Chapter 1

INTRODUCTION

Reason for survey

One of the three pillars of the Arms Management Programme's working model to reduce small arms proliferation is resolution1. Resolution implies those medium-term actions which lead to the reduction of accumulated small arms as well as reducing existing local demand (that is, future accumulation of small arms).

In order to design and implement resolution mechanisms for small arms, it would be necessary to both broaden and deepen our understanding of communities' attitudes to small arms. Primary data collection was seen as a precursor to this. Different research methodologies were applied within three case-study communities. These included a quantitative survey; focus groups; and qualitative one-on-one interviews providing a snapshot of the youth's attitudes to firearms.

These three communities were chosen as case studies because they were economically disadvantaged, with serious crime and firearm-related problems. It was felt that 'softer' case-study areas would negate the applicability of the findings to the purpose of the research: the resolution of firearm accumulation.

How to read this monograph

A quantitative survey is a useful mechanism for obtaining information about a community's attitudes to and perceptions of firearms. Qualitative methods, such as focus groups and one-on-one interviews, provide better tools for obtaining insight into the more sensitive issues of firearm sources, levels of ownership and the nature of firearm penetration. For this reason, different sections of the monograph draw more heavily on different sources of information.

The record of the information collected in this research project is grouped in terms of the insight it provides into a specific research topic (as defined in the various chapters of this monograph), as opposed to the format in which it was collected. For this reason, the various sections of the report allude to the source of the information only briefly, without justifying the choice of methodology. For more background information on the methodology considerations, please always refer back to the following section on the research methodology.

Information obtained from the youth snapshot is indicated by a shaded box, while a broad grey margin strip signifies that the information was obtained from the focus groups. All data tables from Chapter 2 onwards comprise information gathered in the quantitative survey.

Research methodology

This monograph represents the synthesis of a number of discrete research projects linked by two common threads:

similar research objectives, focused on deepening the understanding of attitudes to firearms and strategies to resolve firearm proliferation; and



the fact that all research was conducted in one of three communities where firearm misuse is commonplace.

The four research projects were as follows:

quantitative survey of 2530 respondents across the communities of Kwa Mashu, Tsolo-Qumbo and Lekoa-Vaal



two focus groups in Kwa Mashu (15 in the women's group and 20 in the youth focus group)



ten focus groups in Tsolo-Qumbo (103 respondents)



qualitative interviews with 20 youths in Kwa Mashu (snapshot)

Attention needs to be paid to the time at which the research was conducted. Some of the research was conducted in early April 1998 and the later research was conducted in July 1999. A range of factors, some planned and some unplanned, have influenced the decision to publish the information only at this time.

Quantitative survey

The main component of the research methodology was the quantitative survey. A stratified random sample was applied within each case-study area. The predetermined demographic categories were stratified by gender, race, age and settlement area. The fieldwork for the three community quantitative surveys took place in September 1999. In the community of Tsolo-Qumbo, DRA-Development was in the field from 13 to 20 September. In the case of Lekoa-Vaal, Nala Consultancy was in the field from 6 to 29 September. In the community of Kwa Mashu, surveys were completed during the period 1 September to 27 October, with the main concentration occurring between 7 September and 5 October. Njobo-Nebandla oversaw this process.

Given the stratified random sampling, the main variable for this analysis is based on residential settlement type and location (referred to as "settlement area" in this document). This variable forms the defining parameter of where the actions to reduce firearms will be geographically located. The table below gives the breakdown of the sample by this variable.

The other two key variables used in the analysis are the gender and age of the respondents. Gender plays a definitive role in the life experiences of people, clearly impacting on the attitudes and perceptions of respondents. Where significant variations were evident between male and female respondents, the findings of the survey are so presented. Similarly, in instances where people of different ages had significantly divergent views, the data are so presented. It was evident following the first qualitative survey2 of this nature - as written up by both Meek3 and Hansmann4 in Society Under Siege III - that the quantitative survey falls short in that it often does not provide the space for confidence building between the interviewer and the interviewee. Under these circumstances, some of the more subtle perceptions of firearms are not uncovered. This is a common problem when undertaking research into the issue of firearms - especially when large proportions of firearms in communities are illicit. It was for this reason that the focus groups were incorporated into this study.

