to CODI, a co-finance facility in South Africa has the potential to locate poor people at the heart of upgrading interventions. Where urban poor communities shift from beneficiaries to activated citizens that identify, plan and implement development priorities, informal settlement upgrading can become more nuanced, responsive and participatory. For a co-finance approach, community saving is a valuable mobilising tool, an enabler for meaningful participation and an indicator of household buy-in at settlement level. A co-finance mechanism that is institutionalised in local government but not subject to its bureaucratic process can enable flexible time frames for project budget allocations that are not constrained by annual provincial or municipal allocations. In this sense, innovation and meaningful participation occur only when community members become significant actors in the upgrading process.

*The visit was supported by the World Bank

From left to right: Representatives from the World Bank, Cities Support Programme (Treasury), CORC, Somsook, Western Cape Human Settlements HoD and ISN Coordinator

May 05

Love0

Seeing from the South: an international exchange with South African shelter activists

By Yolande Hendler CORC, FEDUP, ISN, Learning Exchanges, SDI No Comments

By Dan Silver, Diana Mitlin and Sophie King (crossposted from the Global Development Institute at the University of Manchester)

“We are poor, but we are not hopeless. We know what we are doing”.

This is Alinah Mofokeng, one of three activists from the South African alliance of community organizations and support NGOs affiliated to Shack / Slum Dwellers International (SDI) who came to visit Manchester last month. The three came to explain their approaches and to exchange knowledge with local organisations through a combination of visits around Manchester and Salford, and a half-day workshop drawing together activists from around the country.

While South Africa and the UK might initially appear to be worlds apart, previous discussions between low-income communities in the global North and South had identified commonalities in their disadvantage. Potentially there are approaches that can be drawn upon and adapted in order to resist marginalisation and improve local communities, which can work across different places and contexts. This was the basis for Sophie King (UPRISE Research Fellow) and Professor Diana Mitlin (Global Development Institute, University of Manchester) inviting the South African Alliance to meet with UK community groups in March, drawing on a long history of community exchanges. This coincided with the Alliance participating in the Global Development Institute’s teaching programme with community leaders lecturing on their experiences and methods.

Alinah Mofokeng (Federation of the Urban and Rural Poor), Nkokheli Ncambele (Informal Settlements Network) and Charlton Ziervogel (CORC) all talked about their experiences of being part of the South African Alliance of SDI. This alliance has pioneered people-centered development initiatives by and of people in poverty since 1991. Their foundations are established in the grassroots, working on issues that emerge from the daily experiences of poverty, landlessness, and homelessness to bring immediate improvements and long-term inclusive citizenship within cities.

SDI’s approach to organizing is grounded in women’s led savings schemes, in which each member saves small amounts and does so with the support of their own collective savings group, so they are able to improve their own lives, and that of the wider community also. Solidarity is central to their approach and savings schemes are encouraged to federate to have stronger influence on city and state government. In the process of coming together they learn about their respective needs and challenges and respond collectively. If one member’s family does not have enough to eat, the group may decide that week’s savings will be spent on putting bread on their table. Once one savings scheme is formed, they share their learning with other marginalised people around them and support others to form schemes of their own that can join the network.

This extends beyond initial collectives to direct community-to-community learning exchange at city, national, and international levels. From here, they are able to show that they are together and are capable, which means they can influence the government from a more powerful basis – as Nkokheli said, they have been able to say to the politicians: “you are eating our money and not doing what we want. We say, enough is enough!” Nkokheli said that once the community shows that they are capable, for example through building their own toilets in the informal settlements and developing savings, politicians are more likely to listen.

The exchange of different ways of doing things between the South African Alliance and UK organisations certainly had an impact – showing us that the exchange of ideas about solidarity, a self-reliant ethos, and having a long-term vision for more inclusive cities is powerful enough to make sense across continents. One of the participants in the meeting was Ann from a group called Five Mummies Make, which is a self-help group in Scotland who have come together to sell handmade crafts, put on events and contribute to local charities; through meeting every week, the women have improved their own well-being in the process.

After the workshop, Ann was inspired to make a bigger difference than they were already achieving, saying that:

“If we bring together a bigger group, a federation, we can make such a bigger difference within the community, so not just small differences for individuals…I want to go back now and make the changes in the community, without having to go cap in hand asking for help constantly, but saying – this is what we want…”

Alinah, Nkokheli, and Charlton visited the United Estates of Wythenshawe for an extended lunch to meet people involved in Mums’ Mart. Mums’ Mart was started by a group of parents who came together after speaking to each other in the playground at their children’s school in Wythenshawe. Through chatting, they realised that they shared experiences of feeling isolated, and that their kids weren’t getting to take part in everyday activities. To address these problems the mums now meet every other week to have a meal while their children play, and they organise ‘market days’ to bring people from the estate together and raise money to take their families away somewhere fun for a day or a week.

