GeoJournal DOI 10.1007/s10708-015-9635-5

(Re)constructing rural–urban spaces: gendered livelihoods, migration, and natural resources in South Africa Ann M. Oberhauser

 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2015

Abstract Critical approaches to development theory and practice provide alternative perspectives that focus on counterhegemonic and discursive dimensions of the development process. Feminist development is one such approach that opens up new spaces and opportunities to promote socially progressive and sustainable economic strategies. This paper uses feminist development geography as a framework to highlight the intersection of diverse spaces and economic strategies at the household and community levels. The analysis focuses on gendered livelihoods that are linked to circular migration and use of natural resources as a way to understand the integration of rural and urban spaces of development. The empirical section of this paper examines demographic patterns and socio-economic trends in Limpopo Province, South Africa as a context for the case study of two community-based women’s producer groups. These examples illustrate how economic strategies and social identities are embedded in and integrate both rural and urban spaces. This analysis contributes to feminist and post-structural development theory and practice by highlighting the potential for progressive forms of economic and social empowerment. Keywords Feminist development
Rural–urban dynamics
Gendered livelihoods
South Africa A. M. Oberhauser (&) West Virginia University, Morgantown, WV, USA e-mail: [email protected]

Introduction Growing attention to rural–urban dynamics in development theory and practice represents efforts to deconstruct static and hierarchical boundaries between seemingly diverse areas (World Bank 2013). In particular, post-structural approaches to development aim to dismantle and challenge rural–urban boundaries by emphasizing the fluid and discursive socioeconomic processes across multiple scales (Bebbington 2000; Lipton 1977; Saunders 2004).1 This paper critiques the conventional construction of rural and urban spaces and provides an alternative framework that focuses on the intersection and social construction of these spaces. The analysis situates the connections among rural and urban spaces within feminist development geography as a means of contesting hegemonic and structural approaches to the development process. In particular, feminist perspectives provide a 1

Development is a complex and contested process with different theoretical approaches that have been applied to address social, economic, and spatial inequalities. This discussion focuses on the dual meanings of development as material actions and processes, as well as discourses about how development is constructed to support and critique different histories and power relations (see Lawson 2007 for a comprehensive discussion of the background to and theoretical frameworks within the field of development geography). In this paper, various terms are also used to depict how power relations and uneven development are manifest across multiple scales such as ‘developing region’, ‘developing world’, and ‘global North and South.’

123

GeoJournal

lens to analyze development from a counterhegemonic and post-structural viewpoint and promote progressive forms of empowerment across social and spatial boundaries (Beneria 2003; Parpart et al. 2002; Kabeer 1994; Saunders 2004). Kabeer (1994) and others expose the paradoxes of development through analyses of ‘‘the spaces and scales of development as multiple, intersecting and politically constructed;… and intersecting and multiple axes of identity, including gender, race, nationality and sexuality’’ (Lawson 2007:164). This discussion draws from these challenges to hegemonic Western development approaches as a way of illustrating the socio-spatial aspects of intersecting rural and urban spaces. The paper examines rural–urban dynamics through an empirical study of gendered livelihoods in one of the most rural areas in South Africa, Limpopo Province. Two decades after the dismantling of apartheid, rural people in this province remain largely impoverished and unable to engage in sustainable economic livelihoods (Lipton et al. 1996; King 2011). This marginalization of rural areas is partly due to neoliberal economic policies which have been implemented as a means of promoting commercial agriculture and capitalist forms of production (Musyoki and Tshatsinde 2012). Other rural development policies support efforts to improve social capital and infrastructure in rural communities (Bob 2001; Eastwood et al. 2006; Razavi 2002). For example, the SA Department of Rural Development and Land Reform was created in 2009 as a comprehensive rural development strategy to focus on ‘‘the persistent problem of poverty and food insecurity through the sustainable use of natural resources in rural communities’’ (Musyoki and Tshatsinde 2012: 198). This analysis addresses overlapping household and community scales within dynamic rural and urban spaces as a way of interrogating the effectiveness of these approaches to development. The geographies of development in South Africa are largely defined by social and economic deprivation in rural areas, alongside increasing investment in rapidly urbanizing areas. Conventional development discourses that stem from these hierarchical constructions of rural and urban spaces tend to ignore the dynamic intersections of socio-economic processes that are embedded in these areas (Hart 2002; Todes et al. 2010 ). Moreover, conventional approaches are based on neoliberal notions of development that urban

123

growth trickles down to rural areas. As many development scholars argue, however, social inequality and uneven development are a result of rapidly expanding cities, often at the expense of rural areas (Lemon 2000; Lipton 1977; Kessides 2007). The urban bias in conventional development discourse also tends to neglect alternative forms of livelihoods and entrepreneurship among marginalized populations such as women, the elderly, and rural communities (Beneria 2003; King 2011). This analysis uses feminist development geography to emphasize the intersection of rural and urban sociospatial processes in efforts to promote economically balanced and equitable growth for all South Africans. The historical and contemporary integration of rural and urban spaces in this country partly stems from processes influenced by gendered power relations and economic strategies at multiple scales (Walker 2009; Bob 2008; Meer 1997). In addition to gender, diverse social identities such as race and ethnicity, class, and age are implicated in the context of rural and urban dynamics (Bob 2001). The discussion examines how households and community-based livelihoods link rural and urban areas through circular migration and reliance on natural resources for economic activities. First, circular migration incorporates temporary and return movements of migrants from cities to their rural communities in contrast to more permanent migration of labourers away from their homes. These trends reflect an increasingly mobile population, partly as a result of improved infrastructure and the reinforced pattern of ‘split families’ common under the apartheid era influx control (Hall et al. 2013; Collinson et al. 2009). Second, the use of natural resources in rural economic strategies complements other sources of income that are part of the complex and intersecting nature of rural and urban spaces. In particular, households and communities are set within institutional, economic, and social parameters that affect control over and access to resources (King 2011; Shackleton et al. 2008). The following sections draw from this framework to situate rural–urban dynamics within communitybased livelihood strategies in a northern province of South Africa. In the second section, a feminist development approach is used to conceptualize gendered livelihoods and specifically their link to circular migration and natural resource use. Limpopo Province provides the context for a gendered analysis of

GeoJournal

demographic trends and household economic strategies in the third section. The empirical study of two women’s producer groups, a pottery cooperative and a stone crushing group, is presented in the fourth section. The discussion highlights how communitybased economic strategies are impacted by circular migration and their dependence on natural resources. The conclusion summarizes findings from this analysis and examines ways to reconstruct socio-spatial boundaries that pave the way for more equitable and sustainable development.

