IDASA Local Election Study 1995 - South Africa

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

The 1995 community elections were widely seen to be the closing chapter in South Africa's transition to democracy. These elections would provide citizens with a direct and equal voice in government at the most basic level. They were also seen as the vehicle which would restore to local government the legitimacy necessary to begin the process of reconstruction and development, as well as the authority to bring about law and order in areas where it had broken down. Until these elections, local government in towns and metropolitan areas had been fragmented, based on racially determined, apartheid “group areas”. There were virtually no formal structures of local government in rural areas. Whites (except those in rural areas) elected fully democratic councils to govern themselves. Since 1983, Coloured and Indian citizens were able to vote for local councils with limited powers under the Tricameral parliamentary structures. Africans living in Black townships inside “white” South Africa were legally able to vote for councillors to the “Black Local Authorities”. Local government in the “Black Local Authorities” and the local Tricameral structures in Coloured and Indian communities were constantly challenged. Rent and service boycotts, election stay-aways and physical intimidation of councillors left these governments barren of leaders, bankrupt and illegitimate. For Africans in the “national states” or “self-governing territories”, local government was even in greater disarray, with some urban areas having nominal local councils, and most rural areas being governed by a mixture of traditional leaders, regional services councils or development corporations.

The IDASA survey would provide first systematic evidence on individual attitudes toward the local government system in South Africa. The examination of the legitimacy of local government focused on four key areas: whether people felt local councils were in touch with public opinion; whether they felt able to influence local government; whether they trusted local councils to govern well; and whether they thought local councils were able to address key problems effectively.

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

The survey has national coverage.

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

Households and individuals

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

The survey covered all adult South Africans who were eligible to vote in the 1995 local election

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

Sample survey data

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

The sample was drawn using a multi-stage, clustered random probability sample disproportionately stratified by province, population group and community size (metro, city, large town, small town, village and rural).

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

Face-to-face [f2f]

{'Abstract': '1995年的社区选举普遍被视为南非向民主过渡的终章。此次选举赋予公民在政府最基本层面直接且平等的发声权。它也被视为恢复地方政府合法性的载体，从而开启重建与发展进程，并在法律和秩序崩溃的地区恢复治理权威。在此选举之前，城镇和都市地区的当地政府因基于种族划分的种族隔离“集团区域”而呈现分裂状态。农村地区实际上没有正式的当地政府结构。白人（除农村地区外）选举了完全民主的议会以自治。自1983年以来，有色人和印度公民能够在三院制议会结构下，为拥有有限权力的当地议会投票。居住在“白色”南非内部黑人镇区的非洲人能够合法地选举“黑人地方当局”的议员。在“黑人地方当局”以及有色人和印度社区的当地三院制结构中，地方政府始终面临挑战。租金和服务抵制、选举缺席以及议员遭受的身体恐吓，使得这些政府领导层匮乏、财政破产且缺乏合法性。对于居住在“国家州”或“自治领土”的非洲人而言，当地政府的混乱局面更为严重，一些城市地区拥有名义上的当地议会，而大多数农村地区则由传统领袖、地区服务委员会或发展公司混合治理。

IDASA的调查将为关于南非地方政府的个人态度提供首份系统性的证据。对地方政府合法性的审视集中在四个关键领域：民众是否觉得当地议会与公众舆论保持联系；民众是否觉得自己能够影响当地政府；民众是否信任当地议会有效地治理；以及民众是否认为当地议会能够有效解决关键问题。

地理覆盖范围：
---------------------------
调查具有全国覆盖范围。
分析单元：
---------------------------
家庭和个人
总体：
---------------------------
调查涵盖所有符合1995年地方选举投票资格的成年南非人
数据类型：
---------------------------
样本调查数据
抽样程序：
---------------------------
样本采用多阶段、分层随机概率抽样方法抽取，按省份、人口群体和社区规模（都市、城市、大城市、小镇、村庄和农村）进行不成比例的分层。
数据收集方式：
---------------------------
面对面 [f2f]'}