After the exchange, members of Mum’s Mart have begun to emulate the SDI savings model and are holding weekly savings meetings, alongside their income-generating activities and monthly committee meetings to review progress; they also have ambitions about how over the long-term they can bring practical social change beyond their immediate group. Sharon Davies, the group’s treasurer, told us that since the visit Mums’ Mart have set up their own savings scheme and it is going well, and that they “have loads of really good ideas as to where we are going to go with Mums’ Mart from now on”.

This was certainly not just a one-way street of learning from the SDI approach. Nkokheli, who was initially surprised that poverty existed in the UK after visiting a homeless group in Manchester, told us that: “The exchanges are very important to us, because it mobilises the community…and also [helps] to train communities to do things, [to see] what other people are doing for themselves. Here in Manchester, I learnt a lot…The systems are not the same, but the look of things are the same – there are things we can learn from Manchester, and there are things Manchester can learn from us”.

Through this exchange then, there have been concrete changes that have already taken place. It also shows the value of bringing together groups who might be marginalised from politics and from economic opportunities, to share ideas, tactics and strategies. There is most certainly scope in the UK to build on the approach that SDI take: developing a more self-reliant social action approach; coming together, initially in close supportive relationships between neighbours, but with a view to wider solidarity across groups and between areas; and showing the government through practical activities the capabilities of people living in low-income areas and the direction that poverty reduction strategies should take.

As Alinah said, “we are not hopeless. We know what we are doing”.

[vimeo]https://vimeo.com/164289875[/vimeo]

Apr 29

Love0

Learning Space: Lessons from the ISN on building a strong social movement

By Yolande Hendler CORC, ISN No Comments

by Ava Rose Hoffman (on behalf of CORC)

In 2016, the SA SDI Alliance began a new series of participatory learning spaces intended for FEDUP and ISN community leaders and CORC staff to collaboratively strengthen understandings of government structures, processes, laws, and principles. These sessions serve to equip professionals and community leaders alike with information applicable to government partnership meetings. Furthermore, the sessions prepare community leaders to better report back on project preparation processes to their respective communities.

How do learning spaces function?

Each session is facilitated by an individual, but the sessions are guided with the intention for SA SDI Alliance professionals and community leaders to learn from one another, particularly through the experiential lens that community leaders bring to the table.

The first learning space of the year took place on 22 January 2016 and focused on “how government works.” This session worked through the roles and responsibilities of government, the structure of government on national, provincial, and local levels, and the division of powers between legislative, executive, and judicial branches. The second learning space took place on 29 January 2016 and explored “how laws and policies are made.” During this session, participants examined the difference between laws and policies, Green Papers, White Papers, Bills, and Acts, in addition to becoming familiar with the Draft White Paper on Human Settlements—which was the primary topic of the third session, held on 5 February 2016.

The fourth learning space of the 2016 series, held on 15 April 2016 at the community hall in Khayelitsha Site B, focused on the key principles of building a strong social movement composed of informal settlement dwellers.

Learning Space in Khayelitsha Site B on 22 April 2016

Facilitated by Nkokhleli Ncambele, Informal Settlement Network (ISN) Coordinator of the Western Cape, the session focused on the organisational structure of the ISN, ensuring that the community leaders present grasp a clear understanding of their responsibilities as participants and leaders in the ISN as a social movement.

Nkokheli Ncambele, ISN Coordinator of the Western Cape, facilitating the learning space

Guiding Principles of the ISN

The most recent session kicked off with Nkokheli’s description of the fundamental pillars of the ISN:

Accountability & Transparency

To enhance efficiency and transparency, the organisational structure of the ISN is divided into community, subregional, regional, provincial, and national levels. As Nkokheli stated:

“The community leadership is accountable to their community because wherever they go—like when they go to meet with the City of Cape Town—they have to come back and report to the community. If you don’t do that, you’re not accountable. Every leader has to go back and report to his community.”

Furthermore, to ensure transparency and accountability, community leaders are driven by what Nkokheli calls a “community mandate”—the specific needs, goals, and interests that the community leader advances on behalf of the community:

“If you don’t have a community mandate that is going to drive you, when someone doesn’t have a mandate, who is going to hold you accountable? But if you have a mandate, this is very important to you.”

Availability and Commitment

When projects are initiated, Nkokheli recounted that communities often first ask:

“‘When is this project going to start? The second question: how many people are going to be employed? Then the community says, ‘Please, leadership, make sure that our people are benefiting from the project.’”

When communities ask questions of their leaders, leaders must ensure that their actions align with the collective interest of the community.

Love

Nkokheli emphasised the necessity of love and compassion in the ISN: “Whatever we do, we do it with love. Without love, you can’t build an organization.”

