Quality of life survey - KZN Development Planning

UTHUNGULU DISTRICT MUNICIPALITY
QUALITY OF LIFE SURVEY
FINAL REPORT: MARCH 2010
1
Sipho Gumede
And
Vacks Phupheli
2
5.2.3
5.2.4
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.
INTRODUCTION ____________________________________ 6
2.
BACKGROUND TO THE STUDY _________________________ 6
3.
RESEARCH APPROACH _______________________________ 8
4.
5.
3.1
General approach __________________________________ 8
3.2
Methodology ______________________________________ 9
3.3
Fieldwork Logistics ________________________________ 12
5.3
Services and facilities in the community ________________ 45
5.4
Facilities _________________________________________ 47
5.1.1
5.1.2
5.5
5.1.1
5.1.2
5.1.3
5.1.4
TAKE NOTE’S RESEARCH PROCESS _____________________ 14
Energy_______________________________________________ 40
Refuse Disposal _______________________________________ 42
Access to facilities _____________________________________ 47
Travel time to Community Halls __________________________ 48
People Empowerment ______________________________ 49
Aware of workshops being held __________________________ 49
Workshop Attendance __________________________________ 49
Knowledge of Ward Councillor ___________________________ 51
Municipal Service Delivery ______________________________ 51
5.6
Crime ___________________________________________ 51
4.1
Training and Protocols _____________________________ 14
5.7
HIV/Aids _________________________________________ 53
4.2
Quality Assurance and Data Management _____________ 14
5.8
Day to Day problems _______________________________ 54
4.3
Call Backs ________________________________________ 15
6.
SURVEY RESULTS __________________________________ 16
5.1
5.1.1
5.1.2
5.1.3
5.1.4
5.1.5
5.1.6
5.1.7
5.1.8
5.2
5.2.1
5.2.2
Demographic and Socio Inequality Profile ______________ 16
Population ___________________________________________
Gender______________________________________________
Education ___________________________________________
Pensioner Headed Households __________________________
Employment Status ____________________________________
Income Levels ________________________________________
Home and Property Ownership __________________________
Subsistence Farming ___________________________________
16
17
19
22
22
26
32
34
Households Services and Needs ______________________ 36
Sanitation ___________________________________________ 36
Water ______________________________________________ 38
7.
COMMERCIAL FARMING ____________________________ 55
6.1
Household Size ____________________________________ 55
6.2
Type of dwelling ___________________________________ 55
6.3
Dependency ratios _________________________________ 55
6.4
Income Levels _____________________________________ 56
6.5
Energy Sources ____________________________________ 56
6.6
Subsistence Farming _______________________________ 57
6.7
Access to Water ___________________________________ 57
CONCLUSION _____________________________________ 59
3
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Design sample size _________________________________________
Table 2: Actual captured sample______________________________________
Table 3: Total population, Total households, Household Size _______________
Table 4: Mbonambi Gender__________________________________________
Table 5: Mthonjaneni Gender ________________________________________
Table 6: Nkandla Gender ___________________________________________
Table 7: Ntambanana Gender ________________________________________
Table 8: uMhlathuze Gender _________________________________________
Table 9: Umlalazi Gender ___________________________________________
Table 10: uThungulu Gender ________________________________________
Table 11: Education Levels __________________________________________
Table 12: Head of Household Pensioners ______________________________
Table 13: Employment Status (2009) __________________________________
Table 14: Comparative Employment Status of the Total Population (%) _______
Table 15: Levels of Education of the Formally Employed (%) _______________
Table 16: Income Levels for 2009 (%) _________________________________
Table 17: Income Levels for 2007 (%) _________________________________
Table 18: Ways of making a living ____________________________________
Table 19: Dependents per person employed ____________________________
Table 20: Property Ownership________________________________________
Table 21: Satisfaction with Dwelling ___________________________________
Table 22: Farming per Local Municipality _______________________________
Table 23: Area Type _______________________________________________
Table 24: Sanitation per Local Municipality _____________________________
Table 25: Satisfaction with Sanitation __________________________________
Table 26: Water provision per Local Municipality (2007) ___________________
Table 27: Water provision per Local Municipality (2009) ___________________
Table 28: Water Sources in uThungulu ________________________________
Table 29: Sources of Energy _________________________________________
10
12
16
17
17
17
18
18
18
18
19
22
22
24
25
27
28
30
31
33
33
35
35
36
37
38
38
39
40
Table 30: Satisfaction with Electricity ___________________________________ 41
Table 31: Refuse disposal per Municipality ______________________________ 42
Table 32: Satisfaction with Refuse Disposal _____________________________ 44
Table 33: Improvement of Deterioration of Community _____________________ 45
Table 34: Access to Facilities _________________________________________ 47
Table 35: Travel time to nearest Community Hall _________________________ 48
Table 36: Awareness of Workshops ___________________________________ 49
Table 37: Workshop Attendance ______________________________________ 49
Table 38: Knowledge of Ward Councillor________________________________ 51
Table 39: Efficient Service Delivery ____________________________________ 51
Table 40: Victims of Crime ___________________________________________ 51
Table 41: Perceptions of Crime _______________________________________ 52
Table 42: Type of Crime _____________________________________________ 52
Table 43: HIV Awareness____________________________________________ 53
Table 44: Income Levels ____________________________________________ 56
Table 45: Energy Sources ___________________________________________ 56
Table 46: Involvement in Subsistence Farming ___________________________ 57
Table 47: Type of Subsistence Farming Activity __________________________ 57
Table 48: Access to Water ___________________________________________ 57
Table 49: Water Source _____________________________________________ 58
Table 50: Satisfaction with Water Sources ______________________________ 58
4
LIST OF FIGURES
PLEASE NOTE:
Figure 1: uThungulu District in context__________________________________ 9
Figure 2: Total Households per municipality ____________________________ 10
Figure 3: Map of the uThungulu District________________________________ 11
Figure 4: Population per municipality__________________________________ 12
Figure 5: Gender Breakdown of uThungulu District Municipality ____________ 19
Figure 6: Access to Secondary Education _______________________________ 21
Figure 7: Access to Tertiary Education (2009) ___________________________ 21
Figure 8: Income Levels in the uThungulu District (2009) __________________ 27
Figure 9: Households (%) earning less than R1600 per month for 2007 and 2009 29
Figure 10: Ways of making a living____________________________________ 30
Figure 11: Involvement in Subsistence Farming __________________________ 34
Figure 12: Employment by Subsistence Farming _________________________ 34
Figure 13: Satisfaction with Water Supply ______________________________ 39
Figure 14: Electricity Supply _________________________________________ 40
Figure 16: Energy Usage ____________________________________________ 41
Figure 15: Access to Electricity for Lighting _____________________________ 41
Figure 17: Reliance on own refuse dump _______________________________ 43
Figure 18: Change in Economic Situation _______________________________ 46
Figure 19: Mode of Transport in uThungulu_____________________________ 48
Figure 20: Farm worker Household Sizes _______________________________ 55
Figure 21: Households receiving Old Age Pension (%) _____________________ 55
Figure 22: Receipt of Government Grant (%) ____________________________ 56
This report represents the results of the 5th uThungulu Quality of Life Survey
during which about 4% of the households in the district were surveyed to
obtain their perceptions on certain issues. It is not a financial option for a
district to conduct a census, i.e. interviews with 100% of the households.
It is important to remember that the main reason for conducting the
uThungulu Quality of Life Survey (QOLS) is to gauge whether there has
been any improvement in the life’s of the uThungulu communities given
significance investment of time and resources by the uThungulu District in
carrying out their legal responsibilities. The QOLS has a further advantage
in that other government departments, the local municipalities and service
providers can consider the results relevant to their functions and decide if
they wish to take appropriate action to address the findings.
The information contained in this report has been extracted from the survey
results/database of responses received. It is not acceptable practise to
tamper with any of the information.
5
Chapter 3: Research Approach
Chapter 4: Research Process
1. INTRODUCTION
Chapter 5: Survey Results
Take Note Trading 140 Cc was pleased and honoured to undertake the
Chapter 6: Commercial Farming
survey for the Quality of Life (QOL) Survey for the uThungulu District
Municipality. Due to our extensive research and logistics management
2. BACKGROUND TO THE STUDY
required, our organisation’s skills and expertise was particularly well suited
to conduct the Quality of Life Survey as per the required outcome by the
District Municipality.
The uThungulu District Municipality undertook Quality of Life Surveys since
2003, to gauge the socio-economic standard of lives of the people in
uThungulu. It was also initiated with an attempt to monitor performance
The Report includes the following components:
Theoretical context of the QOL survey
The research approach, including sample size, sampling and field
methodology
An explanation of quality control procedures and protocols
Results of the study and the Analysis thereof
The report is broken down into the following chapters:
Chapter 1: Introduction
Chapter 2: Background to the Study
towards achieving their vision of having all residents to live in acceptable
serviced housing and enjoying a high quality of life1. The municipality hoped
that this will allow them to plan for the future development of the area, and
this has been monitored with high interest by many stakeholders.
Subsequent surveys were done in 2004, 2005, 2007 and this current one is
for year 2009.
The municipality’s decision to conduct an annual assessment of the district
was to evaluate and monitor the quality of life of the many people who reside
1
Bid document, Page 8
6
within its jurisdiction and also to monitor the impact of the district’s
Quality of Life is not just about how much disposable income the people
Integrated Development Plan (IDP). This process is viewed as a step in the
have, but it is also about how the person’s daily living improves from day to
right direction, especially in the country in the middle of its second decade of
day. It is about how the district municipality is impacting on the lives of
democracy and where service delivery is now forming an important part of
ordinary citizens within its borders, whether it is about facilities available,
current debates within and outside government circles.
infrastructure development, social cohesion and access to services.
