4. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
6.6 Relocation
158
One can conclude that fear was seen as a factor that influenced one’s choice to help. There was a sense of maintaining a sense of security. The formal residents in formal housing were either scared to render their help or did not care to help these residents from the informal settlement, due to the problems that may arise from such assistance. Furthermore, referring to Respondent 8’s (18 February 2009) fear of the informal community, refers back to the idea of the ‘other’ (Santana, 2002). Some respondents were scared and therefore displayed a lack of concern towards the members of the informal community.
Furthermore, the respondents tended to associate with individuals that had similar backgrounds and this therefore impeded any type of relationship with the informal community.
The experiences that the respondents shared provide insight into the type of relationship that existed between the two socially economically different communities in Clare Estate.
With regards to the positive contact, most of the respondents emphasised that they have helped the informal community in some way and did not mind helping them in the future.
However, with respect to the negative contact, most of the respondents emphasised their unhappiness with some of the experiences that they have had with the informal community. The negative contact indirectly provides insight into the strained relationship that existed between the formal and informal communities in Clare Estate. Also some of the respondents preferred not to have any relationship with the members of the informal community because of the social differences between them and also to avoid any negative repercussions that they may encounter. The following section analyses why the respondents wanted the informal community to be relocated to another location.
159
From the questionnaires obtained, 93.3% of residents in formal housing wanted the residents in the informal settlements to relocate, 2.2% of formal residents were neutral about the decision of relocating the informal settlement to another area and 4.5% of formal residents had no commented about the relocation of the informal settlement. Following this questionnaire, interviews were administered with fourteen formal residents of Clare Estate. In addition to this, all fourteen of the respondents in Clare Estate stated that the informal settlements should be relocated elsewhere, away from their residential area (Respondent 1, 13 February 2009; Respondent 2, 19 February 2009; Respondent 3, 18 February 2009; Respondent 4, 17 February 2009; Respondent 5, 10 February 2009;
Respondent 6, 17 February 2009; Respondent 7, 11 February 2009; Respondent 8, 18 February 2009; Respondent 9, 20 February 2009; Respondent 10, 21 February 2009;
Respondent 11, 22February 2009; Respondent 12, 17 February 2009; Respondent 13, 22 February 2009; Respondent 14, 22 February 2009). There were five prominent reasons for the desire that the informal settlements should be relocated: ‘Insufficient place for the informal settlement’, ‘reducing the negative impacts from the informal community’,
‘upgrading of the area’, ‘improving the informal community’s social well-being’ and lastly, ‘the need for the informal community to take responsibility’. These will be discussed below.
Firstly, a majority (eight residents) of the respondents wanted the informal settlement to be relocated because of the negative impacts that are associated with these settlements (Respondent 2, 19 February 2009; Respondent 4, 17 February 2009; Respondent 5, 10 February 2009; Respondent 6, 17 February 2009; Respondent 7, 11 February 2009;
Respondent 8, 18 February 2009; Respondent 13, 22 February 2009; Respondent 14, 22 February 2009). This was emphasised by the following statement, “Won’t be congested and will therefore decrease crime, noise and pollution” (Respondent 4, 17 February 2009).
The removal of the residents in informal housing will allow for the decrease in crime related issue and any other type of disturbances. Another respondent in order to highlight this reasoning stated, “All will benefit, less crime, area will be pleasant to live in and feel safe when you walk elsewhere” (Respondent 5, 10 February 2009). Residents in formal housing will feel free and safe once the residents in informal settlements are relocated to other areas. Another respondent stated; “Who wants to have them on their door-step? They interfere with us, break into our homes, they must go!” (Respondent 14, 22 February 2009). This respondent did not want the informal community so close to their homes because they posed a social and economic threat to their well-being. Furthermore, another
160
respondent highlighted that once the informal community was relocated, their property value will be restored to what it was (Respondent 2, 19 February 2009). Since the establishment of the informal settlement, many of the residents in formal housing have been negatively impacted upon, because their houses lost their retail value and they were not able to sell them at reasonable prices.
