Informal Settlements South Africa

28 August 2013 Presentation by: Maki Thellane (HDA) and Illana Melzer (eighty20)

Copyright 2010 Eighty20

AGENDA SLIDE
Welcome, introductions and workshop objectives Background and objectives of this study Data sources, collection methodologies, challenges and limitations Context: Human Settlements in South Africa Informal settlements: South Africa Limpopo case study Implications

Objectives of the session

To share a report indicating basic Nation Human Settlements picture based on new census data. Share our findings on South African Informal Settlements, in particular definition of informal settlements, status quo and key trends emerging based on new census data. To share our understanding of informal settlements, their dynamics and drivers based on enumeration undertaken at settlement level in selected municipalities and a comparative analysis to census data. To share with sector role players our views on approaching and addressing the challenge of informal settlements and identify implications on policy and planning approach as well as upgrading methodologies and practices.

AGENDA SLIDE
Welcome, introductions and workshop objectives Background and objectives of this study Data sources, collection methodologies, challenges and limitations Context: Human Settlements in South Africa Informal settlements: South Africa Limpopo case study Implications

A primary objective of the project is to update existing analysis on informal settlements in South Africa with new Census 2011 data. In addition, the project reviewed detailed settlement data gathered in Limpopo
DATA
Identify national, provincial and local databases and information sources where the necessary information can be obtained Analyse available data and identify key trends with regard to informal settlements in South Africa Highlight the limitations of each of the data sources and the extent of validity and reliability of the data sources

REPORTS
Providing a national profile and status quo indication of the informal settlements Providing a provincial profile and status quo of informal settlements Providing municipal profiles per province of the informal settlement in larger municipalities linked to the provincial and national data analyse and compare data gathered in 2012 by the HDA across seven informal settlements in five municipalities in Limpopo.

AGENDA SLIDE
Welcome, introductions and workshop objectives Background and objectives of this study Data sources, collection methodologies, challenges and limitations Context: Human Settlements in South Africa Informal settlements: South Africa Limpopo case study Implications

There is no strict definition of an informal settlement. In most cases definitions highlight the dwelling type and land tenure
SELECTED DEFINITIONS OF INFORMAL SETTLEMENTS Data source
Statistics South Africa

Definition of informal settlement

An unplanned settlement on land which has not been surveyed or proclaimed as residential, consisting mainly of informal dwellings (shacks). Definition of an informal dwelling :A makeshift structure not approved by a local authority and not intended as a permanent dwelling Identifies informal settlements on the basis of the following characteristics: n Illegality and informality; n Inappropriate locations; n Restricted public and private sector investment; n Poverty and vulnerability; and n Social stress No formal definition, however the following working definition is used: An informal settlement comprises An impoverished group of households who have illegally or without authority taken occupation of a parcel of land (with the land owned by the Council in the majority of cases) and who have created a shanty town of impoverished illegal residential structures built mostly from scrap material without provision made for essential services and which may or may not have a layout that is more or less formal in nature. Informal settlement means one shack or more constructed on land, with or without the consent of the owner of the land or the person in charge of the land. Shack means any temporary shelter, building, hut, tent, dwelling or similar structure which does not comply with the provisions of the National Building Regulations and Building Standards Act, 1977 (Act 103 of 1977), the regulations promulgated under that Act and the Municipality's Building Control By-laws and which is primarily used for residential purposes. Dense settlements comprising communities housed in self constructed shelters under conditions of informal tenure. Unplanned settlements where informal housing (i.e. structures not in compliance with building regulations) is constructed on land that occupants have no legal claim to (at least initially), and on which few, if any, services exist.

National Department of Human Settlements (2009 National Housing Codes Informal Settlement Upgrading Programme ) City of Johannesburg Metropolitan Municipality

City of Tshwane Metropolitan Municipality

Mookgophong Local Municipality (Limpopo) Thabazimbi Local Municipality (Limpopo)

The project explored a range of data sources which can be used to triangulate and explore the data more fully. Household level data is available from the 2011 and earlier Censuses, and other Stats SA surveys
HOUSEHOLD LEVEL DATA
Censuses and surveys Basic living conditions and access to services Profile of households and families Income, expenditure and wellbeing Permanence Housing waiting lists Health and vulnerability Education Release of Census 2011 data is a critical reason to update the analysis now

SETTLEMENT LEVEL DATA

National NDHS: Informal Settlements Atlas 2009/10 HDA: LaPsis 2011 Eskom: Spot Building Count 2011 Other Provincial and Municipal Provincial data: KwaZulu-Natal, North West and Western Cape Municipal data: City of Cape Town, City of Johannesburg, City of Tshwane, Ekurhuleni, eThekwini, Nelson Mandela Bay

HOUSEHOLD & SETTLEMENT

CORC: Community-based enumeration Housing Development Agency: 2012 enumerations in Limpopo province

None of the Stats SA instruments focus specifically on households in informal settlements. Questionnaires cover housing and household conditions more generally
Census 2011
GEOGRAPHY
Province, District Municipality, Local Municipality, Wards, Main Place, Sub Place, Small Area Layer, Enumeration Area The lowest level at which a user can run their own data tables through the SuperCross software is Small Area Layer (a combination of Enumeration Areas)

GHS 2011
Province, Metro/Non-Metro (not specified) Province

IES 2010/11

QUESTIONNAIRE STRUCTURE OVER TIME

The census data provides a wide range of demographic and socio-economic information about South Africans Not all categories across censuses are the same. In some instances new questions have been introduced or previous questions re-phrased The system is not fully interactive yet, i.e. not all variables can be analysed in every combination There are also variables that appear in the questionnaire that are not available at all for analysis

Covers a broad array of topics including housing conditions, tenure and access to services, household composition, grants, disability, education and schooling, health and access to health facilities, general indicators of well being and employment Some changes to the questionnaires but it has remained broadly the same Raw data covering all categories in the questionnaire is available for analysis

The IES focuses on income and expenditure patterns and is based on a combination of the diary and recall methods of capture There has been a change in focus from the 2005/6 to 2010/11 surveys w.r.t. nonconsumption expenditure and income categories Raw data covering all categories in the questionnaire is available for analysis

DISSEMINATION

SAMPLE SIZE

N/A Censuses 1996, 2001 and 2011 There have been many provincial and municipal boundary changes since 2001, therefore comparison of the Census 2011 with previous censuses therefore require alignment of data to 2011 municipal boundaries

In some instances, small sample sizes limit the extent to which data can be interrogated GHS 2002 2011 2011: Survey of 25,086 households and 93,434 people Three different sample designs were used over the years: 2002-2004, 2005-2007, 2008-2011. The sample frame is based on Census 2001 EA level data. This has been augmented throughout the past decade through additional listings

In some instances, small sample sizes limit the extent to which data can be interrogated IES 2005/6, 2010/11 2010/11: Survey of 25,328 households The sampling frame for the IES 2010/11 was obtained from Stats SAs Master Sample based on the 2001 Census EAs

TRENDS

The Census contains two candidate indicators to identify households who live in informal settlements those living in informal residential enumeration areas, and those living in informal dwellings/shacks not in backyards. Other surveys do not provide EA level characterisations
Enumeration Area (EA)
Formal residential Traditional residential Informal residential Farms Small holdings Collective living quarters Commercial Vacant 59% 26% 8% 4% 1% 1% 1% 1%

10

Dwelling type
Formal dwelling Shack not in backyard Traditional dwelling Shack in backyard Other 78% 9% 8% 5% 1%

11

A particular focus was the data gathered across seven settlements in Limpopo. This data was gathered by community-based enumerators on Android operated smart phones
LIM

Smash Block Thabazimbi Local Municipality Ext 6 Jacaranda Modimolle Local Municipality Motetema Elias Motsoaledi Local Municipality Mohlakaneng Polokwane Local Municipality Praktiseer Extension 3 Greater Tubatse Local Municipality Praktiseer Extension 2 Greater Tubatse Local Municipality Tubatse A Greater Tubatse Local Municipality

12

The questionnaire includes a household and individual section and took on average 45 minutes to administer. In addition to gathering data, the enumerators logged GPS coordinates for each survey and took photos of each structure
HOUSEHOLD LEVEL DATA
Questions asked for the household in general Building materials used for walls / roof Household size Household income and stability Tenure and proof of ownership Purchase price and funding sources Sense of belonging Usage of financial services Access to services Length of stay and other dwellings Rent paid and rent received Remittances Deprivation and poverty Appliances and assets Subsidies Problems in the area

PERSON LEVEL DATA

Questions asked for every person in the household Employment and location of job Relationship to household head Gender and age Form of ID Marital status and spouses location Dependents and children living elsewhere Length of stay and origin Disability Education Gross salary / income Level of understanding of questions

13

The data can create a detailed database that can be used to develop a baseline profile of the settlement and of each household and dwelling within the settlement

PRAKTISEER EXTENSION 2 INFORMAL SETTLEMENT

The data is saved to the system immediately after the survey is completed. Data can be downloaded to Excel

Data can be viewed as either an individual or household level data Among other things data will indicate households that are eligible for a housing subsidy and the households access to facilities and services, vulnerability, economic situation, etc

15

A comparison of Census data with data from the HDA enumerations highlights that the EA classification is not a reliable indicator Jacaranda Ext 6 informal settlement
Census 2011: Households: 474 Formal residential EA: 308 Informal residential EA: 165 Formal dwelling: 270 Informal dwelling not in backyard: 146 Informal dwelling in backyard: 57 HDA 2012: Number of structures in the settlement: 326 Number of structures used as dwellings: 219 Number of formal dwellings: 0 Number of households: 197

Formal residential

Informal residential

Formal residential

16

A comparison of Census data with data from the HDA enumerations highlights that the EA classification is not a reliable indicator Tubatse A informal settlement
Census 2011: Households: 2 857 Formal residential EA: 2 741 Traditional residential EA: 116 Formal dwelling: 2 734 Informal dwelling not in backyard: 67 Informal dwelling in backyard: 51 Traditional dwelling: 4 Other: 1 HDA 2012: Number of structures in the settlement: 2 269 Number of structures used as dwellings: 1 804 Number of formal dwellings: 1 649 Number of households living in the settlement: 1 493

TR

FR

FR FR FR FR

FR

FR FR FR FR

FR FR FR FR

FR

17

The Limpopo case studies highlight the inadequacy of the dwelling-based definitions. What is a shack?