One of the main functions of the annual research project in many
This, as the bid document clearly stated, indicates which aspects of life that
municipalities is to monitor and evaluate the quality of life in order to inform
uThungulu residents are dissatisfied with, and the outcome of this survey will
budget allocations and measure the impact of local government’s
give the District Municipality direction in formulating programmes and
mechanisms of delivering services to the community2 (Moller, 2000). This,
projects on how to improve and fulfil the needs of its people in terms of the
the municipalities, both at local and district level, should plan to do by
Integrated Development Plan (IDP).
conducting qualitative and quantitative research that will support the
implementation of service delivery initiatives and programmes through
The positive results from the previous years and also from the current study
influencing development planning. In uThungulu, the study forms part of the
has painted an accurate picture of the councils’ vision of an economically
Performance Management System that will ultimately measure the progress
sound district with effective infrastructure and a district municipality that
of the district authority. The current survey sought to evaluate how efficient
empowers people, protects the environment and demonstrates leadership
the municipality is with regard to service delivery and how the communities
excellence. In many instances, the general quality of life has improved
within the municipalities perceive their living conditions. Measuring the
dramatically when compared with the previous years.
Moller, V (2000) Monitoring quality of life in Durban, South Africa. Urban
Health and Development Bulletin. Vol 3 (3)
2
7
In order for the local and district government to fully understand and to better
3. RESEARCH APPROACH
serve the community, they need to focus their attention on finding out what
people perceive as important in improving their quality of life. In this study
3.1 General approach
care was put to tackle issues that form part of the core values of the quality
The general approach involved in the collection of quantitative data from 4
of life of many people in their respective local municipalities. Such issues
600 respondents. This entailed administering a pre-coded questionnaire to
include:
approximately 4 600 people using a structured questionnaire.
Dwelling and basic services satisfaction
Take Note undertook the following responsibilities:
Community facility satisfaction
Prioritisation of basic services
Standard of living
Relationships, leisure, social cohesion
Health
Phase 1
1) to map all areas provided by the municipality
2) Identify the households and randomly select correct stands
3) Randomly select respondents using the Kish Grid
Safety
Employment
Natural environment
Political environment
And the general problems
Phase 2
4) Conduct interviews with 4 600 respondents identified in the sampled
areas
5) Conduct quality control in field and in office
6) Double entry data capture
7) Validation of database
8
sample size to at least double the previous years, hence the total of 4600
3.2 Methodology
The methodology of the survey entailed administering a pre-coded
was sampled. It should be noted however that due to reasons which will be
explained, the final number of households visited was 4553.
questionnaire with a set of questions that covered information on:
Biographical information of members of the main household
Household monthly income
The sectoral and place employment of each household member
Household expenditure patterns
The interviewed members’ levels of satisfaction with regards to the
access to services
The interviewed person’s view on priority community and
household services
Type of sanitation, refuse removal, water sources and energy
source of main household
Estimated size of dwelling and site
The type of equipment that the household possesses
The type of building of household
The type of tenure of the main household
The type of crime that the person being interviewed has been a
victim
Out of the 122 784 households population, a sample size of 4 600 (5% of
total sample) was selected from the total number of households of people
Figure 1: uThungulu District in context
residing in the District Municipality. Previous samples were about 1200, and
one of the recommendations from the QOLs 2007 was to increase the
9
The municipality identified a sample of 4 600 or about 4% of the total
population, in which the interviews were undertaken using a stratified
random method. The map above provides a geographical location of the
municipality, where all the local municipality areas are located.
The sample was randomly selected. This was the most important type of
sample as it allowed a known probability that each elementary unit would be
chosen. For this reason, it is sometimes referred to as a probability sample.
This meant that, in each subpopulation, or local municipality a certain
percentage was sampled, proportional to the total. In each of the local
municipalities, the following number of households was recorded. The
proportional sample was calculated on the percentage of each sub
population or local municipality. It was calculated as follows:
N= 4600/100*%SAMPLE
e.g. for Mbonambi, sample size was 4600/100*11 = 506
Table 1: Design sample size
Local Municipality
Sub-Population
Total Households
%
Mbonambi,
13024
11
Mthonjaneni,
6766
6
Nkandla,
21785
18
Ntambanana,
9528
8
UMlalazi,
38659
30
uMhlathuze
33022
27
TOTAL
122784
100
Source: uThungulu District Municipality website,
Total sample
506
276
828
368
1380
1242
4600
www.uthungulu.org.za/UDMGIS
40000
35000
30000
25000
20000
15000
10000
5000
0
Mbonambi,
Mthonjaneni,
Nkandla,
Ntambanana,
UMlalazi,
uMhlathuzi,
Total Households
Figure 2: Total Households per municipality
Source: www.uthungulu.org.za/UDMGIS
10
Figure 3: Map of the uThungulu District
The district comprises of six local municipalities, namely:
•
•
•
•
•
•
Mbonambi
uMhlathuze
Ntambanana
uMlalazi
Mthonjaneni
Nkandla
(KZ 281)
(KZ 282)
(KZ 283)
(KZ 284)
(KZ 285)
(KZ 286)
Umlalazi local Municipality has the biggest population compared to other
local municipalities in uThungulu. The analysis will also take into account
the size of the local municipalities in the assessment of the quality of life. It
stands to reason that, with limited resources, the bigger the size of the
population, the more complex it becomes to cater for everyone as local
municipalities have to make do with small budgets and limited resources,
but at the same time ensuring that scarce resources are distributed evenly
throughout the entire municipality.
The uThungulu District is located in the north eastern region of the
KwaZulu-Natal Province as can be seen from the inset at overleaf.
Selection of households was also done on a random sampling method
where each household will have an equal chance of being selected. N =
total households/sample.
e.g. for Mbonambi, N = 13024/506 = 25
11
This means that rounded off to the nearest 10, every 25th household will be
interviewed. The actual number of surveys captured was as follows:
Table 2: Actual captured sample
Local Municipality
Sub-Population
Mbonambi
Mthonjaneni
Nkandla
Ntambanana
UMlalazi
uMhlathuze
TOTAL
3.3 Fieldwork Logistics
Once the fieldworkers had been selected for the study, they become
employees of Take Note, therefore subject to the same contract and
Total sample
506
276
828
368
1380
1242
4600
Actual Sample
490
274
780
371
1239
1399
4553
disciplinary procedures of other Take Note staff. In the interests of safety, 2
fieldworkers worked together in relatively close proximity at any given time.
As a general rule, 1 field manager supervised a team of four fieldworkers.
This ratio of 1 field manager to 4 fieldworkers ensured tight control over the
sampling and field process.
Fieldworkers, some originating from the sampled areas and fluent in isiZulu
Population per Local Municipality
and English were included in these teams. The fieldworkers were regarded
to be mature and highly acceptable to the communities that they were
11%
27%
surveying and fluent in the language spoken by the surveyed communities.
6%
17%
trained fieldworkers from the communities of the uThungulu District to collect
8%
31%
Experienced fieldworkers from Take Note Trading were blended with well
the data by conducting face-to-face interviews, under the supervision of
Mbonambi
Mthonjaneni
Umhlathuze
Umlalazi
Nkandla
Ntambanana
experienced field managers.
Figure 4: Population per municipality
12
Take Note Trading were required to conduct 4 600 face-to-face (household)
interviews from the six Local Municipalities falling under the jurisdiction of
uThungulu District Municipality. Although almost in all selected enumerated
areas the gatekeepers granted our fieldworkers permission to collect data
from their areas, there were some areas that were more difficult to obtain the
required permission. Assistance was sought from the district and relevant
local municipality in such instances. Also, in some areas, fieldworkers also
experienced resistance from residents and in other areas, many people
were not at home during office hours and alternative respondents had to be
sought. In the commercial farming areas, field teams were granted
permission to conduct interviews with the farm workers.
13
Training manuals containing relevant information about each phase in the
study were also provided. The manuals included a reference guide for the
4. TAKE NOTE’S RESEARCH PROCESS
questionnaire to maintain continuity and consistency of interviews; guides to
4.1 Training and Protocols
interviewing techniques and skills; and a synopsis of what the overall study
was. This was done so that fieldworkers can answer participant’s questions
Take Note facilitated comprehensive training with the area managers,
research assistants, field workers, field managers, and quality assurance
or provide them with relevant contact details where they may receive
assistance.
personnel and data managers. Research staff were briefed on research
intentions, and trained on how to apply the research tools and other
4.2 Quality Assurance and Data Management
measuring instruments designed for the study, and ethical issues relevant to
the study. Training sessions were designed to be interactive and utilized a
Take Note has a separate department that deals with issues of quality
number of different training techniques to ensure that all aspects of the tools
assurance to ensure data of the highest quality. The quality assurance
were fully grasped. Training of the teams of fieldwork was conducted on two
manager and teams are based at the regional offices from which all quality
different dates in Durban and Richards Bay. Durban training was conducted
control takes place. The team conducted random checks on the
on the 29th of June 2009, mainly for the experienced fieldworkers and
fieldworkers. Take Note utilizes a range of quality control measures meeting
supervisors while the Richards Bay training was conducted on the
30th
of
the best of national and international best practice. These are 100% quality
June 2009 was conducted for the locally recruited field-workers from the
control of questionnaire content, debriefing sessions, site visits and
different local municipalities.
callbacks.
14
Each questionnaire was checked three times to ensure data of the highest
Once all quality control, call back or field issues had been resolved on a set
quality. First it was checked by the fieldworker, then by the field manager
of questionnaires, the questionnaires were then sent for capturing. The
and finally by the quality controller. In the field, fieldworkers checked
quality assurance manager ensured that these questionnaires were in an
completed questionnaire schedules as the interview is completed to ensure
acceptable form before handing them over to the data department.
that all questions are answered and relevant skips followed. The field
managers then performed a second quality check on each questionnaire on
4.3 Call Backs
the same or the following day. They focused on skip patterns, as well as
ensuring that answers correspond with previous responses and follow a
At the end of each of completed questionnaires, the quality assurance team
logical process. Should any data be incomplete, missing, skip patterns not
conducted call- backs on 10% of randomly selected questionnaires of the
followed, or a discrepancy exist between responses in one schedule, the
work completed by each fieldworker. This meant that 10% of every
questionnaires were then returned to the fieldworker, who re-administered
fieldworker’s questionnaires was selected and telephonically contacted the
the questionnaire and corrected any errors.
respondents to verify some responses. The process aimed to verify that:
Once the field manager was satisfied with the quality of the questionnaires,
The correct household was visited
they were submitted to the team’s designated quality controllers in the
The correct respondents interviewed
regional office. The quality controllers rechecked every questionnaire. In
That the interview did take place
addition to office-based activities, quality assurance staff also conducted
field visits to ensure that field workers followed the methodology of the study
The call-back sheet for this process contained general questions on
and adhered to informed consent and interview procedures.
fieldworker appearance, manner and adherence to protocol.