Focus groups

The use of focus groups was identified as the most appropriate methodology for gathering information about illicit firearm-related activities within communities, as well as for providing information with which the quantitative findings could be contrasted. Given cost considerations, it was decided that focus groups would be conducted in only two case-study areas. It was considered adequate to use focus groups from one urban case study (namely, Kwa Mashu) and one rural case study (namely, Tsolo-Qumbo). In Tsolo-Qumbo, the focus groups were handled by DRA-Development, while Njobo Nebandla undertook to conduct the focus groups in Kwa Mashu. In both Kwa Mashu and Tsolo-Qumbo, the same focus group prompt sheet was used to guide the discussions. The focus groups were conducted in Zulu in Kwa Mashu and in Xhosa in Tsolo-Qumbo. These discussions were transcribed and translated into English. In Kwa Mashu, two focus groups were arranged. The women's focus group comprised 15 women, and the youth focus group comprised 20 people (of which 10 were male and 10 were female participants). Ten focus groups were conducted in the villages within the Tsolo and Qumbo areas.

As a research methodology, the conducting of focus groups is a useful tool for obtaining information. To be properly applied, this requires an experienced facilitator, to ensure that the transcription does not record only the opinions of the most vocal members in the discussion group, to ensure that the group dynamics are recorded, and interventions made to allow all participants time to raise their views.

As a methodology, focus groups have come under much critical attention in recent times - especially in terms of the desirable size, selection of participants and length of the focus group. The context in which the focus group is to be applied, as well as the subject of the focus group, strongly informs the extent to which these factors can be controlled by the facilitator. A gap identified from the focus group was the lack of information on the broader context and socio-economic pressures informing the attitudes of young people. It was therefore seen as necessary to complement the research through the use of qualitative interviews to give a voice to the youth.

Snapshot of youth

The use of snapshot qualitative interviews was seen as an effective way to obtain information about the attitudes of young people in Kwa Mashu township. It was felt that their opinions were often not effectively canvassed through quantitative surveys and community channels, and hence this separate piece of research was commissioned focusing purely on young people. The snapshot interviews were important in gauging the perspective of the youth as a possible target group for a firearm reduction campaign.

As a means of information gathering, a series of one-on-one interviews was undertaken with a sample of 20 youths within the Kwa Mashu Township. Twenty juveniles living within Kwa Mashu Township were interviewed. All the respondents had been residents of Kwa Mashu Township for more than five years and were under the age of 25. Twelve male respondents and eight female respondents were interviewed. A stratified sampling method was used in order to obtain a range of opinion. Although it was intended to interview an equal number of male and female respondents, it was difficult to find female respondents who had prison records or were currently involved in criminal activities. The sample was adapted accordingly.

Each respondent was interviewed for 45 minutes. A senior field researcher, Sibusiso Msimango, was utilised for this activity, and no translation occurred in the interview. A semi-structured prompt sheet was used. The questions were asked so that the respondent would remain under the impression that the questionnaire was about contemporary culture in Kwa Mashu. It was felt that placing too much emphasis on the firearm-related aspects of the survey could bias the findings and alienate some of the respondents.

The interviewer found it difficult to set up some of the one-on-one interviews, especially in the case of those respondents involved in 'criminal activities' or who had 'served time in prison'. As a result, in these instances the interviewer had first to approach a person who knew the respondent and set up the interview. Only after this were the introductions made to the relevant respondent. In some cases, the interviewer had to use incentives such as offering to pay for transport. Sometimes it was necessary to set up more than one interview to complete the questionnaire.

Aim of the research project

The overall research project reflects four discrete items of research. Although these were commissioned individually, they had a common aim: to obtain complementary information about firearm penetration and strategies to reduce the demand for firearms. The different research methodologies were conducive to the collection of different types of information, and thus through the use of a patchwork of methods the overall utility of the research was enhanced and the objectives achieved. The research was aimed at:

measuring indicators of firearm penetration in order to establish the existence and identify the nature of a firearm proliferation problem;



understanding the attitudes of the case-study communities towards firearms;



determining whether there was a willingness in the community to reduce firearms; and



identifying possible leverage points within the community for medium-term solutions to firearm proliferation, and methods of making these leverage points implementable.

Overview of the three case studies

The following section of the report provides an overview of the three case studies and the people living in these areas, and gives some insight into what it is like to live in these areas. The brief overviews of the three cases studies, however, can in no way do justice to the complexities of day-to-day life and survival within these settlements. An almost daily incidence of violence, gang-related problems, criminality and high levels of personal insecurity trouble all three communities. Yet, given these seemingly negative factors, people living within these settlements have assimilated these experiences into their daily existence and often show high levels of resilience. This is demonstrated particularly in the vibrancy of the youth in the Kwa Mashu youth snapshot.

The economic and spatial development of the three case-study areas was detrimentally affected by the apartheid policies of 1950 to 1990. Design and intention inherently limited the viability of these areas for economic growth, and although spatial development planning could now partially redress these, the future prospects of these areas remain poor. This, coupled with entrenched cultures of violence, inadequately functioning local government and a small rates base, implies that these conditions are in the short term set to continue. Future prospects in Kwa Mashu are perhaps better than those in Tsolo-Qumbo and Lekoa-Vaal. The Durban Metropolitan Area, under which the administration of Kwa Mashu falls, was recently selected as the best-functioning metropolitan area in South Africa.