18

Examples of houses in informal settlements

AGENDA SLIDE
Welcome, introductions and workshop objectives Background and objectives of this study Data sources, collection methodologies, challenges and limitations Context: Human Settlements in South Africa Informal settlements: South Africa Limpopo case study Implications

According to the 2011 Census there are 51.8 million people living in 14.5 million households in South Africa. The number of households in South Africa grew at 2.6% per annum while the number of individuals grew at 1.5% per annum between 2001 and 2011
NUMBER OF INDIVIDUALS (MILLIONS)
1.5%

20

NUMBER OF HOUSEHOLDS (MILLIONS)

2.6%

55 50 45 40 35

51.8

16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0

48.5 44.8 12.5 11.2

14.5

Millions

30 25 20 15 10 5 0

Census 2001

Community Survey 2007

Census 2011
Average Household Size:

Millions

Census 2001
3.8

Community Survey 2007

3.9

Census 2011
3.4

Source: Census 2011 Statistical release P0301.4 Note: Percentage shown is a compound annual growth rate

21

The dramatic increase in the proportion of households that comprise one person is driving the trend in declining household sizes
HOUSEHOLD SIZE
CENSUS 1996 CENSUS 2001 CENSUS 2011

5+ 36%

1 16%

5+ 33% 2 17%

1 19%

5+ 25%

1 27%

2 18% 4 15%

4 14% 3 15%

2 19%

4 15%

3 15%

3 15%

A households consists of a single person or a group of people who live together for at least four nights a week, who eat from the same pot and who share resources Stats SA

Source: Census 2011; Statistics South Africa: Achieving a better life for all

22

Migration is a key feature. According to Census 2011, 19% of the population moved between 2001 and 2011
Current province Population Number (%) of people who moved between 2001 and 2011 Proportion of people who moved between 2001 and 2011 that relocated within province Proportion of people who moved between 2001 and 2011 that relocated from another province Proportion of people who moved between 2001 and 2011 that relocated from outside SA Provinces most moved from

Eastern Cape Free State Gauteng KwaZulu-Natal Limpopo Mpumalanga North West Northern Cape Western Cape South Africa

6 562 053 2 745 590 12 272 263 10 267 300 5 404 868 4 039 939 3 509 953 1 145 861 5 822 734 51 770 560

762 760 (12%)

76% 62% 61% 76% 64% 54% 53% 63% 66% 64%

15% 26% 24% 14% 18% 30% 32% 29% 22% 23%

5% 10% 12% 6% 16% 13% 12% 4% 8% 10%

Eastern Cape (76%) Western Cape (5%), Gauteng (5%) Free State (62%) Gauteng (9%) Eastern Cape (4%) Gauteng (61%) Limpopo (7%) KwaZulu-Natal (5%) KwaZulu-Natal (76%) Eastern Cape (6%) Gauteng (4%) Limpopo (64%) Gauteng (8%) Mpumalanga (4%) Mpumalanga (54%) Gauteng (11%) Limpopo (7%) North West (53%) Gauteng (12%) Eastern Cape (5%) Northern Cape (63%) North West (9%) Western Cape (6%) Western Cape (66%) Eastern Cape (12%) Gauteng (5%)

365 774 (13%) 3 955 478 (32%) 1 239 410 (12%) 643 208 (12%) 565 575 (14%) 630 408 (18%)

189 540 (17%) 1 441 573 (25%) 9 793 725 (19%)

Source: Census 2011. Table excludes dont know / unspecified

23

This has had a significant impact on the shape of the population pyramid. In urban areas there is a noticeable bulge in the 20 29 age group for men and women
2011
Total population: 51,770,560
Share of population* 63%

Urban
80+ 75-79 70-74 65-69 60-64 55-59 50-54 45-49 40-44 35-39 30-34 25-29 20-24 15-19 10-14 5-9 0-4 8% 6% 4% 2% 0% 2%

Tribal/Traditional
80+ 75-79 70-74 65-69 60-64 55-59 50-54 45-49 40-44 35-39 30-34 25-29 20-24 15-19 10-14 5-9 0-4 2% 0% 2% 4% 6% 8%

Share of population* 32%

Males Females

4%

6%

8%

8%

6%

4%

Source: Census 2011 Note: *The remaining 5% of the population live on farms

24

Across the country there has been a significant increase in the number of households living in formal dwellings since 2001. The number living in shacks not in backyards has declined slightly while those in backyards have increased
16,000
CAGR 2001 - 2011
2.6%

TYPE OF MAIN DWELLING

14 450 128 542

100%

5%

1% 4%

Number of households (000s)

14,000 12,000 10,000 8,000 7,148 6,000 4,000 2,000 0 2001 Shack not in backyard Traditional dwelling Formal other 1,655 460
-3.7% 4.5% -1.0% 4.1%

0.2%

Percentage of households

11 218 47 532

10.6%

80% 64%

60%

74%

10,677

40% 15% 4% 0%

1,140 713 2011 Shack in backyard Formal dwelling Other

20%

8% 5% 2011 Shack in backyard Formal dwelling Other

2001 Shack not in backyard Traditional dwelling Formal other

2001 2011: Stats SA residential construction: 660 162 new residential houses, flats/townhouses completed by the pvt sector* Census: 3 529 251 additional households living in houses / flats / townhouses
Source: Census 2001, Census 2011, Stats SA Building Statistics Note: Formal dwelling: House or brick/concrete structure on a separate stand or yard, Town / cluster / semi-detached house, Flat or apartment. Formal other contains: House/flat/room in backyard, Room/flatlet on a property or larger dwelling/servants quarters/granny flat * Includes residential buildings: dwelling houses < 80 m2, dwelling houses 80 m2 and flats/ townhouses completed 2001 - 2011

25

The number of households has grown in all provinces. In some cases the number living in shacks not in backyards has declined. Shacks not in backyards have increased everywhere
CAGR 2001 - 2011

TYPE OF MAIN DWELLING BY PROVINCE

3.4% 3.3% 3.4% 2.1% 1.2% 3.2% 1.8% 1.3% 2.4%

Total

SNIBY SIBY

4,500 4,000

1.4% 5.4%

3.0% 8.4%

-0.9% 4.7% 3,909

3.3% 4.8%

-5.9% 1.0%

-1.4% 4.7%

-1.7% 2.5%

-3.4% 1.1%

-3.3% 4.3%

Number of households (000s)

3,500 3,000 2,500 2,000 1,500 1,062 1,000 500 0 2001 2011 2001 2011 2001 2011 North West Western Cape Shack not in backyard Gauteng 761 547 810 954 1,176 1,314 193 306 246 198 2001 301 248 2011 2001 2011 2001 2011 2001 2011 2001 734 487 823 668 786 567 902 609 483 1,634 2,794 2,539 3,121 2,078 1,075 1,275 2,119 1,818 1,483 763 549 1,687 1,418 1,066 1,119 811 476 2011 225 2001 2011 1,273

Northern Cape

Free State

Mpumalanga

KwaZuluNatal

Eastern Cape

Limpopo Other

Shack in backyard

Traditional dwelling

Formal dwelling

Source: Census 2001, Census 2011 Note: Formal dwelling contains: House or brick/concrete structure on a separate stand or yard, Town / cluster / semi-detached house, Flat or apartment, House/flat/room in backyard, Room/flatlet on a property or larger dwelling/servants quarters/granny flat Percentage in the circle is the CAGR for all households in the province. The percentage beneath that is the growth rate for households living in shacks not in backyards

26

Access to services for all households in South Africa improved between 2001 to 2011
ACCESS TO SERVICES IN SOUTH AFRICA: 2001 vs. 2011
(All households)

15%

15%
30% 32% 46% 70% 85%

38% 45%
55% 62%

31%

41%
50% 57% 9%

27%

12%

39% 40%

REFUSE REMOVAL
ACCESS TO SERVICE: Removed by local authority/ private company at least once a week

SANITATION
HIGHER LEVEL OF SERVICE: Flush toilet (connected to sewerage system) BASIC LEVEL OF SERVICE: Flush toilet (with septic tank) OR Pit toilet with ventilation (VIP)

WATER SUPPLY
HIGHER LEVEL OF SERVICE: Piped/tap water inside dwelling BASIC LEVEL OF SERVICE: Piped/tap water inside yard OR Piped/tap water on community stand, distance less than 200m from dwelling