15
5. SURVEY RESULTS
5.1 Demographic and Socio Inequality Profile
5.1.1 Population
Table 3: Total population, Total households, Household Size
Municipality
Year
Total Population Surveyed
Mbonambi
2004
1273
2005
1017
2007
911
2009
3337
Mthonjaneni
2004
872
2005
564
2007
662
2009
1734
Nkandla
2004
1451
2005
1369
2007
1911
2009
4578
Ntambanana
2004
702
2005
688
2007
658
2009
2303
uMhlathuze
2004
1610
2005
1727
2007
1995
2009
8198
uMlalazi
2004
2607
2005
2918
2007
2525
2009
7892
Number of Households Surveyed
164
153
139
470
110
87
99
271
217
210
238
780
109
115
117
371
261
376
294
1399
347
418
413
1239
Average Household Size
7.60
6.60
6.55
7.10
7.70
6.30
6.69
6.40
6.60
6.50
8.03
5.87
6.30
5.90
5.62
6.21
5.80
4.60
6.79
5.86
7.40
6.00
6.11
6.37
16
uThungulu
2004
2005
2007
2009
8515
7883
8662
28274
1208
1361
1300
4553
6.90
5.80
6.66
6.21
The average household size in uThungulu District is 6.21 people. Whilst this is a slight decrease from the previous year (6.66 in 2007), the decrease
is not very significant, and it shows the average household is still with just over 6 people per household. There are other notable variations at local
level, the most significant one being that of Nkandla Local Municipality which had an increase from 6.50 (2005) to 8.03 (2007). In 2009 the number
has dropped to 5.87. This shows that Nkandla’s households now have an average of 5 people as opposed to 8 people in 2007.
5.1.2 Gender
Table 4: Mbonambi Gender
Gender
Female
Male
Census 1996
53
47
Census 2001
54
46
QOLS 2003
45
55
QOLS 2004
52
45
QOLS 2005
53
47
QOLS 2007
52
48
QOLS 2009
54
46
Census 2001
54
46
QOLS 2003
49
51
QOLS 2004
53
47
QOLS 2005
54
46
QOLS 2007
55
45
QOLS 2009
56
44
Census 2001
57
43
QOLS 2003
55
45
QOLS 2004
54
46
QOLS 2005
51
49
QOLS 2007
56
44
QOLS 2009
57
43
Table 5: Mthonjaneni Gender
Gender
Female
Male
Census 1996
55
45
Table 6: Nkandla Gender
Gender
Female
Male
Census 1996
57
43
17
Table 7: Ntambanana Gender
Gender
Female
Male
Census 1996
55
45
Census 2001
54
46
QOLS 2003
48
52
QOLS 2004
57
43
QOLS 2005
57
43
QOLS 2007
56
44
QOLS 2009
54
46
Census 2001
52
48
QOLS 2003
48
52
QOLS 2004
53
47
QOLS 2005
53
47
QOLS 2007
54
46
QOLS 2009
54
46
Census 2001
55
45
QOLS 2003
48
52
QOLS 2004
52
48
QOLS 2005
55
45
QOLS 2007
55
45
QOLS 2009
55
45
Census 2001
54
46
QOLS 2003
49
51
QOLS 2004
54
46
QOLS 2005
53
47
QOLS 2007
55
45
QOLS 2009
55
45
Table 8: uMhlathuze Gender
Gender
Female
Male
Census 1996
53
47
Table 9: Umlalazi Gender
Gender
Female
Male
Census 1996
55
45
Table 10: uThungulu Gender
Gender
Female
Male
Census 1996
54
46
There appears to be very little difference with regards to the male to female ratio of uThungulu as a district in comparison to previous years. The
45:55 male: female ratio is consistent from the QOLs 2007 survey, and is also very close to the both Census 1996 and 2001. The most interesting
figure is the local municipality of Ntambanana, which has seen a slight decrease in female population, and an increase in male population, since
QOLS 2005 (57) down in 2007 (56) and a further decrease in 2009 (54). Ntambanana is the second smallest local municipality and the only one that
has recorded an increase in the male population.
The overall district male: female ration has remained the same compared to the QOLS 2007, with a 45:55 split between male and female population.
18
Figure 5: Gender Breakdown of uThungulu District Municipality
5.1.3 Education
Table 11: Education Levels
Municipality
Mbonambi
Mthonjaneni
Nkandla
Year
2004
2005
2007
2009
2004
2005
2007
2009
2004
2005
2007
2009
None /Basic
15.03
16.84
20.16
18.94
22.63
33.08
17.23
23.27
21.14
26.50
15.95
27.01
Education Levels
Primary
Secondary
20.21
55.79
31.33
41.73
37.78
38.70
18.94
58.24
20.99
53.50
29.79
34.62
34.64
46.36
23.27
51.63
23.69
54.05
33.64
36.14
37.90
43.52
20.10
50.83
Tertiary
8.98
10.10
3.36
3.36
2.88
2.51
1.78
1.81
1.11
3.72
2.63
2.04
19
Ntambanana
uMhlathuze
uMlalazi
UTHUNGULU
2004
2005
2007
2009
2004
2005
2007
2009
2004
2005
2007
2009
2004
2005
2007
2009
17.68
22.60
26.10
28.84
3.51
13.14
15.30
11.71
19.26
29.85
17.05
23.40
15.69
22.75
17.55
19
25.41
38.32
37.33
20.75
14.31
24.02
28.02
15
27.45
36.03
35.98
19.10
22.11
31.85
34.82
18.4
54.14
37.57
36.12
49.05
67.60
46.30
39.93
59.57
50.70
31.88
45.87
45.14
56.20
38.33
42.47
55.4
2.76
1.50
0.46
1.34
14.59
16.54
16.74
13.71
2.59
2.24
1.11
2.34
6.01
7.06
5.15
5.8
Access to basic education is a right enjoined in the constitution of the country, and it should be a serious concern that there are a percentage of
people who do not have access to even basic education. A case in point is in Ntambanana, where there has been a gradual increase in the number
of people without basic education, notably 17.68% in 2004 increasing each year up to 28.84% in the current survey. People with at least some
primary schooling have also decreased drastically across the local municipalities. All of the municipalities have recorded a decline from previous
surveys. Mbonambi Local Municipality has decreased the number of people with primary education by more than 50%. Overall, Uthungulu also went
down from 34.82% to 18.4%. An encouraging trend though, is that overall; access to Secondary education has increased.
20
Figure 6: Access to Secondary Education
Access to tertiary education seems to be minimal across the district, with only 5.8% on average of people with a post matric qualification, such as a
diploma, technikon degree or a university degree.
Figure 7: Access to Tertiary Education (2009)
21
5.1.4 Pensioner Headed Households
Table 12: Head of Household Pensioners
Municipality
Mbonambi
Mthonjaneni
Nkandla
Ntambanana
uMhlathuze
uMlalazi
UTHUNGULU
% Pensioner Headed Households
2004
38.41
47.27
29.95
36.70
23.37
42.94
35.60
2005
32.68
22.47
44.29
33.91
16.22
39.47
31.45
2007
22.30
43.43
39.41
36.75
18.77
37.29
32.43
2009
55.92
20.26
49.39
54.89
42.02
43.91
46.84
•
The data indicates an increase for pensioner headed households for the district, from 32.43% in 2007 to 46.84% in 2009.
•
Mbonambi, Mthonjaneni and uMhlathuze seems to have more than doubled compared to the year 2007 in this regard.
5.1.5 Employment Status
Many people seem to measure their quality of life, by and large, by the amount of income that they receive in any given month. Employment or the
lack thereof, was always revealed as a source of many problems within many households. It is for this reason that the quality of life of many
residents should be measured against trends in the past years.
Table 13: Employment Status (2009)
Employed Full Time
Self-employed
Part time/ contract/ temporary
Casual
Unemployed
Housewife
Mbonambi
13.8
6.5
11.8
1.2
43.2
4.3
Mthonjaneni
3.6
3.3
10.9
2.9
52.0
2.2
Nkandla
5.2
6.9
4.6
1.8
47.4
5.0
Ntambanana
7.0
3.8
7.8
1.1
49.3
3.8
uMhlathuze
24.6
6.0
7.9
1.6
37.3
3.9
uMlalazi
7.9
5.8
6.1
2.9
45.3
2.5
uThungulu
10.4
5.4
8.2
1.9
45.7
3.6
22
Pensioner
Student/ scholar/ child
Total
15.5
3.7
100
20.0
5.1
100
22.8
6.3
100
21.3
5.9
100
13.6
5.1
100
25.1
4.5
100
19.7
5.1
100
The previous table above shows that many people in uThungulu are not employed (45, 7%). Unemployment is a big problem in the whole of South
Africa, and across municipalities. Some few points to note are:
•
uMhlathuze has the lowest number of unemployed people in the district (37.3%)
•
However, this number seems to have gone up compared to the last survey of 2007, which recorded a 20.49% unemployment rate in
uMhlathuze.
•
All local municipalities have recorded an increase in unemployed people.
•
Mbonambi has gone up from 35.69% to 43.2%, Mthonjaneni has gone up from 35.79% to 52%, Nkandla from 28.17% to 47.4%, while
Ntambanana increased to 49.3 in 2009.
•
As in 2007, the unemployment figures remains higher than the employment figure.
