History in the new South Africa: an introduction - Det danske ...

Umzinyathi, Sekhukhune and Zululand all have poverty levels above the ISRDP average
of 53.7%. And the relative poverty among ISRDP n odes is marked: poverty levels in
Central Karoo are 3 times lower than in the poorest 4 nodes.
In the URP, poverty levels are above the programme average in Inanda, Mdantsane and
Khayelitsha. In Inanda (using the 2001 node-specific data which is more reliable than
that of 1996, as we have noted), 4 in 10 residents live in high poverty, well above other
urban nodes and making it looks far more like a rural than an urban node. The 2001 data
suggest that Inanda should be a priority node within the URP.
1996 2001 % change
Female-headed households 37.8 41.9 Up 4.1%
Illiteracy 33.6 31.5 Down 2.1%
Unemployment 37.6 48.2 Up 10.6%
Income 14.3 23.2 Up 8.9%
Over-crowding 1.6 2.8 Up 1.2%
Dwelling type 34.5 31.2 Down 3.3%
Sanitation 49.4 45.2 Down 4.2%
Water 39.3 37.7 Down 1.6%
Lighting 41.8 29.8 Down 12.0%
Refuse 45.7 42.8 Down 2.9%
Poverty score 33.6 33.4 Down 0.2%
Table 5: Indicator and overall poverty scores for South Africa, 1996 & 2001
Turning to look at the 10 indicators that make up the poverty matrix (and recalling that
high scores are bad news), we see in Table 5 that unemployment, lack of regular
household income, incidence of female-headed households and over-crowding all rose
between 1996 and 2001. These data reflect the situation nationally, not just in the 21
nodes. Some of these indicators have reached staggeringly high levels – half of
economically active citizens are unemployed, for example – and are key contours of the
crisis facing nodes as well as the country more broadly. But they must be seen in
context: other indicators show considerable improvement.
Unemployment is a critical national concern. Using the expanded definition of
unemployment – which does not require people to have actively sought work in the
period immediately prior to the census interview – we find that unemployment in 2001
stood at 48.2% for the country as a whole, dramatically up from (the already high)
37.6% in 1996. Incidence of households with no regular income had also increased
substantially, from 14.3% in 1996 to 23.2% in 2001, leaving a quarter of households
without a regular income. Female-headed households – often poorer and more
vulnerable than their male-headed counterparts – also increased between the two
censuses, from 37.8% in 1996 to 41.9% in 2001. So did incidence of over-crowding.
Taken together, these indicate a bleak socio-economic picture for 1 in 3 South Africans.
Other indicators give cause for concern but also show evidence of progress and
improvement. Non-removal of refuse (with health and other implications) by local
authorities remained high, but dropped from 45.7% in 1996 to 42.8% in 2001.
Households without tapped water dropped slowly, down 1.6% over the 5 years.
Sanitation has long been a cause for concern, and showed a 4.2% improvement over the
5-year period – but still 45% of households lacked proper sanitation in 2001. These
41