ELECTRICITY SUPPLY
ACCESS TO SERVICE: Electricity used for lighting

Census 2001

Census 2011

Higher level of service

Basic level of service

No access

Source: Census 2011 Note: There is no indication as to the location of the toilet (in the dwelling, in the yard, and so on)

Census data indicates a shift towards rental accommodation. Across the country as a whole between 2001 to 2011 the percentage of South African households that rent their primary dwelling has increased from 19% to 25%. In urban areas it increased from 26% in 2001 to 32% in 2011
SOUTH AFRICAN HOUSEHOLDS IN URBAN AREAS
(Tenure status by type of main dwelling)
Census 2001 Formal dwelling
27% Formal 9% dwelling

27

Census 2011
32% 11% 3%

Traditional dwelling

22%

25% Traditional dwelling

28%

22%

4%

Shack in backyard

52%

20% in backyard Shack

58%

17% 3%

Shack not in backyard

13%

51% Shack not in backyard

17%

39%

5%

Other

28%

32%

Other

44%

20%

7%

Total

26%

17%

Total

32%

15% 3%

Source: Census 2001, Census 2011

Owned

Rented

Occupied rent-free

Other

28

This shift is most noticeable in the major metros where the proportion of households living in formal dwellings who rent has increased noticeably
HOUSEHOLDS IN FORMAL DWELLINGS IN MAJOR METROS
(Proportion that rent)

City of Johannesburg Metropolitan Municipality Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality

Ethekwini Municipality

Nelson Mandela

City of Cape Town City of Tshwane Metropolitan Municipality

Source: Census 2001, Census 2011

Rented 2001

Rented 2011

29

The noticeable shift towards rental accommodation is in part due to a contraction in mortgage lending that has taken place since 2007
NUMBER OF MORTGAGE LOANS GRANTED
PERSONAL INCOME

2008

2012

CAGR

R15 000+

216 980

132 798

-12%

R10 000R15 000

34 741

17 174

-16%

R3 500R10 000

26 133

5 609

-32%

R1R3 500

1 121

24

-62%

VALUE OF LOANS GRANTED: R143 BILLION NUMBER OF LOANS GRANTED: 278 975
Source: NCR Consumer credit report, AMPS 2012

VALUE OF LOANS GRANTED: R108 BILLION NUMBER OF LOANS GRANTED: 155 605

AGENDA SLIDE
Welcome, introductions and workshop objectives Background and objectives of this study Data sources, collection methodologies, challenges and limitations Context: Human Settlements in South Africa Informal settlements: South Africa Limpopo case study Implications

There has been a slight decline in the number of households who live in shacks not in backyards or areas categorised as informal settlements since 2001. Because the total number of households in South Africa has grown the decline in the proportion of households is more noticeable
2001
Total households who live in an informal settlement OR in a shack not in a backyard: 1 772 819 (16% of all households)

31

2011
Total households who live in an informal residential areas OR in a shack not in a backyard: 1 660 380 (11% of all households)

EA: Informal Settlement 1 105 445 (10% of all households)

709 332 (6% of all households)

Main dwelling: Informal dwelling/ shack not in backyard 1 376 706 (12% of all households)

EA: Informal Residential 1 102 989 (8% of all households)

692 386 (5% of all households)

Main dwelling: Informal dwelling/ shack not in backyard 1 249 777 (9% of all households)

64% of households who live in EAs classified as Informal Settlements, live in shacks not in backyards 52% of households who live in shacks not in backyards, live in EAs classified as Informal Settlements

63% of households who live in EAs classified as Informal Settlements, live in shacks not in backyards 55% of households who live in shacks not in backyards, live in EAs classified as Informal Settlements

Source: Census 2001, Census 2011 Note: The name changes in some EA types (including Informal settlement EA changing to Informal residential EA) is due to a change in terminology and not a change in methodology

32

In some cases the two indicators move in opposite directions. Where available we rely principally on shack not in a backyard as a proxy for households who live in informal settlements
HH LIVES IN AN INFORMAL DWELLING / SHACK NOT IN BACKYARD
1 377
-1.0%
3.3% -3.3% 1.4% -5.9% -1.4%

HH LIVES IN AN INFORMAL EA
-0.0%

1,400 1,200 1,000 800 600 400 200 0

22 58 129 147 90 135 143 177

1 250
30 41 149 80 79 96 192

1,400
1 105
0.1%

1,200 1,000 800 600

1 103
0.4% 7.0% -10.5% -1.2%

103 59 132 116

10 24 19

10 24 37 34 52 79 149

-3.4% 3.0% -1.7% -0.9%

-5.1%

241

149

267

2.5% -1.0%

400 200 0 Census 2011 Census 2001

Western Cape Limpopo Eastern Cape Northern Cape

2.4%

CAGR 2001 - 2011

CAGR 2001 - 2011

Census 2001
Gauteng Free State
Source: Census 2001, Census 2011

Census 2011
Mpumalanga

KwaZulu-Natal North West

Number of households

100,000

120,000

140,000

160,000

20,000

40,000

60,000

80,000

While shacks not in backyards are spread all over the country, six district municipalities account for 56% of all households living in shacks not in backyards

Cumulative percentage of households

Source: Census 2011 TOP 12 MUNICIP: 74%

HOUSEHOLDS LIVING IN SHACKS NOT IN BACKYARDS BY DISTRICT MUNICIPALITY

TOP 5 MUNICIP: 51% TOP 6 MUNICIP: 58% TOP 16 MUNICIP: 81%

City of Cape Town Ekurhuleni City of Johannesburg City of Tshwane eThekwini Bojanala Buffalo City West Rand Nkangala Gert Sibande Nelson Mandela Bay Mangaung Dr Kenneth Kaunda Lejweleputswa Ngaka Modiri Molema Cape Winelands Sedibeng Thabo Mofutsanyane Eden Ehlanzeni Capricorn UMgungundlovu Frances Baard Waterberg Fezile Dabi Greater Sekhukhune Siyanda Amathole Cacadu Dr Ruth Segomotsi Mompati iLembe Overberg West Coast Ugu Pixley ka Seme Mopani Vhembe John Taolo Gaetsewe Xhariep Amajuba Chris Hani Ukhahlamba O.R.Tambo Sisonke Uthungulu Umzinyathi Umkhanyakude Alfred Nzo Uthukela Zululand Namakwa Central Karoo

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

33

34

The top six district municipalities (by number households) account for 41% of total households in South Africa
HOUSEHOLDS BY DISTRICT MUNICPALITY (Top 16 district municipalities by total number of households) District municipality City of Johannesburg City of Cape Town Ekurhuleni eThekwini City of Tshwane Bojanala Ehlanzeni Nkangala Capricorn Vhembe Nelson Mandela Bay O.R.Tambo Mopani Sedibeng Gert Sibande UMgungundlovu South Africa Total households 1 434 856 1 068 573 1 015 465 956 713 911 536 501 696 445 087 356 911 342 838 335 276 324 292 298 229 296 320 279 768 273 490 272 666 14 450 161 % of total households 10% 7% 7% 7% 6% 3% 3% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 100% Cumulative percentage 10% 17% 24% 31% 37% 41% 44% 46% 49% 51% 53% 55% 57% 59% 61% 63% 100%

Source: Census 2011

Bojanala, Buffalo City and Siyanda district municipalities have the highest proportion of households living in shacks not in backyards. In some cases these district municipalities account for the vast majority of shacks not in backyards in the province
% of SNIBY that the municipality accounts for in the 63% associated province 20% 18% Percentage of households 16% 14% 12% 10% 8% 6% 4% 2% 0%
City of Cape Town Lejweleputswa Ekurhuleni eThekwini Ngaka Modiri Molema City of Tshwane Frances Baard Dr Kenneth Kaunda West Rand Gert Sibande Mangaung Cape Winelands Buffalo City

35

HOUSEHOLDS LIVING IN SHACKS NOT IN BACKYARDS BY DISTRICT MUNICIPALITY

41% 32% 32% 9% 75% 29% 26% 75% 41% 40% 30% 16% 15% 10% 4%

19% 17% 15% 14% 14%

13%

13%

12%

12%

12%

12%

11%

11%

10%

10%

10%

Source: Census 2011

In the top six

Other

Overberg

Bojanala

Siyanda

36

The Western Cape has five of the ten fastest growing district municipalities with regard to shacks not in backyards, in some cases off a low base
MUNICIPALITIES WITH POSITIVE COMPOUND ANNUAL GROWTH (2001 - 2011)
Province Northern Cape Western Cape Western Cape Western Cape Gauteng Western Cape Western Cape North West Free State Mpumalanga Municipality John Taolo Gaetsewe Eden City of Cape Town Overberg City of Tshwane Cape Winelands West Coast Bojanala Xhariep Nkangala 2001 751 3 596 32 804 1 897 25 305 5 933 2 403 27 964 1 397 8 567 2011 2 981 9 522 74 957 4 048 51 847 11 836 4 744 53 904 2 609 15 847 CAGR 15% 10% 9% 8% 7% 7% 7% 7% 6% 6%

MUNICIPALITIES WITH NEGATIVE COMPOUND ANNUAL GROWTH (2001 - 2011)

Province Eastern Cape Northern Cape KZN Eastern Cape KZN Western Cape Eastern Cape KZN Free State KZN Municipality Chris Hani Namakwa Umzinyathi Alfred Nzo Uthukela Central Karoo O.R.Tambo Umkhanyakude Lejweleputswa Amajuba 2001 1 833 468 799 1 240 1 262 207 2 226 1 414 15 960 3 245 2011 1 719 430 718 1 065 1 063 174 1 834 1 141 11 969 2 286 CAGR -1% -1% -1% -2% -2% -2% -2% -2% -3% -3%

Source: Census 2001 & 2011. Note: The top 10 district municipalities for positive growth and negative growth were used

According to the Census 2011, 41% of households living in shacks not in backyards in South Africa claim to own their dwellings, up from 37% in 2001. The rental market has grown albeit off a relatively low base. Where are the owners of that rental stock?
(HH lives in an informal dwelling / shack not in backyard)
1,600
1 377 1 250

37

DWELLING TENURE

100% 13%

5% 17%

Number of households (000s)

1,400 176 1,200 1,000 800 600 400 200 0 Census 2001 Owned Occupied rent-free 693

Percentage of households

59 211

80%

60%

50%

37%

467

40%

20%

0% Census 2011 Rented Other Census 2001 Owned Occupied rent-free Census 2011 Rented Other

What does ownership mean to the household?