Another interesting point to note was that of the relationship between people involved with informal trading. It was noted that a large portion of
unemployed persons, were also involved in informal trading such as fruit and vegetable trading at street corners, or taxi ranks and other public areas.
It was also noted about the different interpretations of unemployment as understood by the informal traders. Some of them didn’t want to be
classified as unemployed because they felt that they were rendering a service to the public and therefore considered themselves as self-employed.
On the contrary, some informal traders felt it necessary to be classified as unemployed as they are only working as street vendors due to
unemployment.
23
Table 14: Comparative Employment Status of the Total Population (%)
Municipality
Year
Mbonambi
Mthonjaneni
Nkandla
Ntambanana
uMhlathuze
uMlalazi
2004
2005
2007
2009
2004
2005
2007
2009
2004
2005
2007
2009
2004
2005
2007
2009
2004
2005
2007
2009
2004
2005
2007
2009
Employment Status
Employed
Unemployed
Scholar
Preschool
Student
Housewife
10.54
11.44
13.75
13.8
2.72
10.69
10.33
3.6
4.12
11.79
13.81
5.2
4.82
7.88
8.42
7.0
16.23
27.70
24.43
24.6
8.99
10.56
14.86
7.9
20.55
9.90
35.69
43.2
12.83
19.92
35.79
52
25.03
4.64
28.17
47.4
4.96
4.46
9.97
49.3
16.05
10.12
20.49
37.3
20.33
13.85
25.35
45.3
34.91
30.36
38.46
8.71
9.79
1.30
1.43
1.01
0.46
1.54
3.40
4.3
5.79
9.22
2.40
2.2
0.14
5.55
3.98
5.0
6.10
6.98
8.42
3.8
0.85
3.35
3.62
3.9
3.64
4.89
3.21
2.5
34.39
37.11
37.82
27.09
35.82
42.97
41.84
39.08
42.96
33.31
28.26
38.66
36.72
35.37
40.83
3.7*
6.36
2.52
5.1*
7.75
5.86
6.3*
7.80
7.88
3.9*
6.53
3.49
5.1*
4.82
6.58
4.5*
0.79
1.26
1.11
0.96
1.52
1.62
1.99
0.74
0.34
5.06
3.00
4.20
0.99
1.17
0.76
Not
Economically
Active
2.14
0.92
0.50
19.93
3.10
5.09
Pensioner
Looking for
Employment
8.33
11.00
5.55
15.5
8.06
7.55
11.62
20
8.23
11.63
8.96
22.8
7.09
9.06
9.97
21.3
5.49
9.00
5.49
13.6
8.73
12.38
9.91
25.1
13.67
24.53
14.30
11.74
14.06
23.19
16.03
23.92
11.29
15.07
8.84
15.19
24
UTHUNGULU
2004
2005
2007
2009
8.80
14.77
15.68
10.4
18.32
10.05
25.61
45.7
34.35
33.54
40.53
6.63
6.05
1.87
1.67
1.70
5.1*
2.46
4.66
3.84
3.6
4.21
7.77
10.59
8.42
19.7
12.07
18.68
*It should be noted that for this round of the survey, the scholar, Preschool, student and child were grouped together, so it was difficult to compare
separately.
Table 15: Levels of Education of the Formally Employed (%)
Municipality
Mbonambi
Mthonjaneni
Nkandla
Ntambanana
uMhlathuze
Year
2004
2005
2007
2009
2004
2005
2007
2009
2004
2005
2007
2009
2004
2005
2007
2009
2004
2005
2007
2009
Education Levels
None/ Basic
Primary (at least
grade 5)
Secondary (at least
grade11)
Tertiary
8.70
0.99
17.43
18.56
12.50
25.49
5.36
6.40
11.67
10.53
9.46
9.0
26.47
15.38
12.24
10.12
1.88
2.05
1.59
3.00
20.29
16.83
27.52
30.30
25.00
21.57
32.14
34.20
16.67
30.92
21.62
23.34
23.53
25.00
40.82
44.34
9.40
8.19
9.79
12.0
45.65
44.55
42.20
44.00
50.00
45.10
51.79
56.70
63.33
41.45
56.31
59.90
47.06
55.77
44.90
43.01
62.41
42.11
40.21
45.12
25.36
37.62
12.84
8
12.50
7.84
10.71
9.20
8.33
17.11
12.61
10.10
2.94
3.85
2.04
2.80
25.94
47.66
48.41
31.88
25
uMlalazi
2004
2005
2007
2009
UTHUNGULU
2004
2005
2007
2009
12.66
17.65
9.61
11.30
8.70
8.30
7.59
9.76
22.36
21.85
21.92
22
17.13
17.10
19.70
27.7
58.23
47.90
65.77
64.50
6.33
12.61
2.70
2.50
57.05
44.43
51.70
52.5
16.86
30.17
21.01
10.74
From the above table, the following observations are made:
The education patterns of the formally employed have not changed that much.
It is, however, noted that overall, the people with tertiary education seem to have halved from 21.01% to 10.74% in 2009.
Looking at it per municipality, the decrease has been only slightly, with the exception of Nkandla, which seems to have gone down from 17.11% to
5.1.6 Income Levels
Income levels are sensitive in measuring the quality of life of many people and their households. For many households, the major determining factor
of sustainability was measured through the amount of income that a household is able to bring together. In everyday life, people would measure
poverty and the quality of life by pointing out that household income is either very low or in most cases, non- existent.
26
Figure 8: Income Levels in the uThungulu District (2009)
A glimpse into the average income levels of the district shows that the ratio in consistent with the findings within the respective local municipalities.
The survey results show that a large number of people are within the R801-R1500 income bracket. At least 34% of the households surveyed have
income of between R800 and R1500. As with the QOLS 2007, this is the same bracket of old age pension grants. A broader, perhaps more accurate
picture is that more than 60% of uThungulu’s residents survive on less than R1500 every month to buy basic necessities such as food, clothes and
even pay for school fees and or shelter. This trend seems to be prevalent at a local level as well.
Table 16: Income Levels for 2009 (%)
No income
R1 - R200
R201 - R500
R501 - R800
R801 - R1500
R1501 - R2500
R2501 - R3500
R3501 - R4500
Mbonambi
0.6
3.1
7.3
10.8
26.1
21.6
13.0
6.7
Mthonjaneni
12.0
4.7
9.1
14.5
31.5
20.3
3.6
2.2
Nkandla
6.7
4.5
7.9
12.1
39.7
14.7
3.5
1.0
Ntambanana
0.5
1.9
6.7
11.1
42.3
26.7
8.1
1.6
uMhlathuze
1.5
1.4
5.5
10.1
24.2
16.6
9.0
6.6
uMlalazi
1.1
1.2
10.4
13.8
40.0
18.1
7.0
3.7
27
3.3
4.1
1.0
0.4
0.2
0
R4501 - R6000
R6001 - R8000
R8001 - R11 000
R11 001 - R16 000
R16 001 - R30 000
R30 000 and above
0
0.7
0.7
0.4
0
0
0.6
0.8
0.3
0.3
0
0
0.8
0
0
0
0
0
9.0
6.4
4.2
3.0
0.9
0.5
1.9
1.6
0.6
0.1
0.2
0
On a local level, the same trend seems to be prevalent where the majority of the population is in the R801- R1500 cohort. Ntambanana has the
highest number of people within that income group. uMhlathuze, which has the largest population, has the lowest number of households within that
cohort. An important finding is that 0.5% of uMhlathuze have an income of above R30 000.
Below is a breakdown of the 2007 figures for household income. It should be highlighted that, due to a non-standardized income brackets, it is
problematic to make direct comparisons between the 2007 and 2009 survey data. For example, 2007 data categorized the first level as 0-400 whilst
the 2009 data starts at R1-R200. What is clear and consistent though, between the two surveys (2007 and 2009) is the category R800-R1600, which
is high for both years respectively. This finding indicates that the majority of people in the district is still earning a total household income of between
R800- R1600 per month.
Table 17: Income Levels for 2007 (%)
Municipality
0 - 400
401 - 800
Mbonambi
Mthonjaneni
Nkandla
Ntambanana
uMhlathuze
uMlalazi
7.52
12.50
8.02
12.93
3.10
10.26
30.83
34.38
18.99
26.72
6.59
27.57
801 1,600
35.34
39.58
32.91
43.10
24.03
40.47
UTHUNGULU
8.38
22.10
34.97
1601 3,200
15.04
11.46
25.74
15.52
17.05
17.30
3,201 6,400
9.02
0.00
8.44
1.72
23.64
4.11
18.04
9.23
Income Levels
6,401 12,801 12,800
25,600
1.50
0.75
2.08
0.00
5.91
0.00
0.00
0.00
20.54
4.26
0.29
0.00
6.10
1.02
102,401 204,800
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.39
0.00
0.08
>204,801
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.39
0.00
No
Response
4.51
2.08
0.42
0.86
13.95
21.11
0.08
9.99
28
The most poverty stricken Local Municipalities
in the uThungulu District Municipality are still:
Mthonjaneni
Ntambanana, and
uMlalazi
Figure 9: Households (%) earning less than R1600 per month for 2007 and 2009
A trend that has continued from the previous year is that uMhlathuze still has the lowest percentage of households with an income less than R1500.
This graph above also provides an indication that the three poorest local municipalities remain poor even in the current survey. Mthonjaneni, uMlalazi
and Ntambanana, are still the most vulnerable and most poverty stricken compared to other local municipalities. It is worth noting that in most of the
municipalities, there were more people earning less than R1600 in 2007 than in 2009. This could mean a number of things, but more positively it
could mean more people have moved up to the higher income bracket and now earn more than R1600. The state of affairs in the district was so
prevalent in the unemployment rate that the majority of people rely on the government to make ends meet. We further asked the households how
they make a living, and in a somewhat surprising twist, more people rely on government assistant than on actually working to support their families.
More that 40% of the households rely on government grants, including child support, pension, and even disability grants, while only 12.9% are
employed full time.