The Lekoa-Vaal Metropolitan Area, in stark contrast, is reportedly facing financial problems. Tsolo-Qumbo is a deep rural area where government expenditure is low; rural development remains one of the lower national priorities. The snapshot of the attitudes of the youth in Kwa Mashu provides insight into the normality with which they define their environment. There is a strong sense of responsibility amongst the youth towards their household; there are fair opinions expressed about their neighbourhood; and they are quite resigned to the prospect of remaining in the township - even though their accommodation is inadequate.

Tsolo-Qumbo

The rural areas of Qumbo and Tsolo are amongst the poorest and most under-developed in the Eastern Cape Province. Tsolo is situated near the town of Umtata and Qumbo is situated approximately 75 km from Tsolo. The topography is mountainous and some of the villages can be reached only by foot or on horseback.

Most of the people in Tsolo and Qumbo are unemployed, and it is not uncommon for the houses to have no electricity or running water. The roads are in a poor state and are often closed during bad weather. The facilities available in Qumbo and Tsolo are as follows: police station, hospital, magistrate's court, some stores and taverns. Most of these buildings are in a dilapidated condition. Communication infrastructure is also weak.

Murder and stock theft are prevalent crimes in Tsolo and Qumbo. For the past five to six years there have been many mysterious killings linked to stock theft that have impacted upon cultural practices. In the Eastern Cape stock is a form of both direct and indirect income, as people both measure their wealth in terms of livestock, and rent out land for stock grazing. Between 1993 and1999 there were over 800 deaths related to this issue. As time passed, the murder became more indiscriminate and recently the attacks have also targeted women. These attacks on women are also indiscriminate, although there are two labels used to justify these actions, namely the accusations of being an adulteress or a witch. In both cases there seems very little substance to the allegations.5

Lekoa-Vaal

The Lekoa-Vaal Metropolitan Area is situated south of Johannesburg's central business district, in the Gauteng Province. The metropolitan area of Lekoa-Vaal comprises just under one million people. Approximately 84% of the residents are black people,15% are white people, while 1% of the population consists of "Coloured" people and Indian people6. Historically, the residents of former 'Vaal Triangle' were in the forefront of the struggle against apartheid, opposing racially discriminatory laws and actions by the state, often by violent protest. This violent reaction to conflict is still characteristic of the area, especially with regard to competition over taxi routes and amongst school-going youths.

As in Kwa Mashu, the built environment reflects the skewed settlement patterns and lack of functional and economic integration with neighbouring residential and business areas.The formation of the Lekoa-Vaal Metropolitan Area was an attempt to address historical imbalances and build a functionally integrated locality.

Kwa Mashu

Kwa Mashu is a township situated 20 km outside Durban's central business district, falling within the Durban Metropolitan Area, in the KwaZulu-Natal Province of South Africa. Kwa Mashu has experienced high levels of criminality and gangsterism since the early 1990s.

Kwa Mashu Township is one of the oldest townships surrounding the Durban Metropolitan Area. It is now approximately 34 years old. The first people to occupy this area came from Umkhumbami (Cato Manor) in 1966. These people were forcibly removed and made to settle in Kwa Mashu. As a result, conflict was built into the fabric of the settlement, as each wave of forced resettlers resulted in a further disruption of the community and community leadership and governance structures.

Kwa Mashu snapshot: attitudes to the Kwa Mashu and other neighbourhoods Living and growing up in a township like Kwa Mashu (or some of the settlements of Lekoa-Vaal) is difficult. Basic services and amenities are often absent and entertainment facilities are non-existent. Being on the streets at night is unsafe owing to the lack of street lighting and the absence of safe pedestrian walkways. The built environment is conducive to criminal activities and the risks of victimisation are high. (Residents in Tsolo-Qumbo are faced with similar problems to those in Kwa Mashu and Lekoa-Vaal; moreover, in a rural context these problems are exacerbated by the large distances between residential properties, making it more difficult for people in trouble to be heard or seen by neighbouring households.) The Kwa Mashu youth respondents were asked whether they felt that the township was a good or a bad place in which to grow up. The respondents largely agreed that the township offered a vibrant environment for young people. Although some of the responses seemed romanticised, the respondents had, on the whole, positive opinions of Kwa Mashu, although they admitted that there were advantages and disadvantages. "A bad place - young ones grow up only knowing that is to be in possession of a gun and being indulgent in deviant behaviour." - Female school drop-out. "Sometimes it is good and in other times bad." - Female, ordinary young person "A good place to grow up." - Young female, involved in shoplifting "You do not have to bother about other people, just do your own things and live the way you like." - Female fashion-conscious young person "Township life is good but nowadays it is not a good place to grow up." - Male youth, ordinary young person "There are no restrictions." - Male school dropout. "Group association counts a lot - because for youth it is easy to be influenced by the other team members." - Male school-going pupil

