The aftermath of a fire disaster in a Cape Town informal settlement

225 Pages·2008·0.94 MB·English

by  Jackie Stewart

Space and survival: The aftermath of a fire disaster in a Cape Town informal
settlement

JACKIE STEWART

Dissertation for the degree Doctor of Philosophy (Psychology)
at the University of Stellenbosch

Promotor: Professor Leslie Swartz
Co-Promotor: Dr Catherine Ward

March 2008
Declaration

I, the undersigned, hereby declare that the work contained in this dissertation is my own
original work, and that I have not previously in its entirety or in part submitted it at any
university for a degree.

………………………………………… ……………………………………
Signature Date

Copyright ©2008 Stellenbosch University
All rights reserved
Abstract

This study is located in the Joe Slovo informal settlement, Langa, Cape Town. This is a
settlement much like many other townships in South Africa in that it is a disaster-prone,
marginalised community. On the 15 January 2005 a fire ravaged the area, destroying 2 590
dwellings and leaving 12 950 people homeless. This qualitative study attempted to explore
the personal perspectives of the survivors of this shack fire within the wider context of
communal and socio-political variables.

A number of interviews were conducted, some with the fire survivors, and others with service
providers in the field of disaster management. Conservation of Resources (COR) theory was
found to be a useful lens through which to analyse the data. The fire event itself is shown to
have been a precipitant of a far longer and more complex chain of events and ongoing
struggles for survival. Reactions to the fire and subsequent events, furthermore, must be
understood at a number of levels – including at inter-personal and inter-group levels. The
principles and corollaries of COR theory enable a deeper exploration of the disaster especially
in terms of resource loss and the implications of survivors having been disadvantaged prior to
the fire taking place. A number of pre-event issues are presented in order for this context to
be fully understood. Two obstacles to community intervention are emphasised as key. First,
the reality of what COR theory terms ‘communities within communities’ has implications for
survivor behaviour. Second, the focus on the acute aftermath of the fire, and what COR
theory terms the ‘avoidance of long-term needs’ is also crucial.

COR theory facilitated the visibility of a link between the data and the use of space at an inter-
group level. Despite the abolition of apartheid, segregation between groups in South Africa
remains high. The current study made use of the social psychology of segregation to explore
the inter-group conflict that emerged as the most salient and ongoing feature of this disaster.
Although the current study is exploratory, it is hoped that it will encourage future research into
the interface between space, inter-group relations and disaster.

i
Opsomming

Die huidige studie is gedoen in die Joe Slovo informele nedersetting, Langa, Kaapstad.
Hierdie nedersetting is soos vele ander minderbevooregte woongebiede (townships) in Suid
Afrika 'n gemarginaliseerde gemeenskap wat dikwels deur rampe getref word. Op 15 January
2005 het 'n vuur 590 wonings in hierdie area verwoes, en 12 950 mense is daklloos gelaat.
Hierdie kwalitatiewe studie poog om persoolike perspektiewe van die slagoffers van die vuur
binne die breër konteks van gemeenskaps- en sosio-politieke variante te ondersoek.

'n Aantal onderhoude is gevoer, somige met slagoffers van die vuur, ander met die
diensleweraars in die breë veld van ramp bestuur. Conservation of Resources (COR)
(Bewaring van Bronne) teorie was 'n sinvolle lens waardeur die data geanaliseer is. Die vuur
self blyk die uitvloeisel van 'n veel langer en meer komplekse reeks gebeure en voortdurende
stryd vir oorlewing te wees. Reaksies op die vuur en die daaropvolgende gebeure, moet
verder op 'n paar vlakke verstaan word – onder andere inter-persoonlike en inter-groep
vlakke. Die beginsels en uitvloeisels van COR teorie maak 'n dieper ondersoek van die ramp,
veral in terme van die verlies van bronne en van die gevolge verwant aan die feit dat die
slagoffers voor die ramp reeds minder bevoorregt was. 'n Paar relevante aangeleenthede wat
die vuur voorafgegaan het word uitgelig om hierdie konteks beter te verstaan. Twee
hindernisse vir gemeenskaps-intervensie word as sentraal beklemtoon. Eerstens, die realiteit
van wat COR teorie as 'gemeenskappe binne gemeenskappe' (‘communities within
communities’) indetifiseer, het gevolge vir slagoffers se gedrag. Tweedens is die fokus op die
akute nagevolge van die vuur, en wat COR teories as 'vermeiding van lang-termyn behoeftes'
(‘avoidance of long-term needs’) identifiseer.