29
Table 18: Ways of making a living
HOW DO YOU MAKE A LIVING
Missing data
Supported by family member (Spouse/ relative)
Collecting a Child Support Grant
Collecting Old Age Pension
Collecting Disability Grant
Student
Employed Full Time
Part Time/ Contract/ Temporary
Piece jobs
Self Employed (Selling goods / services)
Supported by friends
Government grant
Grow own food / crops
Casual Jobs
Unemployed
Housewife
UIF
Ask for donations
Landlord (collecting rent money)
Total
Percent (%)
0.3
20.4
6.7
19.4
3.4
1.5
12.9
7.3
0.6
5.7
0.1
10.9
0.7
1.9
7.3
0.5
0.1
0.1
0.1
Figure 10: Ways of making a living
100
A simple question of whether households are able to afford the basics, such a shelter, yields conclusive but worrying results in that less than 10% of
the district can actually afford to pay for their shelter, whether in the form of a bond, rent or just building in their own compound. As can be seen on
the table above, the majority of residents survive on state support for the daily living. Almost 40% survive on some of government grant such as child
support grant, disability, or pension grants.
30
Table 19: Dependents per person employed
Municipality
Mbonambi
Mthonjaneni
Nkandla
Ntambanana
uMhlathuze
uMlalazi
UTHUNGULU
Year
2004
2005
2007
2009
2004
2005
2007
2009
2004
2005
2007
2009
2004
2005
2007
2009
2004
2005
2007
2009
2004
2005
2007
2009
2004
2005
2007
2009
Dependents per
Person Employed
7.5
7.7
6.4
7.5
34.8
8.4
5.5
6.4
22.2
7.5
7.5
8
18.7
11.7
6.3
6.0
4.2
2.6
5.9
8.2
9.1
8.5
5.7
8.2
In the uThungulu District, the average Dependents per Person Employed
in 2009 is 7.4, which is slightly higher than the previous years in 2005 and
2007 (i.e. 5.8 and 6.2 respectively).
Contrary to previous years, It is interesting to note that there has been a
significant increase in the average Dependents per Person Employed in
Mbonambi, Mthonjaneni, and uMhlathuze Local Municipalities during
2009.
In the uMhlathuze Local Municipality, there has been a consistent
significant increase in 2009 (8.2) compared to 2007 (5.9%) and 2005 (2.6)
in the average Dependents per Person Employed.
9.4
5.8
6.2
7.4
31
5.1.7 Home and Property Ownership
The question about whether people have enough money to sustain their
Yes
No
2007
%
17.52
82.48
Mthonjaneni Yes
No
1.03
98.97
Mbonambi
Yes
No
0.42
99.58
Ntambanana Yes
No
2.56
97.44
Umhlathuze
Yes
No
61.05
38.95
Umlalazi
Yes
No
61.05
38.95
uThungulu
Yes
No
23.9
76.0
Nkandla
2009
%
4.5
95.3
100
6.2
93.8
100
2.3
97.7
100
22.6
77.4
100
32.6
67.4
100
18.0
82.0
100
14.7
85.6
lives is a controversial one and tends to be tricky with regard to the
responses given. The most important thing to note here is that people
would tend to answer the question in relation to what is perceived to be
more beneficial to them in future. For example, many people may think
that this question is aimed finding out who needs more money for their
daily living. It is in this regard that we can see a huge gap between
those who answered yes and those who said no. A quick look indicates
that all local municipalities have an income problem when it comes to
the provision of shelter.
32
Almost 40% of respondents indicated that they are not satisfied with
Table 20: Property Ownership
% Own Properties
their dwellings while only 21.2% stated that they were satisfied with
Yes
No
93.8
6.1
what they have, and only 4.5% saying they were very satisfied.
Total
100
The type of dwelling in the district is mainly traditional. More than 60%
100
of people live in a hut or a house made of traditional material. An
80
encouraging trend is that, unlike in the urban areas or more
cosmopolitan areas, the people actually own their properties, and or
60
Yes
40
the dwelling in which they reside.
No
20
0
% Own Properties
When asked about their satisfaction with the dwelling, many
respondents indicated that they were not satisfied with the state of
their dwellings as indicated hereunder.
Table 21: Satisfaction with Dwelling
Very Satisfied
Satisfied
Neither satisfied or dissatisfied
Dissatisfied
Very Dissatisfied
Total
Percentage (%)
4.5
21.1
25.0
39.9
9.3
100
33
5.1.8 Subsistence Farming
Employment by Subsistence farming
Student/ scholar/ child
Pensioner
Housewife
Unemployed
Casual
Part time/ contract/ temporary
Self-employed
Employed Full Time
0
Figure 11: Involvement in Subsistence Farming
A great finding was that, although people are employed, many
Not applicable
Crop production
200
400
600
800 1000 1200 1400
Livestock
Livestock and Crop production
Figure 12: Employment by Subsistence Farming
households in the district were involved in the subsistence farming to
supplement their livelihoods. People were engaged in either livestock
or crop farming.
The above graph indicates that many people (43% of the
respondents) of those involved in subsistence farming are
unemployed.
Pensioners are also very involved in subsistence farming
activities, i.e. 19.5%.
34
Table 22: Farming per Local Municipality
Not applicable
Livestock
Crop production
Livestock and Crop
production
Total
Mbonambi
Mthonjaneni
Nkandla
Ntambanana
uMhlathuze
uMlalazi
89.0
1.0
9.2
66.2
33.1
0.4
46.2
15.0
15.2
70.1
27.0
0.3
74.9
2.5
18.7
65.9
23.4
5.4
0.8
100
0.4
100
23.6
100
2.7
100
3.9
100
5.3
100
From the table above, it shows that a large portion of the farming activity is happening in Nkandla, with more than 23.6% of respondents indicating that they are
engaged in both the livestock and crop production. uMlalazi and Ntambanana indicated more involvement with livestock production.
Table 23: Area Type
Commercial Agriculture
Dense Rural Settlement
Small Rural Settlement
Traditional Rural
Urban Area
Urban High Income
Urban Informal
Urban Low Income
Total
Percentage
(%)
5.9
4.5
32.7
28.9
0.9
7.7
9.4
10.1
Area Type
9%
10%
6% 4%
8%
33%
1%
29%
Commercial Agriculture
Dense Rural Settlement
Small Rural Settlement
Traditional Rural
Urban Area
Urban High Income
Urban Informal
Urban Low Income
100
35
5.2 Households Services and Needs
5.2.1 Sanitation
Table 24: Sanitation per Local Municipality
Municipality
Year
No
Response
Full
Waterborne
Flush Toilet
Septic Tank
Chemical
Toilet
Mbonambi
2004
2005
2007
2009
2004
2005
2007
2009
2004
2005
2007
2009
2004
2005
2007
2009
2004
2005
2007
2009
0.00
0.00
0.72
1.20
2.00
0.00
5.5
0.90
0.00
26.53
8.0
0.90
6.70
3.38
6.7
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.3
0.00
41.00
54.45
52.3
11.00
19.00
0.00
0.6
0.00
0.00
3.06
1.5
0.00
0.00
0.00
1.3
0.00
0.00
2.00
0.5
1.71
4.30
2.05
1.4
3.00
0.70
0.00
26.3
0.90
0.00
0.00
0
4.20
0.00
1.27
2.8
1.80
0.00
0.00
4.0
0.00
6.40
3.42
4.7
Mthonjaneni
Nkandla
Ntambanana
uMhlathuze
53.60
2.20
1.02
33.10
3.80
0.42
0.00
5.20
0.00
0.00
5.10
0.68
Ventilated
Improved
Pit Latrine
(VIP)
0.00
22.20
21.74
4.5
0.00
0.00
2.04
10.5
0.00
0.00
27.85
9.3
0.00
36.50
14.00
9.2
11.97
12.50
8.90
4.6
Basic Pit
Latrine
None
Other
75.00
5.20
65.94
55.8
36.40
88.80
46.94
68.7
10.60
79.50
50.63
48.5
41.00
7.00
41.00
47.4
35.04
23.10
21.23
28.4
9.80
51.00
12.32
5.5
8.20
9.00
21.43
11.3
51.20
10.00
16.03
31.0
37.60
27.00
14.00
37.7
11.97
7.20
8.90
8.6
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.84
19.30
24.30
46.00
39.32
0.50
1.03
36
uMlalazi
2004
2005
2007
2009
0.30
4.10
0.49
10.10
3.80
17.76
4.0
0.00
0.00
1.46
1.5
0.90
0.00
2.68
3.9
0.00
0.50
8.03
13.6
51.00
79.40
42.09
47.3
14.70
12.20
27.25
29.5
23.10
0.00
0.73
UNTHUNGULU
2004
2005
2007
2009
11.30
3.90
0.49
12.80
15.60
17.76
19.7
2.00
3.70
1.46
1.3
7.30
2.20
2.68
6.1
0.00
10.40
8.03
8.6
36.30
45.70
42.09
43.9
22.10
16.10
27.25
20.3
8.70
2.50
0.73
An overview of the district shows that more than 20% of households do not have access to sanitation at all that has severe health risks.
Almost 44% of the uThungulu households make use of pit latrines and less than 20% have access to a full waterborne flush toilet.
In Mthonjaneni, there is an interesting and significant decline in the number of households without any sanitation. In 2007 21.43% of households didn’t have
any toilet facilities. In 2009, that has decreased to 11.3%. This is clearly indicative of sanitation investment in the area.
Mbonambi has also seen an increase in the people with access to sanitation.
Table 25: Satisfaction with Sanitation
Satisfaction level
Missing data
Not applicable (No sanitation)
Very Satisfied
Satisfied
Neither satisfied or dissatisfied
Dissatisfied
Very Dissatisfied
Percent
0.4
20.3
7.3
15.7
7.6
31.2
17.6
Of those with sanitation, 7.3% were very satisfied
with
their
sanitation,
whilst
31.2%
were
dissatisfied with their sanitation provision.