Source: Census 2001, Census 2011

38

Tenure differs by province. KZN has the highest proportion of households in shacks not in backyards who rent
(HH lives in an informal dwelling / shack not in backyard)
100% 5% 8% Percentage of households per province 80% 32% 60% 26% 29% 31% 43% 42% 26% 40% 47% 43% 37% 4% 19% 4% 19% 4% 19% 6% 7% 7% 8% 30% 5% 7% 8% 4% 20% 5% 17%

DWELLING TENURE BY PROVINCE: 2011

20%

0% Free State North West Owned

Source: Census 2011

Mpumalanga

Limpopo

Western Cape

Northern Cape

KwaZulu -Natal Rented

Eastern Cape

Gauteng

South Africa

Occupied rent-free

Other

39

On the whole there have been improvements in service levels for households who live in shacks not in backyards, particularly with regard to sanitation
HOUSEHOLD LIVES IN AN INFORMAL DWELLING / SHACK NOT IN BACKYARD
REFUSE COLLECTION
100% 11% 100% 10% 80% 30% 60% 16% 3% 33% 40% 9% 2% 22% 12% 5% 12% 6% 60% 40% 29%

TOILET FACILITY

ACCESS TO PIPED (TAP) WATER

100% 12% 80% 9% 19% 27%

80%

29% 5% 3%

60%

8% 3%

40%

40%

33%

20%

20%

5% 2%

20%

29%

26%

0% Census 2001 Census 2011

Other No rubbish disposal Own refuse dump Communal refuse dump Removed by local authority less often* Removed by local authority at least once a week*

0% Census 2001
None Other Bucket toilet Chemical toilet Pit toilet without ventilation Pit toilet with ventilation (VIP) Flush toilet (with septic tank)

0% Census 2011 Census 2001

No access to piped water Piped water on community stand: > 200m from dwelling Piped water on community stand: < 200m from dwelling Piped water inside yard Piped water inside dwelling

Census 2011

Flush toilet (connected to sewerage system) Source: Census 2001, Census 2011 * In the Census 2011 these include refuse removed by private company

40

In 2011, one quarter of households living in shacks not in backyards used electricity for all three types of energy use (lighting, heating and cooking)
HOUSEHOLD LIVES IN AN INFORMAL DWELLING / SHACK NOT IN BACKYARD
ENERGY USED FOR LIGHTING
100% 100%

ENERGY USED FOR HEATING

0% 6% 19% 22% 80% 6% 17% 60% 16% 60% 100%

ENERGY USED FOR COOKING

4% 5% 7% 2% 6%

80%

44%

39%

80%

60% 17% 40% 19%

48% 66%

40%

42%

28%

40%

20%

20%

20%

0% Census 2001 Electricity Other Census 2011 Paraffin None Candles

0% Census 2001 Electricity Coal Census 2011 Wood None

0% Census 2001 Electricity Coal Census 2011 Wood None

Paraffin Other

Paraffin Other

Source: Census 2001, Census 2011

41

This can be summarised into high vs. basic levels of service

ACCESS TO SERVICES IN SOUTH AFRICA: 2001 vs. 2011
(HH lives in an informal dwelling / shack not in backyard)
7% 28% 3% 36%

53% 47%

21% 20%

52%

48%

68% 74%

7% 11%

39%
58% 66%

43%

57% 64%

REFUSE REMOVAL
ACCESS TO SERVICE: Removed by local authority/ private company at least once a week

SANITATION
HIGHER LEVEL OF SERVICE: Flush toilet (connected to sewerage system) BASIC LEVEL OF SERVICE: Flush toilet (with septic tank) OR Pit toilet with ventilation (VIP)

WATER SUPPLY
HIGHER LEVEL OF SERVICE: Piped/tap water inside dwelling BASIC LEVEL OF SERVICE: Piped/tap water inside yard OR Piped/tap water on community stand, distance less than 200m from dwelling

ELECTRICITY SUPPLY
ACCESS TO SERVICE: Electricity used for lighting

Census 2001

Census 2011

Higher level of service

Basic level of service

No access

Source: Census 2011 Note: There is no indication as to the location of the toilet (in the dwelling, in the yard, and so on)

42

Access to refuse removal differs across provinces. Access to refuse removal has decreased in all provinces except Limpopo
ACCESS TO REFUSE REMOVAL BY PROVINCE
(HH lives in an informal dwelling / shack not in backyard)
Census 2001 Province Eastern Cape Free State Gauteng KwaZulu-Natal Limpopo Mpumalanga North West Northern Cape Western Cape South Africa Total households 135 485 147 081 475 497 177 294 57 710 90 077 129 067 21 788 142 706 1 376 706
47 Access 83 63 64 52 26

Census 2011 Total households 95 983 80 355 434 075 148 889 41 434 78 532 148 794 30 047 191 668 1 249 777
No access 52 80 65 75 58 31

Access (%)
46 54 45 34

Access (%)
57 61 49 38

Source: Census 2001, Census 2011. Note: Access to refuse removal: Removed by local authority/private company at least once a week

43

Access to sanitation differs across provinces. The majority of households saw either an improvement or stagnation in access to higher or basic levels of sanitation services between 2001 and 2011. Limpopo is the exception
(HH lives in an informal dwelling / shack not in backyard)
Census 2001 Province Eastern Cape Free State Gauteng KwaZulu-Natal Limpopo Mpumalanga North West Northern Cape Western Cape South Africa Total households 135 485 147 081 475 497 177 294 57 710 90 077 129 067 21 788 142 706 1 376 706
7 9 12 3 7 7 15 5 5 4

ACCESS TO SANITATION BY PROVINCE

Census 2011 Total households 95 983 80 355 434 075 148 889 41 434 78 532 148 794 30 047 191 668 1 249 777
Basic access No access

Access (%)
76 81 70 75 86 75 79 75 63 74

Access (%)
5 9 15 12 7 9 11 11 6 11 68 76 70 68 74 87 63 73 74 50

Higher level of access

Source: Census 2001, Census 2011. Note: Higher levels of service: Flush toilet (connected to sewerage system); Basic levels of service: Flush toilet (with septic tank) / Pit latrine with ventilation (VIP)

44

Access to the water supply differs across provinces. All provinces saw an improvement in access to higher or basic levels of water services between 2001 and 2011
(HH lives in an informal dwelling / shack not in backyard)
Census 2001 Province Eastern Cape Free State Gauteng KwaZulu-Natal Limpopo Mpumalanga North West Northern Cape Western Cape South Africa Total households 135 485 147 081 475 497 177 294 57 710 90 077 129 067 21 788 142 706 1 376 706
52 64 62 53 46 56 54 61 59 58
Higher level of access

ACCESS TO WATER BY PROVINCE

Census 2011 Total households 95 983 80 355 434 075 148 889 41 434 78 532 148 794 30 047 191 668 1 249 777
Basic access No access

Access (%)
46 34 35 42 52 40 44 36 37 39

Access (%)
63 70 66 65 50 58 60 69 75 66 46 31 34 25 18 28 32 22 27 27

Source: Census 2001, Census 2011. Note: Higher levels of service: Piped (tap) water inside dwelling; Basic levels of service: Piped (tap) water inside yard / Piped (tap) water on community stand: distance less than 200m from dwelling

45

Access to electricity differs across provinces. With the exception of Gauteng, use of electricity for lighting has increased between 2001 and 2011
(HH lives in an informal dwelling / shack not in backyard)
Census 2001 Province Eastern Cape Free State Gauteng KwaZulu-Natal Limpopo Mpumalanga North West Northern Cape Western Cape South Africa Total households 135 485 147 081 475 497 177 294 57 710 90 077 129 067 21 788 142 706 1 376 706
69 58 64 Access
Source: Census 2001, Census 2011. Note: Access to electricity: Use electricity for lighting

ACCESS TO ELECTRICITY BY PROVINCE

Census 2011 Total households 95 983

52 70 58 73 64 48

Access (%)
82

Access (%)
72 46 73 48 65 52 45 54 37 57

80 355 434 075 148 889 41 434 78 532 148 794 30 047 191 668 1 249 777
No access

46

According to the 2011 Census, 83% of households in a shack not in a backyard have at least one cell phone in the household. This is up from 19% in 2001
(HH lives in an informal dwelling / shack not in backyard)