COR teorie het die sigbaarmaking van 'n verband tussen die data en ruimte op 'n inter-groep
vlak gefasiliteer. Ten spyte van die afskaffing van apartheid is daar steeds 'n hoë voorkoms
van segregasie tussen groepe in Suid Afrika. Die huidige studie het gebruik gemaak van
sosiale sielkunde van segregasie om die inter-groep konflik wat as die mees opvallende en
voortdurende kenmerk van die ramp uitstaan, te ondersoek. Alhoewel die huidige studie
ondersoekend is, word gehoop dat dit toekomstige navorsing oor die verband tussen ruimte,
inter-groep verhoudinge en rampe sal aanmoedig.
ii
Acknowledgements

I would like to extend my sincere gratitude to a number of people and organisations that
have enabled this enriching doctoral journey. It is important that I make special mention of
my promoter, Professor Leslie Swartz, who has been my mentor for many years. His
dedication and belief in me has meant that I have surpassed my own expectations of what
I was capable of. My co-promotor, Dr Catherine Ward, was ever-present and her
encouragement and attention to detail helped me attain a goal I never thought possible.

This doctoral journey began after a fascinating conversation about the Joe Slovo informal
settlement with Greg Pillay, Head of the Cape Town Disaster Risk Management Centre
(CTDRMC). His commitment and enthusiasm for the field of disaster management was
infectious and for that I need to thank him. These thanks must also be extended to the
many other wonderful and committed people who work at the CTDRMC. It is important to
also acknowledge the Trauma Centre for Survivors of Violence and Torture where I had
the opportunity to grow and learn in the disaster field. This is also where I met Wanga
Zembe, my co-researcher, who is a true professional and who has tremendous clinical
skill. Heartfelt thanks to the survivors of the Joe Slovo fire who agreed to be interviewed
and allowed us into their world.

None of this would have been possible without the scholarship that I received from the
Harry Crossley Foundation. I am grateful to them for enabling this journey.

Finally, to my family and friends who have all played some role in this process. There are
no words that are fitting or descriptive enough to thank you properly. Of special mention,
my Mum and Dad, who dreamt that the sky would have no limit for their children, my sister,
whose support is never-ending, my husband, who has always believed in me, and my little
girls, to whom this doctorate is dedicated.
iii
A monkey and a fish were caught in a terrible flood and were being swept
downstream amidst torrents of water and debris. The monkey spied a branch from
an overhanging tree and pulled himself to safety from the swirling water. Then,
wanting to help his friend the fish, he reached into the water and pulled the fish
from water onto the branch. The moral of the story is clear: Good intentions are not
enough. If you wish to help the fish, you must understand his nature.