Conceptualizing gender and rural–urban spaces in South Africa Critical analyses of development include an interrogation of the social, economic, and political processes that impact the intersecting and often contested nature of diverse, yet intersecting spaces and scales (Lawson 2007; Bebbington 2000). As argued here, urban biases in many development approaches tend to overlook demographic shifts, environmental deterioration, resource extraction, and expanding socio-economic inequalities that partly stem from the integration of these rural and urban spaces (World Bank 2013). In his research on southern Africa, Lipton (1977) examines the disparities between rural and urban spaces, stating that the most important class conflict is between the rural and urban classes. He argues that rural poverty is linked to increasing commercialization of agricultural production and particularly how capitalist models of development marginalize food-purchasing labourers. Thus expanded agricultural production under a neoliberal approach represents one of the many contradictions of capitalism’s failure to support impoverished rural populations (Lipton 1977). Moreover, the emphasis on urbanization in mainstream development approaches also contributes to increased pressure on infrastructure and social services, as well as a deterioration of the overall livability of urban areas (Todes et al. 2010). In sum, this section outlines the framework for an alternative approach to development that recognizes these rural–urban processes and promotes economically viable and sustainable growth in diverse contexts.2 The remaining discussion 2

In this analysis, sustainable development refers to long term and equitable access to and use of resources. This approach is

in this section is organized into three themes concerning the integration of rural and urban spaces, namely gendered livelihoods, circular migration, and natural resource use. Gendered livelihoods For nearly three decades, literature on gender and livelihoods has examined social processes that shape household and community-based economic strategies in the context of shifting national and global political economies (Francis 2000; Bebbington 2000; Scoones 2009; Lipton et al. 1996). Many of these analyses, however, construct rural and urban areas as mutually exclusive, thus dismiss the socio-economic dynamics and overlapping aspects of these spaces. This discussion focuses on the gendered livelihood strategies that integrate these diverse spatial boundaries and scales. Livelihoods are defined here as the culturally and historically-embedded means for households and communities to produce and reproduce themselves. This discussion draws from work by Rakodi (2002), King (2011), Francis (2000), and others who examine income-generating activities, assets, and access to capital among both individuals and households. Rakodi (2002: 91), for example, argues that ‘‘the crucial determinants of households’ ability to achieve improved livelihoods are their access to assets and the effects of external conditioning variables that constrain or encourage the productive use or accumulation of such assets.’’ Furthermore, King (2011: 298) focuses on the spatial aspects of livelihoods whereby the ‘‘production and reproduction of livelihoods are interlinked with the processes producing and reproducing space.’’ Thus livelihoods are often linked to control or power in society that is influenced by gender, age, and other social identities or roles in households and communities (Francis 2000). More specifically, gendered livelihood strategies are embedded in power relations whereby women tend to have less control over income and expenditures for household and family needs (King 2007; Bob 2000). Footnote 2 continued applied to environmental sustainability, as well as social and economic sustainability in regards to how people develop strategies to cope with economic and environmental change. See Cruz-Torres and McElwee (2012) for a comprehensive discussion of sustainability within a gender and livelihoods framework.

123

GeoJournal

As Bob (2001: 191) states, in South Africa, ‘‘femaleheaded households in particular are generally economically insecure…’’ and ‘‘find it difficult to farm since they lack equitable access to the means of agricultural production such as land and cattle.’’ In this analysis, gendered livelihood strategies are central to socio-spatial aspects of the rural–urban connection.

in rural areas with significant outmigration are highly fluid and somewhat vulnerable in terms of gender roles and control over household resources (Collinson et al. 2006). The following discussion extends the analysis of rural–urban dynamics to the theme of gender and natural resources. Gender and natural resources

Circular migration Migration forms a critical dimension of livelihoods in many contexts, especially at the household level where family members often engage in income-generating activities in various locations. For example, in many rural areas, households have members who do not permanently reside in the primary household, but are part of a circular migrant labour system (Collinson et al. 2009). In this system, migrants often participate in economic activities in regional or national cities and send remittances to rural households (Todes et al. 2010). They are not necessarily permanent migrant labourers, but maintain economic and familial connections to rural households. Gender is an important dimension of these circular migration patterns. Since early periods of industrial growth, South Africa has been highly dependent on a migratory labour force, especially in mining and manufacturing industries which recruited males from rural areas and surrounding countries (Crush and James 1995). Both males and females have migrated to urban areas, often for different types of employment and with varied impacts on household economic strategies. In Limpopo Province, circular migration has mostly involved males who leave rural settings to work in mines and factories in Gauteng Province and return periodically to their homes (Collinson et al. 2006). Although remittances are a large part of household incomes, families and households are sometimes negatively impacted by outmigration with the loss of labour and sometimes unreliable and infrequent remittances. Rural–urban circular migration patterns also contribute to the lower economic status of female-headed households in rural areas (Chant 2008). These patterns are sometimes disrupted by the return of male family members, or, in some cases their failure to return to their rural households altogether. The precarious situations of households dependent on remittances from migrant labour contribute to financial uncertainty. Thus the incidence and status of female-headed households

