Skip to content

The Slow Pace of Desegregation in South African Cities, 1996–2001

Literature › Works

A. J. Christopher (2005). The Slow Pace of Desegregation in South African Cities, 1996–2001. Urban Studies, Vol. 42, No. 12. Sage / Urban Studies Journal Foundation.
Type journal article
Scope Post-1994 South African economy
Method descriptive quantitative
Period studied 1951–2001
Regions South Africa, Port Elizabeth, Free State, KwaZulu-Natal, Western Cape, Gauteng, former homelands
Themes demography urbanisation, transition post apartheid, inequality poverty unemployment, bantustans removals influx, methods data sources
Citation key christopher2005

Argument

Using 1996 and 2001 census enumeration-tract data, Christopher calculates Duncan-style indices of dissimilarity for hundreds of South African towns and shows that residential segregation has declined only marginally since the repeal of the Group Areas Act in 1991. White segregation remains extremely high, African patterns are shaped by growth of peripheral informal settlements, and only Coloured segregation has fallen significantly. The pace of integration slowed after an initial rush in the early 1990s. He explains this by housing inertia, limited mortgage finance and income inequality, state housing policy that extended apartheid-era town plans, the shift to GEAR, and gated enclaves. He tests Frey and Farley's US correlates of integration against South African towns and uses Port Elizabeth as a spatial case study.

Evidence and method

Unpublished 1996 and 2001 census enumeration-tract data by population group supplied by Statistics South Africa, aggregated to magisterial districts (257 urban areas). Port Elizabeth enumeration-area records 1951–70 and Statistics South Africa data for 1980–2001, plus 2001 placename data. Secondary literature on housing policy and post-apartheid cities. US comparison from Frey and Farley and Iceland et al. Statistical tests: Mann–Whitney U and Spearman rank correlation.

Findings

  • National median segregation indices fell only slightly for Africans and Whites; only Coloureds showed a significant break. (p. 6)

    the African median index of segregation declined from 87 to 84, while the White index declined from 94 to 92. Only the Coloured population experienced any significant break with the apartheid past

  • The rate of decline in segregation slowed relative to 1991–96. (p. 6)

    the rate of decline in the African, Coloured and Asian median index values was less than that experienced in the previous intercensal period

  • Very few urban areas showed significant White desegregation, 1996–2001. (p. 7)

    only 35 of the 247 urban areas for which comparable indices could be calculated

  • GEAR ended any large-scale state programme to reintegrate the cities. (p. 3)

    This effectively ended any attempt to implement far-reaching state-funded schemes to undo the apartheid city comparable in scale to the state enterprise which had been necessary for its creation.

  • Mortgage finance constraints and redlining kept most non-Whites from using their freedom to buy in former White areas. (p. 4)

    the limited availability of mortgage finance for low-income earners, small savings and redlining meant that the majority of Africans, Coloureds and Asians were unable to take advantage

  • Income inequality by race is large, limiting residential mobility (African household income R23 000 vs White R158 000 in 2000). (p. 18)

    the average annual African household income was R23 000, while that for Coloured households was R51 000, Asian households R85 000 and White households R158 000

  • Urban growth in South Africa reflects distress migration, not economic advancement, unlike the US, so growth does not drive integration. (p. 9)

    small towns have experienced substantial growth as a result of rural–urban migration by poor people, either evicted from commercial farms or unable to find their own land to farm

  • Port Elizabeth: a quarter of former White areas' population was no longer White by 2001, but few Whites moved into other areas. (p. 12)

    by that date 25 per cent of the population of the former White areas was no longer White. Indeed, in Central Port Elizabeth, the figure increased to 50 per cent.

  • Absolute numbers living in predominantly one-race areas increased even as percentages fell. (p. 14)

    The net result has been an increase in absolute numbers of those living in essentially mono-racial areas, although in relative terms the percentage declined for all four groups.

  • Whites remain the most segregated group yet the former White areas are where most desegregation occurs. (p. 14)

    the White population remains the most highly segregated population, yet it is the former White areas that have experienced the greatest degree of desegregation.