ASSETS IN HOUSEHOLD 2001

2011
1%

Landline telephone

3%

Computer

1%

3%

Refrigerator

22%

28%

Television

31%

41%

Radio

57%

48%

Cell phone

19%

83%

Source: Census 2001, Census 2011

Thirty six per cent of those who live in informal residential EAs in Limpopo have moved between 2001 and 2011, the majority from within the province. Gauteng, the North West and the Western Cape also have a high proportion of people in informal EAs who have moved in the past 10 years
MIGRATION IN SOUTH AFRICA
Province Number of people who moved between 2001 and 2011 Number of people who moved between 2001 and 2011 (informal EAs) Proportion of those who live in informal EAs who moved between 2001 and 2011 Proportion of total who moved between 2001 and 2011 who live in informal EAs

47

Provinces most moved from (informal EAs)*

Eastern Cape Free State Gauteng** KwaZulu-Natal Limpopo Mpumalanga North West Northern Cape Western Cape South Africa
Source: Census 2011

762 760 365 774 3 955 478 1 239 410 643 208 565 575 630 408 189 540 1 441 573 9 793 725

35 579 19 145 398 714 104 201 26 262 33 987 31 071 4 770 122 332 776 061

15% 19% 32% 14% 36% 23% 30% 14% 30% 25%

5% 5% 10% 8% 4% 6% 5% 3% 8% 8%

Eastern Cape (86%) Outside SA (3%)* Free State (70%) Outside of SA (16%) Gauteng (38%) Outside SA (20%) KwaZulu-Natal (65%) Eastern Cape (17%) Limpopo (55%) Outside SA (20%) Mpumalanga (56%) Outside SA (18%) North West (46%) Outside SA (19%) Northern Cape (72%) North West (6%) Eastern Cape (45%) Western Cape (41%)

48

Thirty eight per cent of households in shacks not in backyards are one person households; for the country as a whole this proportion is 27%. In 2001 24% of households living in shacks not in backyards were one person households
(HH lives in an informal dwelling / shack not in backyard)
100%
307,298 25% 53,982 12% 47,481 10% 82,055 18% 111,816 24% 49,632 16% 169,596 36% 35,618 12% 57,600 19%

HOUSEHOLD SIZE

MULTIPLE PERSON HOUSEHOLDS: HOUSEHOLD SIZE

(HH lives in an informal dwelling / shack not in backyard)

80%

89,451 29%

60%

464,929 37%

74,997 24%

40%

108,257 9%

Male-headed
Two Five Three

Female-headed
Four

20%

Six or more

0%

Multiple person HH - Female headed Multiple person HH - Male headed One person HH - Female One person HH - Male

Source: Census 2011 Note: Census 2011 household composition data is not yet available

49

The proportion of households that transfer maintenance or remittances for shacks not in backyards is higher than the average for South African households as a whole
MAINTENANCE OF / REMITTANCE TO FAMILY MEMBERS AND DEPENDANTS LIVING ELSEWHERE
(In cash or in kind)
All households One person households
38%

mal dwelling/shack not in backyard

28%

nformal dwelling/shack in backyard

33%

49%

Formal dwelling

22%

38%

Traditional dwelling

13%

27%

All SA households

22%

38%

Source: IES 2010/11 Note: Formal housing includes Dwelling/House or brick/concrete structure, Cluster house, Town house/semi-detached house, Flat or apartment, Room/flatlet on a property or in a larger dwelling, Dwelling/House/Flat/Room in backyard. All households also includes Caravan/ tent, other

50

There are 983,910 children* living in informal EAs, of which 495,420 (50%) are between the ages of 7 and 17
ATTENDANCE OF CHILDREN AT AN EDUCATION INSTITUTION BY PROVINCE
(Children aged 7-17 years)
Informal residential EA Province
Eastern Cape Free State Gauteng KwaZulu-Natal Limpopo Mpumalanga North West Northern Cape Western Cape South Africa

South Africa Total*

89% 92% 89% 85% 90% 92% 84% 90% 89% 88%

7-10
93% 95% 92% 87% 93% 95% 89% 95% 93% 91%

11-14
93% 95% 92% 88% 94% 95% 89% 94% 93% 91%

15-17
80% 84% 81% 79% 81% 85% 70% 76% 80% 80%

7-10
94% 95% 94% 91% 96% 95% 94% 94% 93% 94%

11-14
84% 95% 94% 91% 96% 95% 94% 93% 93% 94%

15-17
86% 87% 88% 86% 92% 90% 85% 81% 81% 87%

Total*
92% 93% 92% 89% 95% 94% 91% 90% 90% 92%

Source: Census 2011 Note: *Individuals aged 0-17 Note: There is no data on school/ECD attendance of children aged below 5. Children aged 5 and 6 are excluded from this analysis, as low school attendance for this age group skews the data

51

High labour force participation rates in informal residential EAs are consistent with their role as Arrival Cities. Unemployment rates are highest in traditional residential and informal residential EAs
EMPLOYMENT IN SOUTH AFRICA: ADULTS 15+
PROPORTION OF ADULTS 15+

LABOUR FORCE PARTICIPATION RATE Total SA*: 51% 32%

UNEMPLOYMENT RATE Total SA*: 30% 48%

Traditional residential

27%

Informal residential

6%

64%

40%

Formal residential

58%

58%

26%

Collective living quarters

1%

34%

24%

Farms

4%

63%

10%

Source: Census 2011 * Total SA also includes: Small holdings (1%), Commercial (1%), Vacant (0%), Industrial (0%), Parks and recreation (0%). Brackets show proportion of adults 15+ living in EA type Note: The source of official labour market statistics for the country is the Quarterly Labour Force Survey. Due to a variety of factors the official unemployment rate in the Census 2011 is 5.9 percentage points higher than in the LFS 2011Q4. However there is no proxy available in the QLFS to estimate households living in informal settlements

Labour market data indicates higher labour force participation rates in informal residential EAs across all provinces. Unemployment rates are higher in informal residential EAs than for all adults overall. Note that in Limpopo this is not the case
EMPLOYMENT IN SOUTH AFRICA: ADULTS 15+ LABOUR FORCE PARTICIPATION RATE
TOTAL Eastern Cape Free State Gauteng KwaZulu-Natal Limpopo Mpumalanga North West Northern Cape Western Cape South Africa
Source: Census 2011

52

UNEMPLOYMENT RATE
TOTAL
37% 33% 26% 33% 39% 32% 31% 27%

INFORMAL RESIDENTIAL EAS

37% 49% 65% 44% 41% 51% 50% 49% 59% 51% 57% 56% 70% 57% 62% 64% 61% 52% 70% 64%

INFORMAL RESIDENTIAL EAS

45% 39% 38% 42% 31% 37% 36% 45% 41% 40%

22% 30%

53

On the whole, a lower proportion of employed adults living in informal residential EAs are employed in the formal sector compared to all employed adults
(Percentage of employed adults 15+)
Informal residential EA Eastern Cape Free State Gauteng KwaZulu-Natal Limpopo Mpumalanga North West Northern Cape Western Cape South Africa
Source: Census 2011

SECTOR OF WORK

All adults
16% 3% Eastern Cape 14% 12% 2% 14% 15% 2% 9% 12% 2% 13% 9% 3% 18% 14% 2%

17% 20% 15%

21% 2% 15% 3%

Free State Gauteng

KwaZulu-Natal 16% 12% 3%

19% 17% 16% 18% 13% 1%

Limpopo

17% 3% Mpumalanga 17% 3%

17% 12% 2% 15% 15% 2%

North West

Northern Cape 16% 3%

15% 11%2% 11% 8%2% 12% 11% 2%

15% 13% 4% Western Cape 16% 15% 3% South Africa

Formal sector

Informal sector

Private household

Dont know

54

Thirty one per cent of employed adults living in informal EAs in South Africa have a matric or higher education, relative to 54% of employed adults in South Africa
EDUCATION LEVEL BY EMPLOYMENT STATUS
(Adults 15+)
Informal residential EA Employed
63%

All adults 21%

3% 28% Employed

41%

33%

Unemployed

68%

25% Unemployed 2%

59%

31%

6%

Discouraged work-seeker

69%

23% 2% Discouraged work-seeker

63%

27%

3%

Other not economically active

71% 18% 3% Other not economically active

63%

19%

5% 5%

Total adults 15+

67%

3% 15+ 24% adults Total

53%

26%

11% 3%

Source: Census 2011

No schooling

Less than Matric

Matric

Technikon, University or other post matric

Other

55

According to the IES, 22% of households living in shacks not in backyards earned less than R800 in 2011, compared to 42% in the Census 2011. But, as noted earlier, the IES sample may be skewed
(HH lives in an informal dwelling / shack not in backyard)
CENSUS 2011 IES 2010/11 8% 22% 20%

HOUSEHOLD MONTHLY INCOME

5% 12%

42% 22%

19%

30% 20% < R800 R800 - R1 633 R1 634 - R3 183 R3 184 - R6 366 R6 367 +

Incomes in the Census 2011 are reported in 12 wide bands (the respondent can choose to answer the monthly or annual column)

The IES is the most comprehensive nationally representative source for data on household income