123

This section explores the intersection of gender and natural resources as crucial components of development in rural contexts and in their links to urban markets. A key impact of rapid urbanization in developing regions is increasing pressure on the environment and related livelihoods in rural areas (World Bank 2013). For example, growing demand for energy and specifically the need for fuel in urban areas involves extraction of natural resources in rural areas. The deforestation of natural woodlands and production of charcoal as a source of energy for rapidly expanding urban areas have ravaged many rural landscapes in the developing world. Misana’s (2012) study of the decline of the Miombo woodlands in Eastern, Central, and Southern Africa demonstrates that erosion and destruction of forested and agricultural land is linked to the provision of energy for urban areas. This destruction negatively affects rural livelihoods, thus contributes to the cycle of rural outmigration to urban areas. Feminist analyses of livelihoods and natural resource use also focus on gendered aspects of the reliance of households and communities on natural products as sources of income (Resurreccion and Elmhirst 2008; King 2011; McCusker and Oberhauser 2006). Goebel (2002), for example, addresses the role of gender in environmental analyses with particular attention to cultural and social aspects of peoples’ relationship to nature. Her work shows that the use of medicines and herbs among women impact households in what she refers to as gendered social dynamics and relations regarding the environment. Additionally, Shackleton et al. (2008: 506) state that ‘‘trade in natural products may be one of the few accessible local income generating options available to the rural poor, and women in particular.’’ CruzTorres and McElwee (2012: 3) also recognize the role of gender in ‘‘creating long-term resource use strategies that could lead to more sustainable outcomes.’’ This reliance on natural products among women is

GeoJournal

seen as part of a broader effort to maintain sustainable livelihoods. Finally, this discussion addresses land reform and agricultural production as key aspects of natural resource use that have significantly affected the viability of rural areas throughout the developing world (Fraser 2008). In the case of South Africa, land reform has largely failed to redistribute land to those who are most deserving or in need of land for agricultural and other purposes (Musyoki and Khayesi 2012; Budlender et al. 2011; Ntsembeza and Hall 2007). Many scholars and policy-makers critique South Africa’s land policies for being too costly, corrupt, and subject to neoliberal market forces that marginalize impoverished populations (Hart 2002; Razavi 2002). As Musyoki and Tshatsinde (2012: 196) state, land reform ‘‘must be accompanied by appropriate measures for development of both farming and other livelihood activities for communities, thereby improving the socio-economic conditions of the rural poor.’’ Gender relations are directly linked to colonial and other legacies of natural resource use and land distribution which have denied women equal access to land and resources (Walker 2009). The role of customary law has in some ways negatively impacted on the process of land reform and often clashes with government regulation and policy. For instance, traditional customs tend to impede gender-balanced land redistribution because, according to many customary laws, women do not have the same rights as men in terms of land access and control (Bob 2008). Therefore, feminist scholars argue that land redistribution should examine control over land as well as legal access to property (Budlender et al. 2011). Overall, land reform that recognizes the role of gender and natural resources in convergent urban and rural spaces is crucial to balanced and sustainable development strategies. As outlined above, rural development is essential to achieving sustainable growth and economic viability in developing regions. Mainstream policy measures and practices, however, often focus on development with a bias towards urbanization and with limited understanding of how gender dynamics in rural households and communities are linked to urban processes (World Bank 2013). The overall approach in this paper centers on three themes that demonstrate the connection between urban and rural spaces from a feminist development perspective, specifically gendered livelihoods, circular migration, and natural resource use. Development strategies

that incorporate these themes will support rural and urban integration through socially equitable and economically viable strategies. The following sections provide a background discussion and empirical analysis that outline opportunities for women in rural South Africa in the form of community-based economic strategies.

Rural development policy and practice In South Africa, colonial and apartheid regimes of marginalization and discrimination against Black Africans have greatly impacted rural–urban development (Lipton et al. 1996; Ntsembeza and Hall 2007). In particular, the establishment of bantustans in rural and peripheral urban areas were part of a broad plan to create labour reserves for industry, mining, and commercial agriculture. Under this system, blacks were forced to live in areas with poor land, inadequate infrastructure, and a lack of other resources (King 2007; see the special issue of The South African Geographical Journal (2001) on ‘Bantustans’ for a comprehensive geographical and historical analysis of the background and transformation of these areas). In addition to these racial and class-based forms of marginalization and segregation during and after the apartheid era, gender has been a key social dynamic in rural economic livelihoods and labour mobility (Bob 2001; Meer 1997). As Rakodi (2002) and others argue, household dynamics continue to impact economic conditions and resource use in these areas. In particular, gender identities and power relations have laid the foundation for household livelihood strategies that are linked to circular migratory systems and access to resources in rural areas (Walker 2009). According to Todes et al. (2010), gender patterns have shifted in recent decades from predominantly male migration to the mining, industrial, and agricultural sectors to an increase in women migrating to urban areas. Many of the jobs women seek in urban areas are in domestic labour, informal markets, and other services that tend to be poorly paid and insecure. Although migration is still dominated by males, studies of labour migration and urbanization in South Africa show that women’s increased migration patterns have contributed to the split-up of households as child care is provided by elderly women or relatives in the rural areas (Posel 2003; Kok and Collinson 2006).