Secondly, two respondents stated that the informal community should be relocated elsewhere because there was insufficient space in their neighbourhood to sustain them (Respondent 1, 13 February 2009; Respondent 10, 21 February 2009). This was emphasised by the following statement: “Well they need to! There’s no place here”
(Respondent 1, 13 February 2009). Clare Estate was not a spacious residential area, and the informal community was located on the boundaries of the formal residential area. The informal settlement has increased in an uncontrolled manner over the years and occupied the vacant land, private and public (eThekwini Municipality Durban, n.d.a). The respondents showed their discontent with the occupation because the residents in the informal community were trespassing onto their private properties.
Thirdly, in addition to the above issues, the residents in formal housing emphasised that the relocation of the informal community will help in the upgrading of their area. Two respondents stated that the informal community should be relocated so that the area can be upgraded (Respondent 11, 22February 2009; Respondent 12, 17 February 2009). This was emphasised by the following quote: “To upgrade the area to what it was”. The neighbourhood can regain its previous good image, once the residents in informal settlements have been removed. The removal of the informal settlements will create a better impression for the residential area (Respondent 11, 22 February 2009). The respondents have associated the bad upkeep of the area as a result of the occupation of the informal community.
Fourthly, respondents highlighted that the removal of the informal community from their neighbourhood will improve their social well-being and that of the residents in informal housing. One respondent stated that the informal community should be relocated in order so they can acquire better living conditions and socio-economic opportunities that will benefit their social well-being (Respondent 3, 18 February 2009).
161
Lastly, one respondent was annoyed at the fact that the informal community lived on the land for free with no costs, and wanted the residents in the informal settlements to assume financial responsibility for their services (Respondent 9, 20 February, 2009). Respondent 9 (20 February 2009) stated, “We’re waiting for that. We pay rates on our land, they are lying on it for free. It’s time they have some responsibility”. The informal community did not pay for anything; they have no financial responsibilities for services and were, unlike the residents in the formal community, who pay for electricity, water and property taxation.
On examining the reasons for the relocation of the informal community one noticed that the residents in formal housing have some attachment towards their neighbourhood. The types of attachment people have to their place depended on the actions of those individuals to maintain the area as well as the meaning that is embedded in the area. The respondents’
‘sense of place’ was threatened and therefore they adopted the ‘NIMBY’ stance in order to protect that space (Cresswell, 2004; McCreanor et al., 2006; Hernandez et al., 2007). Dear (1992), stated that individuals adopted this position to protect their own property (social space). This was evident in Clare Estate where the respondents want the residents in the informal settlements to be removed and allocated land elsewhere away from their residential area. Embedded here was the nature of the uneasy relationship that existed between the residents in the formal and informal areas.
Furthermore, the ‘NIMBY’ stance was extremely significant since it is associated with the idea of a ‘sense of place’. ‘NIMBY’ largely focuses on the relationships between individuals and the spaces that they occupy. Individuals were unhappy with the location of the informal settlement (Wolsink, 1994; Watson, 1999). The residents in formal housing in Clare Estate adopted a NIMBY position since they held the view that the informal settlements were not advantageous to them. Individuals put their needs and wants first, and did not want these impacted upon. This stance largely place individual’s interests first before community interest. Interests of local residents are entangled with their behavioural motives (Wolsink, 1994; Watson, 1999). Although the individuals of informal settlements were displaced and marginalised, they were seen in a negative light, and were therefore unwelcomed in the Clare Estate area. The residents in formal housing associated the informal community with negative impacts such as crime, devaluation of property, degradation and the litter in their area. Therefore in order to remove these impacts, they emphasised that the informal community should be relocated.
162
All the residents in formal housing wanted the informal residents out of their residential area. This was attributed to the attachment and meaning that the residents in formal housing already had about their neighbourhood. Given that their meaning of, and attachment to their place had been impacted upon, these residents wanted the causes of those impacts to be removed, and their area restored to its original state. This as where the NIMBY attitude became apparent. The NIMBY attitude also allowed the analysis of the perceptions of the residents in formal housing on the informal community and the type of relationship that exists. The following section examines the feelings of the respondents with respect to the changes to the status quo of the residents in informal housing.
6.7 Impacts on the respondents in formal housing of recent actions to relocate and