Trust

Finally, Nkokheli spoke of the trust that communities vest in their leaders to advocate on their behalf: “We trust you [leaders] that you’re going to deliver.”

Understanding the Roles and Responsibilities of ISN Leaders

Next, Nkokheli proceeded to delve into the organisational structure of the ISN, detailing the roles and responsibilities of leaders on each of the five levels composing the movement.

Community level

On a community level, a minimum of fifteen leaders are elected to represent the community. If a community is large, it will be divided into a number of sections. The participation of community leaders is indispensable for the planning and implementation of a project in a community.

Subregional level

Nkokheli described:

“The subregion is where all the community mandates go. From there, the community mandates go to the regions. For example, here in Khayelitsha we’ve got 5 subregions: Site C, Site B, Enkanini, Endloveni and Strand. When they come together they form a region. If you are leading on a regional level or a subregional level, you’re not only focusing on your community, you’re focusing on Site B—you are a leader of Site B, not a leader of your community.”

When a community seeks to advocate its needs, it must first express them to local community leaders, who then conveys the community’s interests to the subregional leaders. In turn, subregional leaders “have the duty to go and put pressure on the regional leadership.”

Regional level

Similarly, on a regional level, Nkokheli emphasised that leaders must be accountable not only to their own communities but to the entire region:

“I want us to think about our communities, but once you are serving on the subregional or regional level, you are not thinking about your community alone… On a regional level, your focus is on all of Khayelitsha.”

Regional leaders, in turn, report to the provincial leadership.

Provincial level

Currently, the Western Cape provincial leadership is composed of eight active members (including Nkokheli himself). When provincial leaders are elected, representatives from all regions must be present. Once again, Nkokheli emphasised the misperception that an individual from a certain community serving in the provincial leadership represents their respective community—which is not the case. While a leader might be inclined to serve the interests of their own community, like subregional and regional leaders, provincial leaders mustn’t focus on the needs of their home community alone:

“Look at me: my community has many problems. But my focus is not on my own community, but on the Western Cape at large.”

National level

While a national leadership structure does exist, the ISN largely operates more locally, spearheaded by the provincial leadership. Nkokheli articulated: “You have to have a strategy to be in or lead this movement.” Integral to this strategy, according to Nkokheli, is understanding the dynamics between community movements (like the ISN) and politics. Nkokheli stated:

“It’s important for us as a social movement to be just a social movement, not to be a political movement. You don’t talk politics, you talk community development.”

Project Development Step-by-Step: From community mandate to project realisation

1. “You can’t do anything in any particular community without consulting its leaders”.The active engagement and participation of community leaders is the cornerstone of initiating and implementing an upgrading project. Furthermore, communities must demonstrate readiness and commitment by developing savings schemes. Nkokheli emphasised: “You can’t just want a project without community savings. How can we approve that project without community savings?”

2. Next, on a subregional level, decision making must involve representation from each affected community. The subregional level is highly important, as the subregional leaders are responsible for reporting back to their communities. In turn, the communities must articulate their needs and interests:

“The community has the responsibility of giving a mandate to these people. If a community says, we want a project, they tell the leadership, ‘We want re-blocking,’ and then the leadership should come here in the subregion and say ‘Our community wants a project.’”

3. Next, the subregional coordinator is responsible for approaching the regional leadership. For example, the subregional coordinator might say:

“‘In our subregion, we’ve got 6 communities that are requesting a project. They’ve done profiling, enumerations, and they’ve started their community savings.’ The duty of regional leaders is to come to the provincial level and say, ‘In our region, we’ve got 15 community that want projects.’”

At this point, a decision must be made: how many settlements can be supported. Based on that evaluation of community preparedness, technical feasibility and local government engagement, CORC becomes involved in the project planning process, advancing towards the next steps of project implementation. After Nkokheli explained these steps, he opened up the forum for questions, conversation and debate. Concluding the session, Nkokheli remarked on the power of collaboration in leadership structures: “When you bring different leaders together, you find something and you learn something.”

Implemented project: re-blocking in a section of Khayelitsha Site B

Project in action: Khayelitsha Site B’s nearly complete new community hall

CORC Archives - SASDI Alliance

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

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

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

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

Co(mmunity)-finance facilities as a tool for local democratic space

A Photo Story: Community-led Enumeration in Action

Reflections on re-blocking: Why community participation is key

Scaling Up Informal Settlement Upgrading: The CODI Model Thailand

Seeing from the South: an international exchange with South African shelter activists

Learning Space: Lessons from the ISN on building a strong social movement

Other Posts

Categories

Quick Links

Newsletter Signup

CORC Archives - SASDI Alliance

Other Posts

Categories

Tags

Quick Links

Newsletter Signup