Source: Census 2011, IES 2010/11 Note: According to the IES, 75% of households in shacks not in backyards have a household income of less than R3,500 per month

56

Per capita income can provide a more nuanced indication of wellbeing than household income
DAILY PER CAPITA INCOME

Informal dwelling/shack not in backyard

10%

18%

48%

14%

Traditional dwelling

22%

33%

25%

4%

Informal dwelling/shack in backyard

7%

17%

45%

21%

Formal

8%

15%

34%

35%

Column1

All households

10%

17%

34%

31%

< R5

[R5, R10)

[R10, R20)

[R20, R80)

R80+

Source: IES 2010/11 Note: Formal housing includes Dwelling/House or brick/concrete structure, Cluster house, Town house/semi-detached house, Flat or apartment, Room/flatlet on a property or in a larger dwelling, Dwelling/House/Flat/Room in backyard Note: All households also includes Caravan/tent, other Note: Per capita income is calculated as the household income divided by the household size (children under 10 count as half an adult)

AGENDA SLIDE
Welcome, introductions and workshop objectives Background and objectives of this study Data sources, collection methodologies, challenges and limitations Context: Human Settlements in South Africa Informal settlements: South Africa Limpopo case study Implications

58

A quick recap The case study compares findings of detailed household level data from seven settlements in five municipalities in Limpopo
LIM

Smash Block Thabazimbi Local Municipality Ext 6 Jacaranda Modimolle Local Municipality Motetema Elias Motsoaledi Local Municipality Mohlakaneng Polokwane Local Municipality Praktiseer Extension 3 Greater Tubatse Local Municipality Praktiseer Extension 2 Greater Tubatse Local Municipality Tubatse A Greater Tubatse Local Municipality

A quick recap The questionnaires were extensive and took around 45 minutes to administer using Android devices. Enumerators logged GPS coordinates for each interview and took a photo of every structure
HOUSEHOLD LEVEL DATA
Questions asked for the household in general Building materials used for walls / roof Household size Household income and stability Tenure and proof of ownership Purchase price and funding sources Sense of belonging Usage of financial services Access to services Length of stay and other dwellings Rent paid and rent received Remittances Deprivation and poverty Appliances and assets Subsidies Problems in the area

59

PERSON LEVEL DATA

Questions asked for every person in the household Employment and location of job Relationship to household head Gender and age Form of ID Marital status and spouses location Dependents and children living elsewhere Length of stay and origin Disability Education Gross salary / income Level of understanding of questions

60

The settlements differ in size

PURPOSE OF STRUCTURE
Ext 6 Jacaranda Home only Home and business premises Business premises only Vacant / unoccupied Structure for any other purpose Grand Total 104 3 326 217 2 Praktiseer Praktiseer Extension 2 Extension 3 486 6 7 108 4 611 744 10 20 245 1 1,020 Tubatse A 1,774 30 67 349 49 2,269 8 60 4 191 56 1 278 Mohlakaneng 119 Motetema 208 13 Smash Block 4,396 16 284 604 78 5,378

Business use as percentage of all occupied 1% Percentage vacant structures of all structure Households that participated in survey 32%

3% 18%

4% 24%

5% 15%

6% 31%

6% 20%

6% 11%

192

377

608

1,266

100

118

3,771

61

Ext 6 Jacaranda

62

Praktiseer ext 2

63

Praktiseer ext 3

64

Tubatse A

65

Mohlakaneng

66

Motetema

67

Smash Block

68

Dwellings in Ext 6 Jacaranda, Mohlakaneng and Smash Block are largely made of tin or metal sheets. The majority of dwellings in the remaining four settlements are more formal and permanent with walls made of brick and cement
MATERIALS USED FOR WALLS
Ext 6 Jacaranda Tin or metal sheets Other Brick and cement Container Wood 99% 1% 0% 0% 0% Praktiseer Extension 2 8% 0% 94% 0% 0% Praktiseer Extension 3 25% 0% 82% 0% 1% Tubatse A 4% 0% 97% 0% 0% Mohlakaneng 97% 0% 1% 0% 8% Motetema 31% 0% 84% 0% 2% Smash Block 66% 6% 26% 0% 5%

Note: Based on households that participated in the survey

69

The majority of households in all the settlements except Smash Block say they own their dwelling, although very few of those who own have proof of ownership
DWELLING OWNERSHIP

Ext 6 Jacaranda Own this dwelling Pay someone to rent this dwelling and the land it is on Pay someone to rent the land and have built your own dwelling Neither own nor rent you live in it for free 97% 1% 1% 1%

Praktiseer Extension 2 82% 16% 0% 1%

Praktiseer Extension 3 89% 9% 1% 1%

Tubatse A 80% 16% 0% 2%

Mohlakaneng

Motetema

Smash Block

91% 5% 2% 2%

87% 11% 1% 1%

47% 47% 1% 5%

For those who own % have proof of ownership:

0%

8%

0%

61%

0%

0%

59%

Of those who say they have proof: 57% have a title deed 21% have a letter from the municipality 21% have a deed of grant

Of those who say they have proof: 86% have a stand card 14% have proof of stand

Note: Based on households that participated in the survey

The surveys contain more qualitative statements with regard to security of tenure and the notion of home. The vast majority agree with the statement This place is our home and relatively few indicate they plan to move within a year or two
AGREE WITH THE FOLLOWING STATEMENTS
Ext 6 Jacaranda This place is our home We feel sure that we will be able to live in this dwelling in the future if we want to We are happy living in this settlement We can make changes to this dwelling if we want to We can decide who should live in this dwelling We can sell this dwelling if we want to Someone can force us to move from this dwelling We plan to move out of this settlement within a year or two 99% 99% 97% 97% 81% 32% 8% 1% Praktiseer Extension 2 86% 89% 97% 72% 58% 50% 22% 6% Praktiseer Extension 3 81% 96% 98% 88% 82% 63% 53% 26%

70

Tubatse A 80% 87% 96% 76% 78% 57% 21% 16%

Mohlakaneng 93% 80% 70% 76% 82% 58% 14% 20%

Motetema 90% 89% 92% 86% 57% 8% 14% 12%

Smash Block 78% 82% 93% 53% 58% 45% 47% 13%

71

Pit latrines are the most common form of toilet facility. One third of households in Mohlakaneng have no toilet facilities
TOILET FACILITY

Ext 6 Jacaranda Flush toilet connected to a public sewerage system Flush toilet connected to a septic tank Chemical toilet Pit latrine/toilet with ventilation pipe Pit latrine/toilet without ventilation pipe Bucket toilet Other (specify) - Neighbour's toilet None 15% 0% 85% 0% 0% 0%

Praktiseer Extension 2 0% 1%

Praktiseer Extension 3 0% 0%

Tubatse A 5% 2%

Mohlakaneng 1% 0% 0%

Motetema 1% 0% 0% 3% 82% 0% 3% 11%

Smash Block 0% 0% 3% 7% 87% 0% 0% 3%

2% 95% 0%

24% 73% 0%

5% 88% 0%

13% 53% 0% 0%

1%

4%

0%

33%

Note: Based on households that participated in the survey

The main source of drinking water varies widely across settlements. In Ext 6 Jacaranda water carriers or tankers dominate, while in Praktiseer Ext 3 and Mohlakaneng most households use a public tap. Almost everyone in Motetema has piped water in their yard
HOUSEHOLD'S MAIN SOURCE OF DRINKING WATER
Praktiseer Extension 2 3% 52% 1% 0% 11% 33% 0% 0% 0% 1% Praktiseer Extension 3 0% 2% 1% 0% 6% 84% 0% 0% 6% 0%

72

Ext 6 Jacaranda Piped (tap) water in dwelling Piped (tap) water in yard Borehole in yard Rain-water tank in yard Neighbour's tap Public/communal tap Water-carrier/tanker Borehole outside yard Buy water Other 0% 0% 0% 0% 2% 0% 97% 0% 0% 1%

Tubatse A 2% 49% 1% 1% 23% 12% 1% 0% 10% 0%

Mohlakaneng 1% 7% 0% 0% 0% 92% 0% 0% 0% 0%

Motetema 0% 97% 0% 1% 1% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1%

Smash Block 6% 0% 3% 0% 0% 9% 1% 79% 2% 1%

Note: Based on households that participated in the survey

In Tubatse A and Mohlakaneng, some households have their refuse removed by community members contracted by the municipality at least once a week. In the other settlements the majority of households either have their own refuse dump or leave their rubbish anywhere
METHOD OF REMOVAL OF REFUSE OR RUBBISH BY THIS HOUSEHOLD

73

Ext 6 Jacaranda Removed by local authority/private company at least once a week Removed by local authority/private company less often than once a week Removed by community members, contracted by the Municipality, at least once a week Removed by community members, contracted by the Municipality, less often than once a week Own refuse dump Dump or leave rubbish anywhere Other 0% 0% 0% 1% 41% 58% 1%

Praktiseer Extension 2 0% 1% 1% 0% 45% 52% 1%

Praktiseer Extension 3 0% 0% 0% 0% 86% 13% 0%

Tubatse A 14% 9% 71% 3% 2% 1% 0%

Mohlakaneng 7% 4% 46% 6% 26% 0% 11%

Motetema 0% 0% 0% 0% 97% 2% 2%

Smash Block 0% 0% 0% 0% 56% 42% 2%

Note: Based on households that participated in the survey

74

All households in Ext 6 Jacaranda, Mohlakaneng and Smash Block have not got electricity. In the other settlements most households have access to electricity through a pre-paid metre supplied by Eskom
HOUSEHOLD ACCESS TO ELECTRICITY

