Community-Level Social Dynamics Survey 2016-2017 - South Africa

Abstract
---------------------------

Freedom House South Africa commissioned Social Surveys Africa to implement the Community Level Social Dynamics Survey. The survey was designed to support the intervention "Combatting Drivers of Xenophobic Violence programme," implemented by Freedom House South Africa and partners in 16 communities across South Africa. The survey in ten communities aimed to improve understanding of the factors contributing to social cohesion. It was part of a larger research programme which included in-depth qualitative case studies of all 16 communities.

Geographic coverage
---------------------------

The survey covered 10 communities in 6 provinces (Eastern Cape, Gauteng, Kwa-Zulu Natal, Limpopo, North West and Western Cape) in South Africa.

Analysis unit
---------------------------

Households and individuals

Universe
---------------------------

The survey enumerated residents in the 10 communities aged 18+

Kind of data
---------------------------

Sample survey data

Sampling procedure
---------------------------

The sample sites for the Freedom House Social Cohesion Survey 2016-2017 were drawn from the Combatting Drivers of Xenophobic Violence programme that had been running since March 2016.
The programme was conducted in 16 sites in 6 provinces (Eastern Cape, Gauteng, Kwa-Zulu Natal, Limpopo, North West and Western Cape) in South Africa, and is guided by Freedom House's working model of what is likely to lead to an 'at-risk' community.
The initial survey design was to conduct the same survey instrument as a baseline and endline 12 months apart in the same 5 sites in order to:
a) Inform the intervention to be conducted by the local MXV implementing partner peace building teams, and
b) Evaluate whether the intervention had had an effect.

The sites were selected purposively by FH in consultation with SSA. The sites were chosen to encapsulate the various contexts in terms of settings, that is, types of settlements (rural, peri-urban and urban) and geographical spread across provinces.
After the completion of the first phase in mid-2016 the design was changed so that the second phase would be implemented in five new sites rather than returning to the same sites. This was because:
a) The timing of the intervention and the study: the intervention had already been active for a longer period, so the survey field work could not be taken as a baseline
b) The timeframe of measuring impact would have to be longer than 12 months
c) Phase 1 field work took place just before local government elections, which is a very particular period in which to ask community residents about political participation and perceptions, so findings would not be comparable with other periods of time.

The total sample of sites was therefore 10 out of the 16 possible intervention sites.
Within each broad intervention site, specific wards or sections of wards were purposively sampled by FHSA, as shown in Table 1, based on the following criteria:
• Areas where the intervention was taking place
• Areas representing a diversity of settlement types within the site, e.g. informal and formal housing areas; areas with predominantly Black or 'Coloured' residents; commercial farming areas, township areas and formal 'town' areas.
• Excluding extremely dangerous or hard to access sites, such as the Glebeland Hostel in Durban South.

Mode of data collection
---------------------------

Face-to-face [f2f]

摘要
---------------------------
自由之家南非委托非洲社会调查机构实施社区级社会动态调查。该调查旨在支持由自由之家南非及其合作伙伴在南非16个社区实施的‘对抗种族主义暴力驱动因素计划’。在十个社区的调查中，旨在加深对促进社会凝聚力的因素的理解。这是更大规模研究项目的一部分，包括对16个社区的所有社区进行深入的定性案例研究。
地理覆盖范围
---------------------------
调查覆盖了南非6个省份（东开普省、豪登省、夸祖鲁纳塔尔省、林波波省、北西省和西开普省）的10个社区。
分析单位
---------------------------
家庭和个人
总体
---------------------------
调查对10个社区的18岁及以上居民进行了登记。
数据类型
---------------------------
样本调查数据
抽样程序
---------------------------
自由之家2016-2017年社会凝聚力调查的样本点是从自2016年3月运行的‘对抗种族主义暴力驱动因素计划’中抽取的。
该计划在南非6个省份（东开普省、豪登省、夸祖鲁纳塔尔省、林波波省、北西省和西开普省）的16个地点进行，其指导原则是自由之家关于可能导致‘风险社区’的运作模型。
最初的调查设计是在相同的5个地点，相隔12个月进行相同的调查工具，以：
a) 为当地MXV实施伙伴的和平建设团队提供干预措施的信息，
b) 评估干预措施是否产生了影响。
地点是由FH在与社会调查非洲（SSA）协商后有意选择的，以涵盖各种背景，即居住地类型（农村、郊区和城市）以及省份间的地理分布。
2016年中完成第一阶段后，设计进行了更改，以便第二阶段将在五个新的地点实施，而不是返回到相同的地点。这是因为：
a) 干预措施和研究的时机：干预措施已经活跃了较长时间，因此调查现场工作不能作为基线，
b) 测量影响的时限必须长于12个月，
c) 第一阶段的现场工作恰好在地方选举之前进行，这是一个非常特殊的时期，询问社区居民的政治参与和看法，因此发现结果与其他时间段不可比。
因此，总样本点为16个可能的干预地点中的10个。
在每个广泛的干预地点内，自由之家南非（FHSA）根据以下标准有意选择了特定的地区或地区部分，如表1所示：
• 干预措施实施的地区，
• 代表地点内不同居住地类型的地区，例如，非正式和正式住房区；以黑人或‘有色人种’居民为主的地区；商业农业区、城镇区和正式‘城镇’区。
• 排除极度危险或难以进入的地点，如德班南部的Glebeland招待所。
数据收集方式
---------------------------
面对面（f2f）