Kwa Mashu snapshot: growing up and living in Kwa Mashu The Kwa Mashu youth snapshot provides a background on 20 respondents. It is useful to understand who the respondents are and how family life impacts on their attitudes and perceptions of firearms. By all accounts the respondents had a typically South African childhood. In the Kwa Mashu snapshot, the youth respondents described their home life. Most of the respondents came from families that ranged in size between five and nine household members. The type of house and the number of rooms in these houses varied. Most respondents lived in four-roomed houses - consisting of a two-roomed brick house with two backyard rooms. The accommodation was seen as too small for the household requirements and one respondent complained of the lack of privacy of living in such small quarters. One respondent lived in an informal shack, which he complained leaked when it rained. The level of employment amongst household members varied. On the whole, it appeared that more female household members were employed than male household members. The forms of employment mentioned included domestic work, nursing, teaching and dressmaking. Some households relied on the pension of grandparents. At an economic level, some respondents felt that the household could not afford the things they needed and that they lived below the poverty line, relying on a single household pension.While some respondents came from more extended household structures, other households comprised nuclear families, For example, one respondent was an orphan being cared for by grandparents, another respondent's parents were divorced and yet another respondent's one parent had died. Overall, 85% of the respondents (17 of 20) described their background as good. The reasons cited for this included the fact that they had been taught how to tell right from wrong, that they knew how to love and respect people, and that there was open communication in the household. Those respondents that felt they had a 'bad' background gave reasons that included the type of house they lived in, living in poverty and a lack of privacy. Growing up with a 'bad' background did not necessarily translate into the perception of having had a sad childhood. Four of the 20 respondents said that they had had a sad childhood. Only one of these respondents felt that his background was bad and that his childhood was sad, which he attributed to growing up as an orphan with his grandparents. Of the remaining three respondents, one attributed the sad childhood to alcohol abuse in the household, one to poor housing and the third did not cite a reason. The prevalence of violence in the household was high. In seven households violence occurred at some stage. In some cases it was a regular feature, and in others it occurred only under certain predictable circumstances. In three of the cases these were alcohol related.

Kwa Mashu snapshot: sense of responsibility to the household Poor households usually rely more heavily on the assistance of younger household members for survival than do relatively wealthier households. This was demonstrated in the Kwa Mashu youth snapshot, where the youth generally showed a heightened sense of responsibility towards supporting the household. Bearing in mind that all the Kwa Mashu youth snapshot respondents were under the age of 18, it was with considerable surprise that we found that 15 of the 20 respondents felt that they were responsible for the well-being of their family. In response to the question, "What does looking after your family involve?", there were a number of responses, as follows: "Whatever I get I bring home to my family." - Female involved in illegal activities "It involves doing domestic work like cutting the grass, planting flowers and trees. Cleaning the surrounding as such. And contributing financially if one is doing casual work." - Male, ordinary young person "Doing whatever one is expected to do." - Male, ordinary young person From the survey, it was evident that looking after the family was not the sole responsibility of any of the respondents, but a shared attitude held amongst most of the family members. In some of the cases this meant undertaking domestic chores at home if unemployed, in others paying the instalments and rent if employed or doing ad hoc casual work. There were different expectations of the male and female respondents in terms of domestic responsibilities. There was a strong sense that being responsible in the family meant being able to contribute money. Three male respondents felt that they could not claim to be responsible if they did not have money to contribute to the household. All three of these respondents had previously been involved in criminal activities, and two had served prison sentences. "One has got to have money in order to be a responsible person." - Respondent involved in illegal activities (selling marijuana) "[Looking after your family] that means money. Without it you can not claim to be responsible for the well-being of your family." - Respondent who had served eight years for armed robbery.Two respondents were still attending school and explained that they were only responsible to the household after school hours, and would be once their education was completed. The one female respondent explained that after she had completed her education she would be expected to provide significantly for the family, as cited: "[Looking after your family] means to extend or buy a house which will be sufficient for the whole family. To buy furniture, food, clothes and pay rent and other instalments." - Female school-going pupil

Interpretation of findings

The overview of the case-study communities provides an appreciation of the context in which the respondents were located. Throughout the reading of the monograph this information should be borne in mind when conceptualising strategies to reduce firearm proliferation. Dealing with firearms cannot be done in isolation from the socio-economic context within which people are located. The life experiences of individuals within households and within communities strongly inform the extent to which the proliferation of small arms can be curbed.