123

GeoJournal

The circular migration of males in particular is linked to the spread of HIV/AIDS in rural areas (Collinson et al. 2006). The separation of many men from their wives and families for long periods of time significantly affects the incidence and diffusion of this disease (King 2006). People in rural communities are especially impacted by the AIDS epidemic and often have fewer resources or health clinics to deal with this disease. Thus HIV/AIDS is devastating to many rural families, draining resources and labour that could be invested in productive activities. Finally, numerous government policies and practices illustrate the importance of rural development in alleviating poverty and redistributing land and natural resources. These measures comprise institutional efforts targeting rural development (King 2011). Many of these efforts, however, have not adequately addressed the intersection of rural and urban processes. As noted above, the establishment of the Department of Rural Development and Land Reform (DRDLR) in (2009) instituted the Comprehensive Rural Development Programme (CRDP) as a broad strategy aimed at land and agrarian reform as well as food security (Musyoki and Tshatsinde 2012). This revised approach to rural development is designed to improve access to resources among communities in order to create wealth and overcome inequalities. As stated in the DRDLR document, this program promotes ‘‘integrated development and social cohesion through participatory approaches in partnership with all sectors of the economy’’ (Ministry of Rural Development and Land Reform 2009: 3). The program also emphasizes expanding access to modern methods and technology as well as valuing indigenous knowledge of natural resources. A more recent version of this departmental policy focuses on entrepreneurship, the formation of cooperatives, local markets, and infrastructural improvements of facilities in rural areas (Musyoki and Tshatsinde 2012). Overall, a focus on rural development with attention to multiple aspects of livelihoods represents the potential to overcome urban bias in development strategies and effectively engage with the integration of rural and urban processes. This South African study illustrates the historical legacy of social and spatial inequality within the context of rural development strategies. As discussed here, gendered aspects of livelihoods that are linked to migration and natural resource use form the basis for often overlooked

123

intersections of rural and urban spaces. Communitybased livelihood strategies in particular are seen as viable means of generating income and developing social capital at local levels. The research design and background analysis of social and economic disparities in both Limpopo Province and South Africa are provided in the following section.

Researching gender and livelihoods: a South Africa case study This analysis draws from primary fieldwork that was conducted in 2001, 2002 and 2012 and secondary data collection on gendered livelihood strategies in Limpopo Province. Mixed methods employed in fieldwork include surveys, in-depth interviews, and participatory mapping of land use and livelihoods (Oberhauser 2014; McCusker and Oberhauser 2006). In addition, the analysis uses secondary data on economic livelihoods, rural development, and demographic patterns at both the provincial and national levels from South African government documents and the 2011 census. These mixed methods and multiple data sources provide information about how gendered livelihoods are linked to rural–urban migration patterns and natural resource use. Limpopo is one of the most rural provinces in South Africa with 89 % of the population living in rural areas (Statistics South Africa (SSA) 2012a). Some urban growth in this province is taking place in cities such as Mokopane, Polokwane, and Louis Trichardt along the N1 highway that connects Gauteng Province and South Africa’s northern border with Zimbabwe (Fig. 1). Much of this growth is attributed to peri-urban development whereby people migrate to urban and semi-urban areas to find housing, employment, and access to other services (Todes et al. 2010; Tsheola 2012). In addition to the migration of people from rural areas, this urban expansion reflects the influx of labour from neighboring countries in southern Africa such as Zimbabwe. The relatively impoverished status of Limpopo has its roots in racial segregation instituted during the colonial and apartheid eras. Limpopo Province is the home of three former bantustans (Venda, Gazankulu, and Lebowa) where concentrations of Black Africans remain crowded onto marginal land with overburdened services and infrastructure (Tsheola 2012). With 5.4 million people, Limpopo had approximately one tenth of South Africa’s overall population in 2011.

GeoJournal

Fig. 1 Location of community projects in Limpopo Province, South Africa

According to the UN Development Programme, Limpopo Province has one of the lowest Human Development Indices in South Africa, .59 compared to .67 in the country as a whole (Adelzadeh 2003). The economic status of Limpopo’s population also tends to lag behind the rest of the country. It has the lowest average household income in the country (R56,800 in Limpopo compared to R103,200 in South Africa; SSA 2012a). Finally, the majority of the province’s 38.9 % unemployed population is female. Formal and wellpaid employment is limited, therefore a significant proportion of the population depends on state welfare grants such as pensions and child support grants. In addition, remittances from migrant labour are a large source of cash income for many households. These social and economic indicators reveal the impoverished conditions and extreme vulnerability of the mostly rural population in this province. Similar to many developing and rural regions, the demographic profile of Limpopo Province reflects important trends concerning age and gender that link to household livelihood strategies. In 2011, 34 % of the provincial population was from 0 to14 years old, 60 % was from 15 to 64 years old and 6.3 % 65 years or older (SSA 2012a). In Fig. 2, the distribution of

population by age group and sex in 1996, 2001, and 2011 displays the youthful population in this province as well as the higher proportion of females 25 years and older starting in 2001. For example, the proportion of the total population that is female 60 years old and above is nearly double that of males for all years represented in this figure (SSA 2012a). In addition, the overall sex ratio of males to females in this province has increased slightly from 84 in 1996 to 88 in 2011 (SSA 2012b). Outmigration, combined with a higher proportion of males dying from HIV/AIDS than females, contributes to the demographic imbalance among older people in this country. According to the 2011 census, approximately one half of all households in Limpopo Province are headed by females (SSA 2012b). In addition, data show that 69 % of women are likely to never marry in Limpopo compared to 65 % in South Africa as a whole (SSA 2012b). The demographic and socio-economic conditions in this province are also related to circular migration patterns. As noted above, the loss of population in rural areas is largely attributed to lack of employment and other educational and social opportunities in these areas (Todes et al. 2010; Donaldson and Marais 2002). These patterns are evident in Fig. 3 which shows net