Ext 6 Jacaranda This dwelling does not have electricity 100%

Praktiseer Extension 2 1%

Praktiseer Extension 3 20%

Tubatse A

Mohlakaneng

Motetema

Smash Block

2%

99%

3%

99%

Supplied by Eskom or the municipality on a pre-paid metre Supplied by Eskom or the municipality for which you receive a monthly bill

0%

99%

77%

96%

0%

97%

0%

0%

1%

2%

2%

1%

0%

0%

Note: Based on households that participated in the survey

75

Following this pattern Ext 6 Jacaranda, Mohlakaneng and Smash Block have fewer appliances in their homes
ITEMS IN THE HOUSEHOLD
Ext 6 Jacaranda A blanket for everyone Cell phone A bed for everyone A paraffin stove/burner Radio (excl. car radio) Television set Fridge Motor vehicle Electric stove VCR or DVD player Hi-Fi/music centre M-Net or DStv Subscription Microwave oven 100% 86% 85% 34% 30% 3% 2% 2% 1% 1% 0% 0% 0% Praktiseer Extension 2 97% 93% 98% 9% 29% 65% 79% 21% 99% 55% 21% 59% 50% Praktiseer Extension 3 96% 90% 96% 35% 33% 65% 65% 10% 78% 14% 31% 32% 22% Tubatse A 99% 95% 99% 23% 27% 78% 86% 20% 95% 50% 40% 63% 51% Mohlakaneng 79% 87% 80% 82% 43% 15% 3% 4% 4% 5% 8% 1% 2% Motetema 80% 91% 81% 8% 40% 70% 67% 10% 58% 55% 9% 20% 23% Smash Block 91% 88% 90% 94% 32% 5% 2% 2% 0% 2% 1% 1% 0%

No electricity
Note: Based on households that participated in the survey

No electricity

No electricity

The are numerous problems in the settlement areas including bad roads and crime. Despite this the majority of households in all the settlements say they are satisfied with where their house is; in Praktiseer Ext 2 all but one household said they were satisfied
PROBLEMS IN AREA HOUSE LOCATED IN
Ext 6 Jacaranda Bad roads Infestation of rats/other vermin Poor street lighting Air pollution or a lot of dust and smoke Uncleared rubbish dumps Flooding Crime Noise Fires Leaking water pipes/taps Water pollution or dirty water 99% 98% 98% 82% 80% 79% 70% 65% 51% 33% 31% Praktiseer Extension 2 98% 80% 98% 99% 94% 5% 90% 58% 3% 24% 23% Praktiseer Extension 3 98% 94% 96% 93% 69% 72% 96% 82% 11% 30% 43% Tubatse A 82% 26% 98% 84% 30% 10% 89% 59% 4% 5% 14% Mohlakaneng 44% 79% 13% 22% 20% 10% 54% 30% 5% 10% 17% Motetema 99% 53% 48% 88% 79% 58% 53% 40% 5% 44% 19%

76

Smash Block 99% 61% 98% 95% 97% 65% 99% 91% 43% 52% 87%

HOUSEHOLDS LEVEL OF SATISFACTION WITH THE HOUSE WHERE IT IS CURRENTLY

Ext 6 Jacaranda Satisfied 56% Praktiseer Extension 2 100% 0% Praktiseer Extension 3 66% 34% Tubatse A 92% 8% Mohlakaneng 69% 31% Motetema 75% 25% Smash Block 67% 33%

44% Dissatisfied Note: Based on households that participated in the survey

77

Household sizes in Mohlakaneng and Smash block are small compared to the other settlements with an average household size of 1.6 and 1.4 respectively. Smash block is dominated by male headed households
HOUSEHOLD SIZE
Ext 6 Jacaranda 1 2 3 4 5 or more 18% 14% 17% 14% 37% Praktiseer Extension 2 19% 14% 16% 18% 34% Praktiseer Extension 3 12% 14% 18% 20% 36% Tubatse A 20% 12% 13% 16% 39% Mohlakaneng 61% 26% 9% 2% 2% Motetema 27% 14% 20% 19% 19% Smash Block 76% 14% 5% 2% 2%

Average HH size
Percentage of one person households that are married

3.9
0%

3.7
7%

4.0
18%

4.0
6%

1.6
20%

3.1
6%

1.4
37%

GENDER OF HOUSEHOLD HEAD

Ext 6 Jacaranda Praktiseer Extension 2 52% 48% Praktiseer Extension 3 43% 57% Tubatse A 43% 57% Mohlakaneng 45% 52% Motetema 35% 64% Smash Block 72% 27%

Male Female

38% 62%

Note: Based on households that participated in the survey

78

In Motetema nearly one third of households are single parent households

HOUSEHOLD COMPOSITION (ALL)

Ext 6 Jacaranda One person Extended family Nuclear family Single parent Married no children Other 18% 21% 29% 28% 4% 0%

Praktiseer Extension 2 19% 26% 33% 17% 6% 0%

Praktiseer Extension 3 12% 24% 36% 23% 5% 0%

Tubatse A 20% 42% 19% 15% 4% 0%

Mohlakaneng 61% 6% 7% 16% 9% 0%

Motetema 27% 25% 13% 32% 3% 0%

Smash Block 76% 4% 5% 6% 6% 3%

Percentage of one person households that are married

0%

7%

18%

6%

20%

6%

37%

Note: Based on households that participated in the survey

79

Single parent households are far more common where the head of the household is female. In Mohlakaneng which has a high proportion of one person households, almost half are female
HOUSEHOLD COMPOSITION (MALE VS. FEMALE HEADED HH)
Ext 6 Jacaranda One person Male Female Extended family Male Female Nuclear family Male Female Single parent Male Female Married no children Male Female Other Male Female 0% 100% 0% 100% 0% 100% 0% 100% 0% 100% 0% 100% 71% 29% 88% 13% 57% 43% 66% 34% 80% 20% 44% 56% 75% 25% 77% 23% 6% 94% 3% 97% 8% 92% 13% 87% 25% 75% 22% 78% 23% 77% 52% 48% 74% 26% 61% 39% 73% 27% 71% 29% 60% 40% 75% 25% 18% 83% 40% 60% 32% 68% 33% 67% 33% 67% 38% 62% 68% 32% 79% 21% 72% 28% 74% 26% 52% 48% 51% 49% 32% 68% 76% 24% Praktiseer Extension 2 Praktiseer Extension 3 Tubatse A Mohlakaneng Motetema Smash Block

Note: Based on households that participated in the survey

80

Education levels for adults vary. Over a third of adults in Mohlakaneng and Motetema have no schooling
HIGHEST LEVEL OF EDUCATION FOR INDIVIDUALS
(Age 18+)

Ext 6 Jacaranda No schooling Junior Primary Senior Primary Some Secondary Completed High School Certificate or Diploma Bachelors Degree Post-graduate degree 15% 21% 23% 32% 9% 1% 0% 0%

Praktiseer Extension 2 2% 2% 4% 31% 43% 15% 2% 1%

Praktiseer Extension 3 3% 3% 8% 49% 30% 5% 2% 0%

Tubatse A 8% 3% 6% 28% 35% 16% 4% 1%

Mohlakaneng 36% 5% 8% 21% 24% 5% 0% 0%

Motetema 36% 1% 4% 27% 26% 4% 1% 0%

Smash Block 11% 11% 28% 32% 17% 1% 0% 0%

Note: Based on households that participated in the survey

81

Self employment is limited. For those who work for a salary or wage, the majority work for formal companies although informal sector and domestic work is common in Jacaranda
WORKS STATUS
(Age 15+)
Ext 6 Jacaranda Work for someone for a salary or wage Work for themselves or have their own business Volunteer work for no money Does not work 28% 0% 0% 71% Praktiseer Extension 2 32% 3% 1% 64% Praktiseer Extension 3 21% 6% 0% 73%

Tubatse A 22% 3% 0% 75%

Mohlakaneng 32% 5% 1% 61%

Motetema 21% 6% 1% 72%

Smash Block 54% 2% 4% 40%

(Age 15+, Work for someone for a salary or wage)

Ext 6 Jacaranda Works for a formal company for a salary or wage Works for an unregistered company for a salary or wage Works as a domestic worker or gardener for salary or wage 44% 32% 24% Praktiseer Extension 2 90% 4% 5% Praktiseer Extension 3 84% 4% 12% Tubatse A 92% 5% 4% Mohlakaneng 67% 20% 13% Motetema 81% 6% 13% Smash Block 97% 2% 1%

KIND OF BUSINESS WORK FOR

Note: Based on households that participated in the survey

82

It is also important to look at employment patterns within a household. In over half of households in Motetma no-one is employed
HOUSEHOLD EMPLOYMENT STATUS
Ext 6 Jacaranda Salary or wage in a formal company Salary or wage in an unregistered company Salary or wage as a domestic worker or gardener Self-employed in a formal or registered business Self-employed in an informal or unregistered business Volunteers, works for no money 24% Praktiseer Extension 2 62% Praktiseer Extension 3 41%