37
5.2.2 Water
Table 26: Water provision per Local Municipality (2007)
Municipality
Year
Mbonambi
Mthonjaneni
Nkandla
Ntambanana
uMhlathuze
uMlalazi
UTHUNGULU
2007
2007
2007
2007
2007
2007
2007
Piped
Water in
Dwelling
2.16
2.02
0.42
0.00
49.15
19.36
17.72
Piped
Water in
Yard
14.39
19.19
29.24
14.53
38.23
6.86
20.51
Piped
Water
<200m
20.86
16.16
25.85
23.93
5.80
8.33
14.32
Piped
Water
>200m
4.32
9.09
4.66
29.91
3.07
8.82
8.20
Regional
Local
School
0.72
0.00
0.00
0.85
0.00
0.74
0.39
Borehole
Spring
Rainwater
Tank
Dam/Pool
/Stagnant
River/
Stream
Water
Vendor
48.2
1.01
0.42
29.0
0.00
11.27
11.53
0.00
0.00
21.61
0.85
0.00
14.22
8.51
0.72
1.01
0.00
0.85
2.39
3.68
1.93
0.00
3.03
0.85
0.00
0.34
4.90
2.01
3.60
46.46
11.02
0.00
0.00
20.83
12.54
3.60
1.01
5.51
0.00
0.00
0.74
1.70
Table 27: Water provision per Local Municipality (2009)
Water Source
Piped water in dwelling from full
pressure pipes
Piped water in dwelling from roof tank
Mbonambi
Mthonjaneni
Nkandla
Ntambanana
uMhlathuze
uMlalazi
Uthungulu
4.9
5.5
7.6
0.3
46.1
5.2
17.7
1.2
0.4
0.7
0.8
Ground tanks next to the house (bailiff
operated)
On site taps (taps in the yard only)
0.8
1.2
0.7
1.9
3.5
0.4
0.6
1.1
27.3
13.8
35.6
16.2
38.6
16.8
27.6
40.5
44.4
24.5
53.4
10.5
41.5
30.1
18.3
8.4
0.9
0
0.4
6.4
4.5
5.5
27.3
24.1
14.0
2.1
26.6
15.4
4.7
12.7
0.8
2.4
2.9
Street taps (standpipes)
Borehole / rainwater tank/ well
Dam/ river/ stream/ spring
Other: (i.e. water kiosk, tanker, from
nearby house)
1.2
In 2007, 17.72% had access to piped water. A similar trend was captured in 2009.
38
Umhlathuze has the highest percentage of households with on-site taps.
It remains a concern that more that 15% of respondents rely on rivers and streams as their source of water.
There has been very little change in terms of people with piped water in their dwellings from full pressure pipes. The data indicates however that there is an
increase in the number of people (27%) who have on site taps in the yard, as opposed to 20.51% in 2007.
Table 28: Water Sources in uThungulu
Piped water in dwelling from full pressure pipes
2007 %
2009 %
17.72
17.7
0.7
Piped water in dwelling from roof tank
Ground tanks next to the house (bailiff operated)
On site taps (taps in the yard only)
20.51
1.1
27.6
30.1
Street taps (standpipes)
Borehole / rainwater tank/ well
13.46
4.5
Dam/ river/ stream/ spring
Other: (i.e. water kiosk, tanker, from nearby house)
23.02
15.4
1.70
2.9
Total
100
A large portion of people (58%) are dissatisfied with water provision in the
district.
Figure 13: Satisfaction with Water Supply
39
5.2.3 Energy
With regards to energy usage and provision, it is important to note that many households use different types of energy sources for different uses. Whether it’s for
cooking, heating and lighting, households choose the energy source most convenient and most cost effective for them.
Figure 14: Electricity Supply
From the above it is noted that at least, 41% of households in uThungulu do not have electricity in their households.
Table 29: Sources of Energy
Electricity
Gas
Paraffin
Wood
Coal
% Cooking
(2007)
37.68
13.77
21.01
27.54
0
0
% Lighting
(2007)
48.53
0.23
0.39
1.70
% Cooking
(2009)
43.2
4.3
5.1
% Lighting
(2009)
58.8
0.5
1.1
47.1
0.3
39.4
0.0
Dung
0.0
0.0
The table on the previous page indicates that across the district, access to electricity has increased both for cooking and for lighting. On the other hand, the use of
paraffin seems to be fading away with only 5.1% and 1.1% for cooking and lighting respectively.
40
2004
2005
2007
2009
Figure 15: Access to Electricity for Lighting
Figure 16: Energy Usage
An average picture of energy usage shows that 58.8% use electricity for lighting, while the over 43% use it for cooking only.
There appears to be a gradual increase over the past few years in the use of electricity for lighting. The increase has been from 39.16% in 2004 to 58.8% in
2009.
Table 30: Satisfaction with Electricity
Satisfaction Scale- Electricity
Not applicable
Very Satisfied
Satisfied
Neither satisfied or dissatisfied
Dissatisfied
Very Dissatisfied
Total
Percent
41.0
9.9
26.2
7.1
12.8
2.2
100
Overall, more that 26% of uThungulu residents are satisfied
with their electricity.
12.8% and 2.2% were dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with
their electricity supply.
41
5.2.4 Refuse Disposal
Table 31: Refuse disposal per Municipality
Municipality
Year
LA Removal
Service once a
week
LA Removal
service less than
once a week
Communal
Refuse Dump
Own Refuse
Dump
Burnt or Buried
near property
No Refuse
Removal
Mbonambi
2004
2005
2007
2009
2004
2005
2007
2009
2004
2005
2007
2009
2004
2005
2007
2009
2004
2005
2007
2009
2004
2005
2007
2009
0.00
0.00
0.00
3.3
0.00
1.10
4.04
4.7
0.92
1.00
4.22
5.1
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
42.91
3.20
58.42
46.4
6.63
1.00
18.89
1.9
0.61
3.30
0.00
0.8
0.00
0.00
1.01
3.3
0.00
7.10
0.42
0.3
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1.15
43.60
0.00
1.6
0.58
3.60
0.00
0.6
0.61
0.70
0.00
2.6
0.91
0.00
0.00
1.8
0.00
0.00
0.42
0.1
0.92
0.00
0.00
1.9
0.38
3.70
0.34
9.6
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.8
0.00
22.20
31.88
3.1
0.00
0.00
91.92
0.7
0.00
0.00
31.22
12.7
0.00
3.50
11.11
0.5
0.38
4.50
20.96
1.2
0.00
0.00
10.41
0.9
95.12
59.50
68.12
77.6
40.91
92.10
3.03
52
0.92
85.70
61.18
53.4
97.25
93.90
88.03
42.9
53.26
33.00
18.21
13.2
90.49
89.20
69.73
44.9
0.61
13.70
0.00
11.8
0.00
6.70
0.00
37.5
64.98
6.20
2.53
26.9
0.92
2.60
0.85
54.1
1.15
11.40
2.06
27.9
0.58
5.70
0.97
50.1
Mthonjaneni
Nkandla
Ntambanana
uMhlathuze
uMlalazi
42
UTHUNGULU
2004
2005
2007
2009
11.34
1.50
20.23
16.3
0.50
16.60
0.15
0.8
0.33
1.30
0.15
3.4
0.08
4.50
25.17
2.9
63.08
67.40
52.97
40.4
12.25
8.40
1.31
35.0
In the previous QOLS 2007, there was an increase in refuse removal by local municipality, especially in the uMhlathuze and uMlalazi area. However, during
2009, the situation seemed to decline again. In the district as a whole, less people indicated than they get a weekly refuse removal. From 20.23% in 2007 to
16.3$ in 2009. .
It appears that most people either burn of burry their refuse near their properties.
The number of households without the refuse removal is high at 35%.
It is unclear from this study if there was a deliberate drive to discourage residents from having their own refuse dumps, but it seems as if there is a significant
drop in the percentage of people using their own dumps, from 25.17%(2007) to 2.9% in 2009.
It is clear from the graph that there was a huge decline in
percentages from 2007(25.17%) to 2009 (2.9%)
It is not clear if there was a deliberate drive from the
municipality to discourage residents from using their own
refuse dumps.
Figure 17: Reliance on own refuse dump
43
Table 32: Satisfaction with Refuse Disposal
Missing data
Not applicable*
Very Satisfied
Satisfied
Neither satisfied or
dissatisfied
Dissatisfied
Very Dissatisfied
Mbonambi
Mthonjaneni
Nkandla
Ntambanana
uMhlathuze
Umlalazi
Uthungulu
1.0
11.8
1.2
16.7
1.1
37.5
3.6
18.2
0.4
27.0
3.5
4.2
0.8
54.7
0
12.1
0.6
27.9
23.7
25.4
50.9
0.9
5.4
0.5
35.0
8.5
13.9
27.9
37.5
3.9
9.5
24.7
5.5
5.8
25.7
33.4
7.0
11.9
13.5
5.6
11.6
5.3
2.3
23.4
17.1
7.5
20.8
13.8
Total
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
*Refers to those who had indicated that they don’t have refuse removal, hence felt they could not respond on their satisfaction thereof.
uMhlathuze responded very positively with regards to their satisfaction of the refuse removal. It seems as if almost 48% were satisfied (23.7% of that very satisfied),
with their refuse removal in the local municipality. This is high in contrast with Nkandla, where more than 58% indicated that they are dissatisfied with their refuse
removal. A general trend observed is that the residents of uThungulu are not satisfied with refuse removal – 34% indicated such.
44
5.3 Services and facilities in the community
This chapter deals with information pertaining to the information about services and facilities in the communities’ and suburbs. The questions asked respondents to
rate these features of their communities. The features outlined are some of the basic measures by many residents to rate how satisfied they were with their
neighbourhood.
One of the main aims of the annual assessment by the municipality is to be able to monitor how the council if performing with regards to service delivery. One of the
ways to monitor that is by comparing the current statistics of performance to the previous data. Another question we posed was whether there has been any
improvement or deterioration of the community when compared to previous years.