123

GeoJournal Fig. 2 Distribution of population in Limpopo Province by age group and sex, 1996, 2001, and 2011. Source: Statistics South Africa (2012a)

migration data by province in South Africa for three dates starting in 2001. During this period, Limpopo Province has experienced significant outmigration with a net loss of 401,300 people in 2001 and 259,100 in 2011 (SSA 2012a). In contrast, the most urbanized and populated province of Gauteng experienced a net migration of over 900,000 in 2001 and 566,800 in 2011. Provinces such as Limpopo suffered from the lack of jobs while Gauteng attracted people due to employment and the perception of an overall higher standard of living. Thus, circular migration among provinces continues to be highly uneven and often at the expense of rural provinces such as the Eastern Cape and Limpopo. Given the impoverished economic status and aging population in this province, women’s livelihoods are important to the survival of rural households. Numerous studies show increased dependence on multiple income sources for rural households, with remittances and pensions remain the largest source of income in Limpopo Province (McCusker and Carr 2006; Oberhauser and Pratt 2004; Oberhauser 2014; Eastwood et al. 2006). Furthermore, shifts in livelihood strategies are occurring alongside increasing commercialization and mechanization of agriculture that reduces overall employment in this sector (Hall et al. 2013; Todes et al. 2010). This decline in employment opportunities on commercial farms has expanded people’s reliance on subsistence agriculture and informal activities for livelihoods. Following this section on the research design and

123

background to gendered aspects of economic and demographic trends in Limpopo Province, the discussion turns to the case study of two women’s producer groups.

Women’s producer groups in Limpopo Province This section draws from feminist development geography to situate the construction of rural–urban intersections in the context of diverse and contested livelihoods that include circular migration and resource use. As argued above, feminist perspectives on the development process critically examine the impact of circular migration and natural resource use on household and community social relations and economic strategies. The following analysis focuses on two women’s producer groups as a way of illustrating the integration of rural and urban spaces through complex socio-economic processes. Specifically, a pottery cooperative and a stone crushing group represent gendered livelihood strategies that take place in a context of circular migration and rely on natural resources. As Shackleton et al. (2008: 506) note, economic activities that include natural products ‘‘may be one of the few accessible local income generating options available to the rural poor, and women in particular.’’ The incidence of households headed by women in this province make economic activities such as these important components of gendered livelihoods. This discussion highlights how

GeoJournal

Fig. 3 Net Migration by Province in South Africa, 2001, 2007, and 2011. Source: Statistics South Africa (2012a)

these livelihoods are linked to circular migration and activities that draw on natural resources for trade and subsistence. Mukondeni Pottery Cooperative The Mukondeni Pottery Cooperative is a communitybased organization with a relatively long history that has involved several generations of women in the Mashambe community. The cooperative originated as a community business in 1947 to provide economic security and means for household subsistence in the local area (Oberhauser 2001). A building which served as a workshop for this women’s cooperative was opened in 1998. Part of the funding for this structure was provided by the Limpopo provincial government. The organization currently produces pottery and ceramic water filters to sell in local and national markets through largely informal and small-scale marketing channels. The cooperative is run by an executive committee of five women elected by members of this organization. Much of the leadership and decisionmaking in the cooperative, however, are controlled by the district chief. This form of influence is not uncommon in rural areas of South Africa where customary laws and traditional forms of leadership

dictate control over and access to natural resources and development projects in the communities where tribal authorities are based. Membership in this cooperative is somewhat fluid depending on the availability of people and the need for income from this activity. Approximately fifteen female members ranging in age from 20 to 69 years belong to Mukondeni Pottery Cooperative. Many of the members are heads of households and depend on earnings from the cooperative when other income sources are not available. According to the women interviewed for this research, membership fluctuates depending on the availability of people and the need for income from this activity. Members also noted that weather and seasonality such as heavy rains and wind impede their production and sales at various times throughout the year (Oberhauser 2001). Raw materials for the pottery are mostly found in the surrounding area. For example, clay used to make the pots is gathered from land in surrounding areas and transported to the site of production. The members hire diggers who are usually family members or friends, and they also use trucks to carry the material from these sites to the workshop. Fire wood is also gathered from the vicinity to provide fuel for the outdoor ovens used to bake and cook the clay pots

123

GeoJournal

(Fig. 4). The cooperative purchased an electric kiln through a grant from the provincial development office in the early 2000s. Unfortunately, the kiln does not always work due to mechanical problems and electrical shortages, therefore, they continue to use open fire pits to bake the clay pots. Additional materials such as graphite used for designs on the pottery are purchased from local vendors. The group has diversified their production process in recent years from making clay pots to also producing ceramic water filters. The production of ceramic water filters involves a significant shift in the process of mixing and firing the clay. Specifically, the process requires stone casts, wood frames, sawdust, and other materials to produce clay insets for the water pails (Fig. 5). This diversification came about partly as a response to local demand for filtered water and was facilitated by a partnership between the cooperative and two universities. A group of researchers connected to the University of Venda and the University of Virginia is working with members of the Muondeni Pottery Cooperative to develop and manufacture these filters (Mudao et al. 2013). The project’s goals include ‘‘empowering the women to learn new technologies, educating the community about the importance of household water quality, and … to revive the economic stability of the Cooperative by creating a sustainable business’’ (Mudao et al. 2013). The universities’ staff and students are working alongside members of the cooperative and local municipalities to implement measures directed at these goals. The cooperative is still perfecting the production of the water filters, and it remains to be seen how this will

Fig. 5 Ceramic Water Filters at Mukondeni Pottery Cooperative. Source: fieldwork, photo by author, 2012

become a viable source of income for the cooperative and to meet the water needs of local villagers. Finally, members of this cooperative are primarily engaged in this activity to generate income for their households and to take advantage of social networks in the community. Several women stated that they are heads of household and depend on this income for survival, as well as revenue from state grants such as child support and old age pensions. Much of this economic need stems from their positions as single heads of households. Several women reported that they have partners who migrate to urban areas and fail to provide consistent sources of income. Finally, members acknowledge additional benefits of participating in the cooperative such as networking, support for child and elder care, and other social activities. Tshandama Community Stone Crushing Project

Fig. 4 Wood-Burning Clay Oven at Mukondeni Pottery Cooperative. Source: Fieldwork, photo by author, 2002