Tubatse A 46%

Mohlakaneng 30%

Motetema 30%

Smash Block 61%

15%

3%

2%

3%

8%

3%

1%

12%

4%

6%

2%

4%

2%

1%

0%

0%

1%

1%

1%

2%

1%

1%

5%

13%

6%

5%

7%

2%

0%

1%

0%

1%

1%

2%

4%

No-one in the household is employed

48%

25%

38%

43%

51%

56%

30%

Note: Based on households that participated in the survey

83

Households in Smash Block are the best off with almost half earning a monthly household income of R3 500 or more
HOUSEHOLD INCOME BANDS
Ext 6 Jacaranda 0 R1 - R799 R800 - R1 499 R1 500 - R1 999 R2 000 - R2 499 R2 500 - R2 999 R3 000 - R3 499 R3 500 - R4 999 R5 000 - R7 499 R7 500 - R9 999 R10 000 + Don't know 2% 20% 30% 20% 13% 6% 3% 4% 2% 0% 0% 0% Praktiseer Extension 2 0% 8% 14% 8% 10% 6% 8% 9% 16% 5% 14% 0% Praktiseer Extension 3 0% 15% 28% 10% 7% 6% 6% 9% 10% 4% 5% 0% Tubatse A 0% 10% 20% 7% 8% 5% 5% 10% 13% 5% 13% 5% Mohlakaneng 17% 18% 24% 13% 11% 8% 1% 4% 1% 0% 0% 3% Motetema 7% 23% 20% 10% 8% 8% 3% 9% 8% 0% 2% 3% Smash Block 5% 17% 6% 3% 4% 3% 4% 8% 35% 2% 0% 12%

BROAD HOUSEHOLD INCOME BANDS: DONT KNOW

Ext 6 Jacaranda None R1 - R799 R800 - R3 499 R3 500 or more Praktiseer Extension 2 Praktiseer Extension 3 Tubatse A 0% 0% 1% 3% Mohlakaneng 0% 0% 1% 2% Motetema 0% 3% 0% 0% Smash Block 8% 4% 0% 0%

Note: Based on households that participated in the survey

The main income source in Smash Block is salaries and wages, grant income is more significant in the other settlements. Seventy three per cent of households in Ext 6 Jacaranda receive grant income. Given the proportion that rent, rental income may be under-reported
INCOME SOURCES
Ext 6 Jacaranda Grants Salaries or wages Business activities (self-employment) Remittances Rentals from this land or property Rentals from another dwelling 73% 51% 1% 4% 1% 0% Praktiseer Extension 2 38% 69% 5% 14% 2% 1% Praktiseer Extension 3 56% 48% 14% 14% 2% 0% Tubatse A 50% 50% 7% 21% 2% 1% Mohlakaneng 40% 42% 6% 2% 2% 0% Motetema 54% 34% 11% 23% 2% 1%

84

Smash Block 7% 63% 2% 12% 0% 0%

DWELLING OWNERSHIP
Ext 6 Jacaranda Own this dwelling Pay someone to rent this dwelling and the land it is on Pay someone to rent the land and have built your own dwelling Neither own nor rent you live in it for free 97% 1% 1% 1% Praktiseer Extension 2 82% 16% 0% 1% Praktiseer Extension 3 89% 9% 1% 1% Tubatse A 80% 16% 0% 2% Mohlakaneng Motetema Smash Block

91% 5% 2% 2%

87% 11% 1% 1%

47% 47% 1% 5%

Note: Based on households that participated in the survey

Per capita incomes are highest in Smash Block. However, per capita incomes are skewed where households send remittances. Households in Smash Block are the most likely to send remittances; 44% of households regularly send money to someone who lives in another place
HOUSEHOLD PER CAPITA INCOMES
Ext 6 Jacaranda < R5 [R5, 10) [R10, R20) [R20, R40) [R40, R80) [R80, R140) [R140, R280) R280 + 9% 26% 29% 24% 11% 2% 0% 0% Praktiseer Extension 2 1% 11% 16% 20% 24% 17% 8% 2% Praktiseer Extension 3 6% 21% 25% 21% 17% 5% 4% 1% Tubatse A 6% 8% 20% 27% 22% 10% 6% 2% Mohlakaneng 20% 8% 17% 18% 31% 6% 0% 0% Motetema 14% 13% 25% 27% 18% 3% 0% 1% Smash Block 14% 5% 10% 9% 14% 17% 29% 1%

85

ANYONE IN THIS HOUSEHOLD REGULARLY SEND MONEY TO SOMEONE WHO LIVES IN ANOTHER PLACE
Ext 6 Jacaranda 8% 92% Praktiseer Extension 2 15% 85% Praktiseer Extension 3 7% 93%

Tubatse A 9% 91%

Mohlakaneng 3% 97%

Motetema 5% 95%

Smash Block 44% 56%

Yes No

Note: Based on households that participated in the survey

86

The majority of households in all settlements have been there for five or more years. Around 10% of households in each settlement have recently moved into the settlement (been living in the settlement for a year or less)
PERIOD OF TIME HOUSEHOLD HAS BEEN LIVING IN THIS SETTLEMENT

Ext 6 Jacaranda About a year or less More than a year but less than 3 years Between 3 and 5 years 5 years or more 10% 11% 28% 51%

Praktiseer Extension 2 10% 4% 25% 60%

Praktiseer Extension 3 11% 3% 11% 75%

Tubatse A 12% 4% 5% 79%

Mohlakaneng 9% 9% 13% 69%

Motetema 10% 14% 18% 58%

Smash Block 11% 9% 21% 59%

Note: Based on households that participated in the survey

87

The majority of household heads have a green bar coded ID book although 14% of those in Smash Block say they have a foreign passport
IDENTIFICATION DOCUMENTS HELD BY HOUSEHOLD HEAD

Ext 6 Jacaranda SA ID book (green bar coded) Other SA official document Foreign passport Other Old SA ID book SA birth certificate SA passport 96% 3% 2% 1% 1% 0% 0%

Praktiseer Extension 2 97% 1% 2% 1% 2% 0% 3%

Praktiseer Extension 3 96% 3% 2% 1% 0% 2% 1%

Tubatse A 94% 0% 2% 0% 11% 0% 1%

Mohlakaneng 91% 0% 2% 0% 1% 6% 0%

Motetema 94% 1% 3% 2% 0% 2% 1%

Smash Block 83% 1% 14% 2% 0% 1% 2%

Note: Based on households that participated in the survey

Usage of formal financial products is low in certain settlements. The most common forms of credit used are furniture and clothing store accounts although the majority of households from all settlements said they were not currently paying off any instalments.
HOUSEHOLD FINANCIAL PRODUCTS
Ext 6 Jacaranda Bank account Formal funeral policy Belong to a burial society Belong to another type of savings group/society 59% 16% 83% 5% Praktiseer Extension 2 90% 44% 87% 43% Praktiseer Extension 3 50% 18% 70% 37% Tubatse A 80% 37% 76% 42% Mohlakaneng 52% 13% 79% 33% Motetema 64% 17% 63% 36%

88

Smash Block 78% 15% 12% 4%

HOSUEHOLD IS CURRENTLY PAYING INSTALMENTS ON

Ext 6 Jacaranda Does not pay off any instalments Furniture store Clothing store Loan with a bank or other formal lender Loan with an informal lender (e.g. Mashonisa) Loan from employer Loan from family or friends 75% 20% 6% 2% 1% 0% 0% Praktiseer Extension 2 58% 23% 33% 14% 2% 1% 0% Praktiseer Extension 3 62% 23% 21% 13% 0% 0% 0%

Tubatse A 64% 26% 29% 8% 1% 0% 1%

Mohlakaneng 80% 6% 4% 6% 6% 3% 1%

Motetema 58% 28% 18% 11% 0% 0% 0%

Smash Block 72% 7% 7% 19% 1% 0% 1%

Note: Based on households that participated in the survey

89

In Ext 6 Jacaranda 78% of households qualify for subsidy housing, Praktiseer Ext 2 and Tubatse A just 28% of households qualify for a housing subsidy
MAIN QUALIFICATION CRITERIA FOR SUBSIDY HOUSING

Ext 6 Jacaranda Household head is a South African citizen Household head is 18 years or older Household size is greater than one, OR the household head has dependents living outside the dwelling Household income is less than R3 500 per month No one in the household has ever received a government housing subsidy in the past Household does not currently own or has ever owned a house with a title deed 97% 100% 86% 94% 100% 100%

Praktiseer Extension 2 97% 100% 85% 55% 85% 93%

Praktiseer Extension 3 97% 100% 90% 72% 76% 98%

Tubatse A 97% 99% 88% 58% 89% 70%

Mohlakaneng 95% 94% 57% 95% 100% 100%

Motetema 95% 97% 78% 81% 96% 97%

Smash Block 85% 98% 70% 53% 100% 95%

Household meets all of these criteria

78%

28%

43%

28%

50%

55%

28%

Note: Based on households that participated in the survey

90

Things to add
DATA
Sector of employment and name of employer (where formal) Location of landlord (for renter households)

ANALYSIS
More spatial analysis: broader geography around the settlement including areas of economic activity More spatial analysis of households in the settlement

AGENDA SLIDE
Welcome, introductions and workshop objectives Background and objectives of this study Data sources, collection methodologies, challenges and limitations Context: Human Settlements in South Africa Informal settlements: South Africa Limpopo case study Implications