Ancient Chinese Fable

iv
Table of contents

Declaration
Abstract.............................................................................................................................i
Opsomming......................................................................................................................ii
Acknowledgements.........................................................................................................iii
List of figures...................................................................................................................xi
List of tables...................................................................................................................xii
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION............................................................................1
1.1 Background to the study.............................................................................................2
1.1.1 The history of Joe Slovo Informal Settlement, Langa, Cape Town........2
1.1.2 The 15 January 2005 fire.......................................................................5
1.1.3 The legal basis for disaster management in South Africa......................8
1.1.3.1The declaration of a disaster...........................................................................9
1.2 Structure of thesis......................................................................................................9
CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW..............................................................12
2.1 Defining a disaster....................................................................................................13
2.2 The taxonomy of disaster.........................................................................................15
2.3 Disaster trends and statistics ...................................................................................15
2.3.1 Deaths drop, number of affected rises.................................................16
2.3.2 Development level determines disaster costs.....................................17
2.4 Key themes that emerged across disaster frameworks............................................19
2.4.1 The developmental approach to disaster.............................................19
2.4.2 Individual versus collective responses to disaster...............................22
2.5 Disaster frameworks.................................................................................................24
2.5.1 Individual/micro-level understanding of disaster..................................24
2.5.1.1 Psychiatric morbidity....................................................................................24
2.5.1.1.1 Prevalence studies: ............................................................24
2.5.1.1.2 Vulnerability studies:...........................................................25
2.5.1.1.3 Comorbidity studies:...........................................................25
2.5.1.2 The issue of normality..................................................................................25
2.5.1.2.1 Definitions Of Stress...........................................................26
2.5.1.2.2 Conservation Of Resources Theory and individual stress..27
2.5.2 Societal/macro-level understanding of disaster...................................28
v
2.5.2.1 Disaster in developing countries..................................................................28
2.5.2.2 The socio-political nature of disaster in developed countries.......................30
2.5.2.3 Poverty and inequality in South Africa..........................................................32
2.5.2.4 Urban vulnerability and disaster in South Africa...........................................34
2.5.2.4.1 Disaster and the Cape Metropolitan Area...........................35
2.5.2.5 Communal processes ..................................................................................36
2.5.2.5.1 Conservation Of Resources Theory and community stress38
2.5.2.5.2 COR Theory and disaster/extreme stress...........................39
Resources....................................................................39
Principles of COR theory..............................................40
Intervention in the community......................................43
Obstacles to community intervention............................44
CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY....................................................................48
3.1 Methodological positioning.......................................................................................48
3.2 Research questions..................................................................................................48
3.3 Data collection..........................................................................................................49
3.3.1 The interviewers..................................................................................49
3.3.2 The fire affected community................................................................49
3.3.4 Negotiating entry.................................................................................51
3.3.5 The interviewees.................................................................................51
1.3.5.1 Demographic details of respondents............................................................53
3.3.6 Data gathering instruments.................................................................55
3.3.6.1 Service providers interviews.........................................................................55
3.3.6.2 Fire survivor interviews ................................................................................56
3.4 Data analysis............................................................................................................57
3.5 Involvement versus detachment in disaster research...............................................59
3.6 Reflexivity and validity..............................................................................................59
3.7 Ethical considerations..............................................................................................62
3.8 Conclusion ...............................................................................................................63
CHAPTER FOUR: PRE-EVENT ISSUES...............................................................64
4.1 Disaster Mitigation For Sustainable Livelihoods Programme...................................65
4.2 The evaluation of the fire mitigation programme in Joe Slovo informal settlement,
Cape Town.....................................................................................................................65
4.2.1 The Joe Slovo informal settlement and fire risk...................................65
4.2.2 The turning point – a national disaster.................................................66
4.2.3 The findings of the evaluation report...................................................67
vi
4.2.4 The challenges as identified in the evaluation report...........................68
4.2.5 Recommendations made by DiMP......................................................69
4.3 Pertinent pre-event issues raised in the DiMP and service provider interviews .......70
4.3.1 Issues related to the evaluation report.................................................70
4.3.2 Additional issues raised within the context of the interviews...............72
4.3.2.1 Cost versus benefit ......................................................................................72
4.3.2.2 Formalisation of the “informal”......................................................................72
4.3.2.3 The conceptualisation of “The Community”..................................................73
4.3.2.4 Political agendas and pressure....................................................................74
4.3.2.5 Monitoring fire risk in informal settlements...................................................75
4.4 Conclusion ...............................................................................................................76
CHAPTER FIVE: RESULTS – SERVICE PROVIDERS......................................77
5.1 The acute event .......................................................................................................77
5.1.1 Eyewitness accounts...........................................................................77
5.1.2 Powerlessness....................................................................................79
5.1.3 Group dynamics..................................................................................81
5.1.3.1 Management and politicians.........................................................................82
5.1.3.2 The service providers...................................................................................83
5.1.3.3 The survivors................................................................................................84
5.2 Post- event/the ongoing disaster..............................................................................86
5.2.1 Shifts in survivor behaviour as incident moves from an acute to an
ongoing disaster...........................................................................................87
5.2.2 Group dynamics..................................................................................88
5.2.2.1 Management and politicians.........................................................................89
5.2.2.2 The service providers...................................................................................90
Communication..................................................................................90
Privacy...............................................................................................90
Dependency ......................................................................................91
5.2.2.3 The survivors................................................................................................92
Communication..................................................................................92
Privacy...............................................................................................94
5.3 Conclusion ...............................................................................................................95
CHAPTER SIX: RESULTS - SURVIVORS.............................................................96
6.1 The acute event .......................................................................................................96
6.1.1 Individual responses to the acute event..............................................96
6.1.2 Community responses to the acute event...........................................98
6.1.3 Resource loss......................................................................................99
vii
6.1.4 Attributions relating to the fire............................................................100
6.1.5 Group dynamics................................................................................102
6.1.5.1 “Joe Slovo” and “The Zone” 102
6.2 The ongoing nature of this disaster........................................................................103
6.2.1 Group dynamics................................................................................103
6.2.1.1 Leadership Structures................................................................................104
6.2.1.1.1 Government/City of Cape Town........................................104
N2 Gateway Project...................................................104
Communication channels...........................................104
6.2.1.1.2 Informal community leadership structures........................107
6.2.1.2 The experience of being a survivor 108
6.2.1.2.1 Protection of resources.....................................................108
6.2.1.2.2 Dependence and paternalism...........................................111
6.2.1.2.3 Vulnerability and exposure................................................114
6.2.1.2.4 The dissolution of social fabric..........................................115
6.2.1.2.5 Diversity and difference....................................................119
Poverty.......................................................................119
Marital relationships...................................................121
Children......................................................................122
Religion......................................................................124
6.3 Concluding remarks...............................................................................................125
CHAPTER SEVEN: DISCUSSION ONE...............................................................127
7.1 General commentary..............................................................................................127
7.1.1 The acute versus chronic nature of disaster......................................127
7.1.2 The individual versus collective experience of disaster.....................129
7.2 The data and COR theory......................................................................................129
7.2.1 The definition of stress......................................................................129
7.2.2 Resource loss....................................................................................130
7.2.3 Principles and corollaries relating to COR theory..............................132
7.2.4 Resource loss in the tent villages......................................................136
7.2.5 Resource loss in Tygerberg Hostel ...................................................138
7.2.6 Identification of communities within communities..............................139
7.2.7 Pressure cooker effect.......................................................................141
7.2.8 Political processes and agendas.......................................................143
viii