123

The second producer group discussed here is a stone crushing organization, the Tshandama Stone Crushing project, which produces gravel from stones gathered in local river beds. The group was established in 2000, but did not become fully active until 2002. Forty-three women joined to form the original project which led to the development of a constitution and business plan. The chief and traditional authorities have played a role in this organization since its establishment. As described by the members, the project was introduced to the community by the chief who granted requests by those interested in joining the group. The manager of the project is a man selected by the chief but voted on

GeoJournal

by members of the project. In turn, women who join are expected to contribute 10 Rand.3 Thirty-one women were members of the group in 2002 which continued to be run by the local chief through the male manager. This situation reflects larger institutional control and access to resources that are embedded in larger socio-economic processes and political economies (King 2011). Rudimentary tools such as hand-held hammers were used by the women to crush the rock (Fig. 6). Members of the group complained about the difficulties using their worn out tools to crush the stones. This low-skilled operation was dependent on local resources for production of the stones. When questioned about the production process during the fieldwork, the members stated that they are saving towards the purchase of a stone crushing machine which costed approximately R56,000 (approximately $9333 in 2002). They had saved R15,000 at that time, but only earn about R2000 per month. At that point, the group members were not receiving any individual income from the project (Oberhauser 2002). They have dreams of not only purchasing a machine, but building an office and obtaining electricity, wheel barrows, fences, and a delivery truck for hauling the gravel to markets. According to the participants, the primary markets for the gravel and other stones were local households and construction companies. One such market was construction of the government-provided Reconstruction and Development Programme (RDP) housing built between 1994 and 2001 as a means of accommodating the high demand for cheap housing in the early post-apartheid era. During the 2002 fieldwork, members acknowledged that this work was very labour intensive and time consuming without many financial rewards. In response to questions about the local economy and livelihoods, women described other income-generating activities such as brewing traditional beer, collecting and selling firewood, and receiving pensions from grandparents and parents. They stated that men build houses, do thatch work, and cut wood for fencing (Oberhauser 2002). Overall, income from the producer group was not enough to support their households. Eventually, competition from large-scale mechanized gravel production made it unsustainable for this group 3

The currency exchange rate in 2002 was approximately six Rand to one US dollar.

Fig. 6 Members of Tshandama Stone Crushing project. Source: fieldwork, photo by author, 2002

to continue to operate their business. The group was no longer functioning in 2012. In sum, these female producer groups in Limpopo represent important economic strategies that, in some cases, supplement household income. Their activities, however, are vulnerable to high turnover among members and to competition for their goods and services. In the case of the stone crushing group, the mechanization of stone crushing from local producers drove them out of business. They were unable to generate enough revenue or obtain grants or loans for machinery. In contrast, the pottery cooperative has benefitted from external assistance in diversifying their production to include ceramic water filters for local use. In addition, the producer groups in this analysis are dependent on natural resources and thus must address income generation and environmentally sustainable business practices. These groups demonstrate how rural livelihoods must adjust their strategies to accommodate changing resource use, institutional parameters, and household labor dynamics. Gender roles and access to natural resources also demonstrate how these activities are connected to urban-based markets for their goods. Thus producer groups and other community-based livelihoods are related to urban socio-spatial processes and opportunities that draw from migrant labor and intersect with rural household strategies. Overall, alternative and gendered economic activities such as those discussed in this analysis are an important part of livelihoods. Women’s economic livelihoods are often flexible and give people more autonomy and less dependence on other sources of income that include remittances and state grants

123

GeoJournal

(Shackleton et al. 2008). They are, however, also highly vulnerable to competition, mismanagement, and a lack of resources, as seen with the stone crushing group. Moreover, economic activities involving natural products have increased due to a shift in formal employment opportunities and especially the retrenchment of workers in commercial agriculture (Hall et al. 2013). Other factors contributing to the rising importance of women’s economic activities include the impact of HIV/AIDS on households and the additional burden on women as caretakers. Finally, given the increase in rural households headed by women, especially among older segments of the population, this research demonstrates that support for these economic strategies is essential to their success.

Conclusion: gender and sustainable rural–urban development Development approaches that construct rural areas as distinct from urban areas overlook the fluid and dynamic intersection of socio-spatial and economic processes. Feminist development geography provides a critical approach to development that challenges these binaries and engages with the integration of multiple scales and seeks to empower marginal voices and practices. This paper examines the intersection of rural and urban spaces through a focus on dynamic gendered livelihoods at the household and community scales to demonstrate the diverse, yet connected dimensions of these practices. The discussion articulates three themes that represent these rural–urban dynamics, namely livelihoods, circular migration, and natural resource use that are situated in a rural region of South Africa. Limpopo Province is one of the most rural areas of South Africa, yet it is impacted by urbanization trends through circular labour migration, markets for goods and services, and use of natural resources. Gendered livelihoods underlie many of these dynamics, as illustrated by the household and community-based economic strategies that intersect with circular migration and natural resource use in this province. The demographic shifts reveal a growing trend in female heads of household, especially among elderly women, that are linked to circular labour migration of men to urban areas (Collinson et al. 2009). Given these migration patterns, HIV/AIDS has also affected many