Table 33: Improvement of Deterioration of Community
Missing data
Improvement
Deterioration
Unchanged
Total
Mbonambi
0.4
7.7
4.5
87.4
100
Mthonjaneni
1.4
10.5
4.7
83.3
100
Nkandla Ntambanana Umhlathuze
0.4
0.54
0.2
12.9
11.86
18.7
4.5
7.28
3.9
82.2
80.32
77.1
100
100
100
Umlalazi
0.2
9.2
2.4
88.2
100
The majority of people seem to feel that their communities have not changed at all in the last years. It is notable that in all the local municipalities, more than 75% fee;
that their communities have not changed. Another important finding is that uMhlathuze has the highest number of households that think there is an improvement,
notably 18.7% in uMhlathuze mentioned that there has been an improvement in their environment. In Ntambanana, there is a portion of the respondents who feel the
communities in the local municipality have deteriorated. About 7.28% feel that Ntambanana as a community has deteriorated compared to the previous year.
45
50
Some of the reasons cited about these perceived improvements in life and economic
40
situation include:
30
Better
Same
20
10
0
Worse
I will be employed
My children will have completed their studies
New Government will provide job opportunities
I will get a promotion
Open my own business
Figure 18: Change in Economic Situation
I will get a salary increase
I will have my own car
Hope new Government will increase pension money
2010 World Cup will create job opportunities
46
5.4 Facilities
5.1.1 Access to facilities
Table 34: Access to Facilities
Municipality
Year
Library
Clinic
Sports Ground
Mbonambi
2004
2005
2009
2004
2005
2009
2004
2005
2009
2004
2005
2009
2004
2005
2009
2004
2005
2009
0.61
5.90
3.9
4.55
13.50
8.7
31.34
18.60
18.8
0.00
0.00
3.0
66.67
57.70
33.6
8.36
16.30
2.8
59.76
26.80
36.5
7.27
76.40
12.7
54.38
68.10
81.2
30.28
18.30
52.3
86.97
68.10
64.5
51.01
66.70
49.8
10.37
45.80
31.2
9.09
74.20
28.0
22.12
75.20
32.1
19.27
45.20
28.6
59.77
68.00
43.3
12.10
72.70
16.2
Mthonjaneni
Nkandla
Ntambanana
uMhlathuze
uMlalazi
Community
Hall
41.46
52.90
28.1
6.36
71.90
31.3
50.23
57.10
42.9
24.77
19.10
31.5
74.71
64.40
56.7
15.27
51.70
45.5
Park
Police Station
0.00
19.60
3.9
1.82
40.40
0.9
0.46
57.60
4.5
0.00
0.90
7.8
47.51
62.80
24.5
6.34
54.10
2.2
32.32
4.60
8.8
8.18
23.60
9.5
36.41
36.20
74.1
4.59
4.30
19.7
83.14
60.90
53.9
42.65
36.40
47.9
Generally there is a poor access to clinics and libraries.
uMhlathuze and uMlalazi seem to have a much higher percentage of access to services than other local municipalities.
The survey results indicated that Nkandla also has very good access to police stations, with more than 74% of respondents indicating that they can access
the police station easily.
47
5.1.2 Travel time to Community Halls
Table 35: Travel time to nearest Community Hall
Time to community hall
Less than 15 minutes
Between 15 minutes and 30 minutes
More than 30 minutes but less than 1 hour
Between 1 hour and 1.5 hours
Between 1.6 hours and 2 hours
Over 2 hours
Total
Mbonambi
7.3
21.6
30.3
23.2
3.9
13.6
100
Mthonjaneni
6.9
25.1
11.3
12.0
3.3
41.5
100
Nkandla
10.2
15.6
15.4
12.4
1.7
44.3
100
Ntambanana
14.6
16.7
13.7
14.6
4.6
35.8
100
uMhlathuze
22.1
27.5
22.1
17.1
2.1
8.9
100
uMlalazi
5.3
14.8
31.8
21.5
5.7
20.9
100
From the table it is noted that the uMhlathuze Municipality has more facilities but that they are also located in closer proximity to the communities that they
serve, notably, 21.1% of respondents are able to get to a hall in less than 15 minutes.
In contrast, 31.8% of the uMlalazi respondents need more than an hour to get to their nearest community hall.
It is worth noting that at least 41.5% of the Nkandla respondents need to walk more than 2 hours to get to their nearest community hall. Only 10.2% of the
Nkandla respondents can get to a hall in 15 minutes or less. This figure could also be indicative of very low car ownership in Nkandla.
It is clear from the chart above that the majority of respondents in the
municipality use mini bus taxis to get around. When we asked them
about their satisfaction with the taxis as their mode of transport, it was
found that most of the respondents were satisfied with the taxis, i.e.
36% indicated that they were satisfied with their mode of
transportation
Figure 19: Mode of Transport in uThungulu
48
5.5 People Empowerment
One of the most important aspects of effective municipal delivery is based on the principle of proper consultation with the constituency and the residents at large.
When residents are properly consulted and briefed about the municipal’s plans of action and the intentions, they are more likely going to understand that service
delivery is a process and that there should be ongoing support by the people residing in the respective communities. The distribution of information to communities is
a vital tool to ensure between with the service providers and the service recipients.
5.1.1 Aware of workshops being held
Table 36: Awareness of Workshops
Percent
Public Workshops
Yes
No
This above result is concerning in that it seems as of
more than 57.7% of respondents do not know anything
42.2
57.7
about workshops.
60
50
40
Yes
30
No
20
10
0
Percent
5.1.2 Workshop Attendance
Table 37: Workshop Attendance
Yes
No
%
27.3
11.0
49
50
5.1.3 Knowledge of Ward Councillor
Table 40: Victims of Crime
Table 38: Knowledge of Ward Councillor
Percentage (%)
Yes
84.3
No
15.5
It is interesting to note that more than 84% of respondents knew their
Victim of crime in the
past year
Missing data
Yes
No
Total
respective ward councillors.
Percent
0.1
21.3
78.6
100
Only 21% of the respondents have indicated ever being a victim of
5.1.4 Municipal Service Delivery
crime.
Out of the 21%, 2.4% was for rape, and 6.9% was for assault.
Table 39: Efficient Service Delivery
Percentage (%)
Yes
26.9
No
72.9
It remains a concern that more than 70% of respondents indicated
that their municipality is not delivering services efficiently.
The following figure provides a visual understanding of the above
result.
Q7.9.1 Victim of crime in the past year
0%
21%
5.6 Crime
The following tables and figures provide the response to crime related issues.
79%
Missing data
Yes
No
51
Table 41: Perceptions of Crime
Perception of
Safety from crime
Very good
Good
Neutral
Bad
Very bad
Percent
9.4
23.1
22.1
29.3
16.1
Total
According to the respondents, only 16.1% hold a perception
that crime is very bad in their area.
22.1% are neutral on the issue, and didn’t want to say if they
think it’s safe of not safe in their area.
100
Table 42: Type of Crime
Year
Municipality
Mbonambi
Mthonjaneni
Nkandla
Ntambanana
2004
2005
2007
2009
2004
2005
2007
2009
2004
2005
2007
2009
2004
2005
2007
2009
Rape
Assault
Robbery
Hijacking
0.61
0.00
14.06
1.0
0.00
0.00
11.63
0.4
7.83
0.00
2.37
0
2.75
3.00
14.91
0
4.27
2.10
3.15
1.4
3.64
45.90
5.81
1.1
15.21
34.90
4.29
0.4
0.00
0.00
13.16
0.8
1.83
1.40
11.72
3.7
1.82
0.00
9.30
2.5
20.74
0.50
7.62
2.9
0.00
0.00
20.18
3.5
2.44
1.40
3.15
1.0
0.00
0.00
3.49
0
15.67
0.00
0.96
0.4
0.92
0.00
10.53
0
Type of Crime
Burglary
Theft
10.37
12.60
7.14
18.7
13.64
0.00
13.95
5.8
24.88
3.30
17.62
7.1
7.34
17.70
13.51
6.5
17.68
13.30
7.94
13.8
13.64
19.50
13.95
2.9
31.80
15.40
16.19
2.8
5.50
4.90
13.51
5.1
Car
Theft
1.22
0.70
0.79
0.8
0.00
0.00
3.49
0
5.99
0.00
2.86
0.1
0.00
0.00
6.31
0
Theft
out of
Car
1.22
0.70
0.00
0.2
1.82
0.00
2.33
0.4
3.23
0.00
3.81
0.9
0.00
0.00
7.21
0
Stock
Theft
Fraud
Any
Crime
3.05
2.80
13.39
2.2
2.73
11.70
16.47
0.4
41.94
5.60
3.81
2.3
0.92
1.00
19.82
1.3
0.00
2.10
9.45
0.2
0.91
2.00
8.24
0
32.26
0.90
0.48
0.3
0.00
0.00
15.32
0
28.66
37.20
29.69
0
19.09
79.10
39.08
0
52.53
60.50
35.21
0.2
16.51
26.60
35.65
0.5
52
uMhlathuze
uMlalazi
UTHUNGULU
2004
2005
2007
2009
2004
2005
2007
2009
1.15
0.30
7.33
0.5
1,15
0.20
2.72
0.5
3.07
8.80
8.06
2.4
2.59
27.20
8.97
0.8
9.20
10.40
17.75
6.9
8.36
1.00
16.12
2.3
2.68
2.20
7.72
1.7
1.73
0.00
3.54
0.6
33.33
21.40
13.50
20.1
4.61
0.80
21.47
10.4
25.67
20.40
21.45
15.4
12.68
12.60
20.33
5.2
5.36
2.50
4.41
1.6
1.44
0.00
4.40
0.3
4.98
1.60
5.88
0.8
1.44
0.00
4.40
0
10.34
2.50
19.12
0.5
5.19
7.60
4.71
1.3
1.53
2.20
9.96
0.5
1.44
5.40
1.96
0.1
45.21
72.30
32.97
0.5
23.92
54.80
38.54
0.2
2004
2005
2007
2009
2.32
0.40
6.79
2.4
5.05
19.40
7.47
4.9
8.53
3.40
14.41
18.36
4.30
0.80
4.68
2.17
16.31
9.60
16.09
56.26
19.04
15.10
17.41
42.32
2.81
0.80
3.85
1.18
2.40
0.50
4.28
0.23
12.00
5.00
11.15
6.20
6.62
2.80
6.12
0.11
33.20
57.70
35.46
0.14
Incidences of rape seems to have decreased in the district as a whole, however, robbery seems to have gone up from 14.41% to 18.36%.
