Gauteng City-Region Observatory (GCRO)

Permanent URI for this communityhttps://hdl.handle.net/10539/36900

The Gauteng City-Region Observatory (GCRO) was established in 2008 as a partnership between the University of Johannesburg (UJ), the University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg (Wits) and the Gauteng Provincial Government (GPG), with local government in Gauteng also represented on the GCRO Board. Behind the motivation for setting up the GCRO is a vision for South Africa's economic heartland as a region that is competitive, spatially integrated, environmentally sustainable and socially inclusive. GCRO is charged with helping to build the knowledge base that government, business, labour, civil society and citizens all need to make this vision a reality. GCRO collects data and benchmarks the city-region, provides policy analysis and support, undertakes applied research, and publishes critically reflective academic work.

Visit the GCRO home page at www.gcro.ac.za

For information on accessing Gauteng City-Region Observatory (GCRO) content please contact Bongi Mphuti via email : bongi.mphuti@wits.ac.za or Tel (W) : 011 717 1978

Browse

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Quality of Life Survey V (2017/18): The quality of life of students in Gauteng
    (Gauteng City-Region Observatory, 2020-07) Hamann, Christian; Joseph, Kate
    In the Quality of Life (QoL) V (2017/18) survey, respondents from all population groups were represented in the student sample. However, a higher percentage of all Indian/Asian respondents (17%) and white respondents (13%) were registered as students compared to the proportion of all African respondents (10%) and coloured respondents (11%). The differences were larger among younger respondents from each population group. • However, racialised socio-economic inequality is evident in the fact that the average monthly household income of African students was around R11 755 while the average monthly household income of white students was around R38 541. • Similarly, a lower percentage of African students reported having access to assets which are likely to assist learning (like a laptop or internet at home) when compared to the access of coloured, Indian/Asian or white students. But African and white students had higher levels of access to these assets than African and white non-students. • The majority of all students in the sample would have qualified for National Student Financial Aid Scheme (NSFAS) funding (69%) based on their household income. A further 26% of students were considered part of the ‘missing middle’, and only about 5% of students could be categorised as upper class. Racialised socio-economic inequality is evident in students’ average monthly income • There were important lifestyle and class differences between full time and part time students. On average, students had a higher socio-economic status than non-students, but part time students had a higher socio-economic status than full time students. • The mean age of full time and part time students was 24 and 31 years, respectively. Further, part time students were more likely to be household heads, while in the households of full time students it was more likely for the mother or father of the student to be the head of the household. • On average, students were 6% more likely to be satisfied with a range of services, facilities and spheres of government than non-students, but higher satisfaction with services did not translate into higher satisfaction with spheres of government. • Although the differences remain relatively small, students were more likely to respond positively on various measures of physical wellbeing (like general health status) and mental well-being (like having emotional support) than non-students. • Despite a significant degree of racial inequality in the student sample (in terms of income and access to assets), students score higher on the overall quality of life index than non-students. • While respondents born in Gauteng were the most likely to be students (12%), migrants from other provinces were nearly as likely to be students (11%). By contrast, only 6% of respondents who had migrated from another country were students. • Across QoL surveys, students predominantly made use of taxis (44% on average) or private motorised transport (31% on average) for their trips to the places where they study. • A slightly smaller percentage of students (7%) participated in protest action compared to non-student respondents (9%).
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Taking streets seriously
    (Gauteng City-Region Observatory, 2018-02) Harber, Jesse; Parker, Alexandra; Joseph, Kate; Maree, Gillian
    In many parts of Gauteng, streets are congested with cars, trucks, minibus taxis, pedestrians, and informal traders. In other parts, streets are quiet, underutilised and frequently underserviced. The surface quality of the city-region’s streets varies widely – from the engineering marvel of the Gauteng Freeway Improvement Project to those (relatively few) remaining gravel or dirt roads. Besides these contrasts, there are many other degrees of quality by which Gauteng’s streets vary. In some parts of Gauteng, streets have become privatised or heavily securitised. The phenomenon of ‘gated’ communities either manifests as enclosed streets within private estates or as closed-off existing public-road networks in older suburban areas. Some streets are patrolled by security guards, lined with high walls and electric fences, and surveyed by CCTV cameras. In busy areas, informal traders sell their wares on the pavement or at traffic lights, adding to the congestion on narrow sidewalks. These activities are subject to varying levels of control and police harassment, where by-laws dictating the use of roads and pavements are haphazardly enforced, with trading goods or café tables randomly confiscated across the city. And, like many other features of the urban environment, the quality of Gauteng’s streets is highly uneven. This Research Report, ‘Taking Streets Seriously’, interrogates how what is considered good urban design and liveability of streets may shift in different contexts. Through a series of case studies it attempts to understand the various logics at play in Gauteng’s streets – not only the logics of their designers, builders or managers, but also of those who inhabit, use, or otherwise interact with them. The studies unearthed a complex interplay of actors on Gauteng streets, with street users, property owners and the state each operating according to their own, diverse agendas, contingent on the particular street in question. The result is streets that are chaotic, contested, and changing over time. It is fair to say that, with only a few exceptions, Gauteng’s streets were and continue to be designed with hostility or a studied disregard towards anyone not behind a steering wheel. Yet despite the dominance of cars, pedestrian activities do proliferate. While indubitably car-centric, they are nonetheless sites of diverse and vibrant 'non-motorised' life. This vibrancy is no thanks to those who constructed and now control our streets. Non-car users have only made their mark by contesting the territory of the street using a variety of tactics. With this Research Report, we hope to prompt a re-imagination of our streets, not least as streets rather than roads, but also as public spaces. Streets comprise by far the majority of public space in contemporary Gauteng, where other forms, such as plazas and parks, are woefully inadequate. Streets taken seriously – not by users, who have little choice, but by their designers, planners, and managers – have enormous potential to enable and encourage public life in Gauteng’s cities. Conversely, streets that are poorly made or neglected outright can constrain both the society and economy of a city. Ultimately, we hope to correct an official urban discourse that overlooks the many uses to which streets are and could be put. In a time of enormous excitement and corresponding investment in our cities, we would like to see some of both these factors directed towards the (re)development of our streets.