123

households and communities in rural areas with the loss of male migrant labourers, increased risk to their rural partners, and extra caretaking burdens on household members. Therefore, household economic strategies are related to women’s livelihoods that fluctuate and in some cases become more diversified with shifting labour demands and sources of revenue. In turn, the gendered livelihoods highlighted in this discussion draw from local natural resource use that is embedded in institutional power relations such as chieftancies and traditional customary laws. The empirical study of two women’s producer groups from the Limpopo Province exemplifies many of the rural–urban dynamics emphasized in the approach outlined here. This analysis also provides a conceptual framework and recommendations for specific measures to overcome barriers to sustainable development. These recommendations are designed to incorporate the intersection of rural and urban socio-economic processes and are applicable to not only the South African context, but similar livelihood strategies in developing contexts. First, development of and investment in rural employment and enterprises should support women’s contributions to household and community-based livelihoods. This assistance will empower women and rural communities that often depend on remittances from circular migration and state grants for children and pensioners. In addition, rural development measures need to expand women’s access to loans, training, markets, and legal rights to land and other natural resources (Bob 2008; Budlender et al. 2011; Walker 2009). Both of the producer groups highlighted in this analysis have the potential to benefit from these types of support. Based on findings from this research, training members of the pottery group in financial planning, marketing, and other management skills, for example, would aid in the growth of this cooperative. Likewise, the stone crushing group was limited in its ability to produce gravel partly due to the rudimentary tools they used to crush the stones and overall lack of resources for their business. Government assistance in purchasing stone crushing machines could have possibly prevented this project from closing by providing sufficient capital to keep it operating and to compete with larger and more mechanized producers of gravel. Finally, state and provincial government, non-governmental organizations, and traditional authorities need

GeoJournal

to coordinate efforts to develop and maintain livelihoods and land reform that benefit South Africans and other rural areas in the global South. These efforts should counter the negative impacts of neoliberal approaches that focus on free market enterprises and export-oriented agricultural development. This situation has contributed to increasing unemployemtn among farm workers and further marginalization of rural households (Hall et al. 2013). Moreover, the Comprehensive Rural Development Programme and other rural development policies implemented by the South African government should address social inequalities in rural areas and redress the urban bias of economic strategies. In conclusion, feminist development geography and other critical approaches that recognize gender dynamics in households and community-based livelihood strategies will make important strides in achieving integrated and sustainable rural–urban development. Acknowledgments The author would like to thank colleagues who have participated in this research project at various stages. Agnes Musyoki, Virginia Maimela, Josephine Mudau, Madzinghe Nembudani, Marubini Ramudzuli and Amy Pratt provided invaluable research assistance. Brian King and an anonymous reviewer gave useful comments on earlier versions of the manuscript. Derek Springston applied his cartographic skills to produce the map. This project was supported by generous funding from the National Science Foundation (#SBR 9906626) and the Fulbright Program.

References Adelzadeh, A. (2003). South Africa Human Development Report 2003. Cape Town: Oxford University Press. Bebbington, A. (2000). Reencountering development: Livelihood transition and place transformation in the Andes. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 90(3), 495–520. Beneria, L. (2003). Gender, development and globalization: Economics as if all people mattered. New York: Routledge. Bob, U. (2000). Gender, the role of the chieftaincy and rural women’s access to land under the land reform program in KwaZulu-Natal. Alternation, 7(2), 48–66. Bob, U. (2001). The intersection of gender, race and class: The socio-economic and spatial implications of differentiation in the former homelands of South Africa. South African Geographical Review, 83(3), 190–197. Bob, U. (2008). Rural women’s relation to land resources in KwaZulu-Natal: Issues of Access and Control. Alternation, 15(1), 110–134. Budlender, D., Mgweba, S., Motsepe, K., & Williams, L. (2011). Women, land and customary law. Johannesburg: Community Agency for Social Enquiry.

Chant, S. (2008). The ‘feminisation of poverty’ and the ‘feminisation of anti-poverty’ programmes: Room for revision? Journal of Development Studies, 44(2), 165–197. Collinson, A. M., Gerritsen, A. A. M., Clark, S. J., Kahn, K., & Tollman, M. S. (2009). Migration and socio-economic change in rural South Africa, 2000–2007. In M. Collinson, K. Aduzu, M. White, & S. Findley (Eds.), The dynamics of migration, health and livleihoods: INDEPTH network perspectives (pp. 81–108). England: Ashgate Publishing Ltd. Collinson, M., Wolff, B., Tollman, S. M., & Kahn, K. (2006). Trends in internal labour migration from rural Limpopo Province, male risk behavior, and implications for the spread of HIV/AIDS in rural South Africa. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 32(4), 633–648. Crush, J., & James, W. (Eds.). (1995). Crossing boundaries: Mine migrancy in a democratic South Africa. Cape Town: David Phillip. Cruz-Torres, M. L., & McElwee, P. (2012). Gender and sustainability: Lessons from Asia and Latin America. Tucson, AZ: University of Arizona Press. Donaldson, R., & Marais, L. (Eds.). (2002). Transforming rural and urban spaces in South Africa during the 1990s: Reform, restitution, restructuring. Pretoria: Africa Institute of South Africa. Eastwood, R., Kirsten, J., & Lipton, M. (2006). Premature deagriculturalisation? Land inequality and rural dependency in Limpopo Province, South Africa. Journal of Development Studies, 42(8), 1325–1349. Francis, E. (2000). Making a living: Changing livelihoods in rural Africa. London: Routledge. Fraser, A. (2008). Geography and land reform. The Geographical Review, 98(3), 309–321. Goebel, A. (2002). Gender, environment and development in South Africa. Canadian Journal of Development Studies, 23(2), 293–316. Hall, R., Wisborg, P., Shirinda, S., & Zamchiya, P. (2013). Farm workers and farm dwellers in Limpopo Province, South Africa. Journal of Agrarian Change, 13(1), 47–70. Hart, G. (2002). Disabling globalization: Places of power in post-apartheid South Africa. Berkeley, CA: University of Berkeley Press. Kabeer, N. (1994). Reversed Realities. Gender Hierarchies in Development Thought. London: Verso. Kessides, C. (2007). The urban transition in Sub-Saharan Africa: Challenges and opportunities. Environment and Planning C, 25(4), 466–485. King, B. H. (2006). Placing Kangwane in the new South Africa. The Geographical Review, 96(1), 79–96. King, B. H. (2007). Developing KaNgwane: Geographies of segregation and integration in the new South Africa. The Geographical Journal, 173(1), 13–25. King, B. (2011). Spatialising livelihoods: Resource access and livelihood spaces in South Africa. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 36(2), 297–313. Kok, P., & Collinson, M. (2006). Migration and urbanization in South Africa. Pretoria: Statistics South Africa. Report 03-04-02. Lawson, V. (2007). Making development geography. London: Hodder Arnold.