An interesting increase can be seen on burglary which has shot up to 56% from 16% across the district.
5.7 HIV/Aids
With regard to HIV/AIDS, and its effects, the following responses were noted:
Table 43: HIV Awareness
Missing data
Doing enough HIV/ AIDS education
Should do more HIV/ AIDS education
%
1.4
37.3
61.3
Total
100
More than 61% of respondents were of the opinion that the municipalities should do more to educate and make citizens aware of the HIV pandemic,
while 37.3% thought that enough was being done.
53
5.8 Day to Day problems
There are many problems which were raised throughout this study. It should be noted that whenever such assessments are conducted, there will be those
respondents who have lost hope in the service delivery systems, but there are also those who would appreciate any kind of assistants from fieldworkers, even when
researchers insist that they cannot personally do anything to help the situation. To this end, we included a question in the questionnaire that will probe into the day to
day problems faced by residents of uThungulu. The most occurring problems, across all local municipalities were as follows:
•
Unemployment / Lack of job opportunities
•
Health problems (e.g. high blood pressure, arthritis, asthma, etc)
•
Shortage of food / food insecurity / not enough food / Hunger
•
Financial problems (shortage of money / no money / money problems in general)
•
Shortage / loss of water
•
Crime / Safety
•
Poverty
•
Lack of transport / Transport problems / Poor transport / Transport delays
•
Loneliness
•
Death of a family member/s
•
Family feuds
54
6. COMMERCIAL FARMING
6.2 Type of dwelling
Responses from farm workers to the questionnaire are extracted in this section of
The majority of farmworkers across the district are residing in dwellings made out of
the report.
traditional materials. On average, 70% of the reside in dwellings from traditional
materials. uMhlathuze is an expetion 76.2% of the farmworkers reside in houses, or
6.1 Household Size
formal structures on individual stands within the farming area.
Household sizes for farm workers were noted to be as follow:
6.3 Dependency ratios
Average Household Size
7.00
6.00
6.66
6.28
5.57
5.55
5.26
The issue of dependency is related to household sizes in this instance. The
5.56
5.00
situation also exists where some household members obtain government grants as
4.00
noted in the figure hereunder.
3.00
2.00
Average Household Size
1.00
Receipt of Old Age Pension (%)
0.00
Yes
No
Figure 20: Farm worker Household Sizes
With an average of 6.6 people per household, Mthonjaneni has the highest number
of people per farming household.
Figure 21: Households receiving Old Age Pension (%)
55
Table 44: Income Levels
Receipt of other Government Grant
(%)
Nkandla
Ntambanana
uMhlathuze
uMlalazi
No income
Mbonambi Mthonjaneni
1.9
18.3
2.6
0
1.1
0.7
R1 - R200
0
8.6
1.9
2.7
0.6
1.2
R201 - R500
5.6
11.8
7.4
9.9
4.5
9
R501 - R800
13
15.1
14
6.3
13.6
14.5
R801 - R1500
29.6
36.6
44.8
36
28.1
39.4
R1501 - R2500
18.5
5.4
20
28.8
22.4
20.4
Yes
R2501 - R3500
18.5
1.1
4.8
11.7
7.4
5.9
No
R3501 - R4500
9.3
0
0.7
3.6
6
4.5
R4501 - R6000
3.7
0
0.7
0.9
8.5
2.1
R6001 - R8000
0
1.1
1.2
0
4.8
0.7
0.2
Figure 22: Receipt of Government Grant (%)
On average, more than 67% of farm worker households are receiving some form of
government grant. The highest percentage is noted in Ntambanana where more
than 77% of the farm workers indicated saying that they receive some form of
government grant.
6.4 Income Levels
The following table provides some information on income levels of farm workers
R8001 - R11 000
0
1.1
0
0
1.7
R11 001 - R16 000
0
0
0.5
0
0.3
0.2
R16 001 - R30 000
0
0
0
0
0.3
0.7
R30 000 and above
0
0
0
0
0
0
Nkandla
14.8
6.5 Energy Sources
Table 45: Energy Sources
Electricit y
Mbonambi
16.7
Mthonjaneni
26.9
3.2
Nt ambanana
23.4
uMhlat huze
58.8
uMlalazi
31.8
1.2
2.7
5.7
5.7
1.4
2.7
7.7
5.9
69.9
81.4
71.2
27.8
56.3
0
1
0
0
0.2
0
0
0.2
0
0
0
100
100
100
100
100
100
Gas
1.9
Paraffin
7.4
Wood
74.1
Coal
0
Dung
Total
surveyed.
The majority of respondents use wood as their main sorce of energy. With the
exception of uMhlathuze local municipality, an average of 75% are use wood for
cooking while in uMhalthuze more than 58% of respondents have access to
electricity.
56
Table 47: Type of Subsistence Farming Activity
6.6 Subsistence Farming
Table 46: Involvement in Subsistence Farming
Involved in subsistence farming
Yes
No
Percent (%)
31.9
68.1
Total
100
Type of farming involvement
Percent
Livestock
Crop production
Livestock and Crop production
43.9
34.1
22.0
Total
100
Of the farm workers who are involved in subsistence farming, 43.9% are in livestock
production, while only 34.1 are involved in crop production. 22% of the respondents
indicated that they are involved in both crop and livestock production. It is, however
No
3500
not clear what the reasons are for the majority of farm workers being involved in
livestock production.
3000
2500
Yes
2000
6.7 Access to Water
1500
Table 48: Access to Water
1000
500
Access to Water for farm workers
0
Yes
No
Series1
Percent
Piped water in dwelling from full pressure pipes
12.1
Piped water in dwelling from roof tank
0.3
Ground tanks next to the house (bailiff operated)
1.1
On site taps (taps in the yard only)
28.5
Street taps (standpipes)
30.0
When looking at the involvement in subsistence farming, it is clear that the majority
Borehole / rainwater tank/ well
2.8
of the respondents are not involved in subsistence farming, i.e. apart from their daily
Dam/ river/ stream/ spring
20.3
work in the commercial farming activities.
Other: (i.e. water kiosk, tanker, from nearby house)
4.8
Total
100
57
Overall, it seems that most farm workers have water on site, 28% street taps, and
With regard to the satisfaction with the water source, it is clear that the majority of
over 30% standpipes.
Mthonjaneni, a large percentage of
the respondents are dissatisfied with the water provisions for their households on
respondents indicated that their water sources is either a , dam, river, stream or
the farms. Except for Umhlathuze, with over 50% of the people who are very
spring.
satisfied (33.2%) and satisfied (21%) respectively, the other local municipalities are
In the case of
all over 50% dissatisfied.
Table 49: Water Source
Mbonambi Mthonjaneni
Piped water in
dwelling from full
pressure pipes
0
Piped w ater in
dwelling from roof
tank
Ground tanks next to
the house (bailiff
operated)
On site taps (taps in
the yard only)
Street taps
(standpipes)
Borehole / rainwater
tank/ w ell
Dam/ river/ stream/
spring
Other: (i.e. w ater
kiosk, tanker, from
nearby house)
Nkandla
1.7
4.3
Ntambanana Umhlathuze
0
Umlalazi
5.9
5.9
1.9
0
0.5
0
0.2
0.2
3.7
0
1.9
1.8
0.7
0.7
11.1
10.8
41.2
19.8
17.3
17.3
44.4
43
19
45.9
41.6
41.6
24.1
3.2
1.7
4.3
4.3
11.1
38.7
27.9
5.4
27.8
27.8
6.2
27
2.1
2.1
3.7
0
Table 50: Satisfaction with Water Sources
Mbonambi Mt honjaneni
Very Satisfied
Sat isfied
Nkandla
Ntambanana uMhlat huze
Umlalazi
1.9
1.1
1.7
2.7
33.2
2.6
9.3
19.4
9
10.8
21
12.4
Neither satisfied
or dissat isfied
9.3
6.5
11.4
9.9
9.9
5.5
Dissatisfied
18.5
60.2
38.1
46.8
27
43.9
Very Dissatisfied
61.1
12.9
39.8
29.7
8.8
35.6
58
7. CONCLUSION
On the employment front, it is clear that lack of jobs is not only unique to uThungulu
as a district municipality, but it is a national crisis. The national trends in
The current study has found some important insights into what the residents of
unemployment are evident across all local municipalities. There seems to be a
uThungulu District Municipality think about their quality of life and the quality of
significant decline in the number of people who have full time or regular
those within the same community. One can fully appreciate that the quality of life for
employment. As a result, there is a ripple effect in the household income as there
many people is characterized by many factors. Some of the factors include the
are more and more people within one household who are not employed.
surroundings within which people reside, their health, their ability to access certain
things within their communities, the level of education and income, and the overall
Social Cohesion and family life has also been an important issue to mention with
satisfaction with aspects of their lives.
regard to the satisfaction of the residents of uThungulu. The way people connect
with each is of utmost importance, especially in family units that are not necessarily
The current findings indicate that generally the quality of life in the people of
the conventional family units, some of which are pensioner headed, and the others,
uThungulu District municipality has remained the same, compared to the previous
child headed. Many people felt that they were satisfied with this aspect of their lives,
year. In most instances, the residents seem to be slightly more satisfied with their
symbolising that it forms a significant part of their lives.
general standard of living, although their overall quality of life has remained the
same.
Education access is also on the increase, although on many local municipalities,
there is still a decline in the number of people leaving school, perhaps for
employment in order to support their family. Access to post–matric education is a
major challenge, and continues to present major problems of affordability for many
residents.
59