123

GeoJournal Lemon, A. (2000). Urbanization and urban forms. In R. Fox & K. Rowntree (Eds.), The geography of South Africa in a changing world (pp. 186–210). Oxford: Oxford Press. Lipton, M. (1977). Why poor people stay poor: Urban bias in world development. London: Temple Smith. Lipton, M., Ellis, F., & Lipton, M. (1996). Land, labour and livelihoods in rural South Africa (Vol. 2: KwaZulu-Natal and Northern Province). University of Natal: Indicator Press. McCusker, B., & Carr, E. R. (2006). The co-production of livelihoods and land use change: Case studies from South Africa and Ghana. Geoforum, 37(5), 790–804. McCusker, B., & Oberhauser, A. M. (2006). An assessment of women’s access to natural resources through communal projects in South Africa. GeoJournal, 66(4), 325–339. Meer, S. (Ed.). (1997). Women, land and authority: perspectives from South Africa. Braamfontein: National Land Committee. Ministry of Rural Development and Land Reform (2009). The comprehensive rural development programme framework. Retrieved 20 February 2015. http://www.ruraldevelopment. gov.za/phocadownload/Strategic-Plan/Strategic_Plan_2009_ 2012.pdf Misana, S. (2012). Transformation and decline of Miombo Woodlands in Eastern Tanzania. In A. Musyoki & M. Khayesi (Eds.), Environment and development: Selected themes from eastern and southern Africa (pp. 76–98). Botswana: Bay Publishing. Mudao, J., Schmidt, R., Smith, J., & Dillingham, R. (2013). ‘‘Mukondeni ceramic water filter business.’’ In Conference paper, Global University Network for Innovation (GUNI). Barcelona, Spain. Retrieved 20 February 2015. http://www. guninetwork.org/guni.conference/2013-guni-conference/ mukondeni-ceramic-water-filter-business Musyoki, A., & Khayesi, M. (Eds.). (2012). Environment and development: Selected themes from eastern and southern Africa. Botswana: Bay Publishing. Musyoki, A., & Tshatsinde, T. M. (2012). Land Reform Policy and Rural Development in South Africa. In A. Musyoki & M. Khayesi (Eds.), Environment and development: Selected themes from eastern and southern Africa (pp. 180–204). Botswana: Bay Publishing. Ntsembeza, L., & Hall, R. (Eds.). (2007). The land question in South Africa: The challenge of transformation and redistribution. Cape Town: HSRC Press. Oberhauser, A. M. (2001). Fieldnotes. Mashamba, South Africa. July 2001. Oberhauser, A. M. (2002). Fieldnotes. Tshandama, South Africa. July 2002. Oberhauser, A. M. (2014). Crossing boundaries: transnational feminist methodologies in the global North and South. In A. M. Oberhauser & I. Johnston-Anumonwo (Eds.), Global

123

perspectives on gender and space: Engaging feminism and development (pp. 87–102). New York: Routledge Press. Oberhauser, A. M., & Pratt, A. (2004). Women’s collective economic strategies and political transformation in rural South Africa. Gender, Place and Culture, 11(2), 209–228. Parpart, J., Rai, R., & Staudt, K. (2002). Rethinking empowerment: Gender and development in a global/local world. New York: Routledge. Posel, D. (2003). Have migration patterns in post-apartheid South Africa changed? In Paper presented at the Conference on African Migration in Comparative Perspective, Johannesburg, 4–7 June 2003. Rakodi, C. (2002). A livelihoods approach – conceptual issues and definitions. In C. Rakodi & T. Lloyd-Jones (Eds.), Urban livelihoods: A people-centered approach to reducing poverty (pp. 3–23). London: Earthscan Publications. Razavi, S. (Ed.). (2002). Shifting burdens: Gender and agrarian change under neoliberalism. Bloomfield, CT: Kumarian Press. Resurreccion, B. P., & Elmhirst, R. (Eds.). (2008). Gender and natural resource management: Livelihoods, mobility and interventions. London: Earthscan. Saunders, K. (Ed.). (2004). Feminist post-development thought: Rethinking modernity, post-colonialism and representation. London: Zed Books. Scoones, I. (2009). Livelihoods perspectives and rural development. The Journal of Peasant Studies, 36(1), 171–196. Shackleton, S., Campbell, B., Lotz-Sisitka, H., & Shackelton, C. (2008). Links between local trade in natural products, livelihoods and poverty alleviation in a semi-arid region of South Africa. World Development, 36(3), 505–526. Statistics South Africa. (2012a). Census 2011 provinces as a glance. Pretoria: Statistics South Africa. Statistics South Africa. (2012b). Census 2011 municipal report—Limpopo. Pretoria: Statistics South Africa. The South African Geographical Journal (2001). Bantustans 83(3). The World Bank (2013). Developing countries need to harness urbanization to achieve the MDGs: IMF-World Bank report’, The World Bank Group. Retrieved 20 February 2015. http://www.worldbank.org/en/news/press-release/2013/04/ 17/developing-countries-need-to-harness-urbanization-toachieve-mdgs-imf-world-bank-report Todes, A., Kok, P., Wentzel, M., Van Zyl, J., & Cross, C. (2010). Contemporary South African urbanization dynamics. Urban Forum, 21(3), 331–348. Tsheola, J. (2012). Rural women’s survivalist livelihoods and state interventions in Ga-Ramogale Village, Limpopo Province. African Development Review, 24(3), 221–232. Walker, C. (2009). Elusive equality: Women, property rights and land reform in South Africa. South African Journal on Human Rights, 25(3), 467–490.