ID S EVIDENCE REPORT No 118 Empowerment of Women and Girls Turning the Tide: The Role of Collective Action for Addressing Structural and Gender-based Violence in South Africa Elizabeth Mills, Thea Shahrokh, Joanna Wheeler, Gill Black, Rukia Cornelius and Lucinda van den Heever February 2015 The IDS programme on Strengthening Evidence-based Policy works across seven key themes. Each theme works with partner institutions to co-construct policy-relevant knowledge and engage in policy-influencing processes. This material has been developed under the Empowerment of Women and Girls theme. Input was provided by Sonke Gender Justice and the Sustainable Livelihoods Foundation (SLF). The authors would also like to acknowledge review on this publication from Lyndsay McLean Hilker, Pauline Oosterhoff and Jerker Edström. The material has been funded by UK aid from the UK Government, however the views expressed do not necessarily reflect the UK Government’s official policies. AG Level 2 Output ID: 118 TURNING THE TIDE: THE ROLE OF COLLECTIVE ACTION FOR ADDRESSING STRUCTURAL AND GENDER-BASED VIOLENCE IN SOUTH AFRICA Elizabeth Mills,a Thea Shahrokh,a Joanna Wheeler,b Gill Black,b Rukia Corneliusc and Lucinda van den Heeverc Institute of Development Studies, UK Sustainable Livelihoods Foundation, South Africa c Sonke Gender Justice, South Africa a b February 2015 This is an Open Access publication distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are clearly credited. First published by the Institute of Development Studies in February 2015 © Institute of Development Studies 2015 IDS is a charitable company limited by guarantee and registered in England (No. 877338). Contents Acknowledgements Partner information Abbreviations Executive summary 3 4 5 6 1 Introduction 10 2 Conceptual framework 2.1 Theoretical and policy approaches to SGBV 2.1.1 International policy and definitions of SGBV 2.1.2 Theoretical approaches to SGBV 2.2 Structural violence and hegemonic masculinities 2.3 Collective action and structural change 11 11 11 11 12 13 3 Research background 3.1 Policy context 15 16 4 Research focus 18 5 Research methodology 5.1 Research methods 5.1.1 Digital storytelling and power analysis 5.1.2 Key informant interviews 5.1.3 Policy engagement 5.2 Ethical considerations 5.3 Analytical methodology 5.4 Study limitations 19 19 19 20 21 21 21 22 6 Research findings 6.1 Structural inequality and SGBV 6.1.1 Legacies of inequality shape contemporary experiences of violence 6.1.2 Discriminatory judicial systems and the limits of law enforcement 6.1.3 Social norms and institutions that fuel gender inequality and violence 6.2 Collective action to address SGBV 6.2.1 Forms and functions of collective action in communities 6.2.2 Building personal power in spaces of safety and belonging 6.2.3 Personal agency and empowerment to effect change 6.2.4 Networked ways of working for gender justice 6.2.5 National advocacy and accountability for gender justice 6.3 Lessons for and limitations to collective action to address SGBV 6.3.1 Recognising constraints to engaging men for gender justice 6.3.2 Funding and resource allocation 23 23 23 24 7 Discussion 36 8 Conclusion 40 26 27 28 29 31 31 33 34 34 35 1 9 Policy and practice recommendations 9.1 Citizens’ initiatives and social activism 9.2 Civil society partnerships 9.3 Government institutions 9.4 International community 41 41 41 41 41 Annex 1 Map of community activists’ engagement in the research 43 Annex 2 Key informant interview schedule 45 Annex 3 Participatory and qualitative consent forms 47 Annex 4 Analytical framework 49 References Boxes Box 6.1 Vee’s story 51 31 2 Acknowledgements The authors would like to acknowledge the resources and energy contributed by the South African organisations involved in this project; without their exceptional levels of commitment over and above the scope of this work it would not have been possible. We would also like to express our deepest appreciation of the 11 community activists for their conviction and for sharing their stories so powerfully and openly. Thank you to the reviewers of this paper for generously giving your time and input: Lyndsay McLean Hilker, Pauline Oosterhoff and Jerker Edström. Sustainable Livelihoods Foundation (SLF) colleagues provided invaluable research support throughout this process. Bathulile Ntshingila co-facilitated the digital storytelling (DST) and collective power analysis workshops and provided translation support for both. Mzodidi Tutuka co-facilitated the DST workshop and assisted with the translation and subtitling of the stories. Becky Hillier assisted with documentation of the DST and collective power analysis workshops. Cebisa Fubesi provided translation support throughout the DST process. The team at SLF also provided exceptional logistical support during the community engagement processes. Furthermore, colleagues at Sonke Gender Justice worked collaboratively and with great commitment throughout. Keegan Lakay provided support during the facilitation of the community engagement and stakeholder dialogue processes. Rodney Fortuin supported the digital storytelling process and provided excellent guidance and coordination in setting up the research interviews in the Matzikama area. 3 Partner information Sustainable Livelihoods Foundation The Sustainable Livelihoods Foundation (SLF) is an agency based in Cape Town that seeks to contribute towards eliminating poverty through undertaking original research and engaging with marginalised communities. The organisation aims to advance innovative policies and development interventions in order to strengthen livelihoods within the townships and informal settlements of South Africa. SLF recognises that within these settings, the insecurities facing women and girls reflect widespread vulnerabilities that undermine their capacity to engage in economic activity, affect their citizenship and democratic participation, and constrict their active involvement in the public sphere, including leisure activities. Sonke Gender Justice Sonke Gender Justice (Sonke) works to create the change necessary for men and boys, women and children to enjoy equitable, healthy and happy relationships that contribute to the development of just and democratic societies. Sonke pursues this goal by using a human rights framework. Sonke works across Africa to strengthen government, civil society and citizen capacity to promote gender equality, prevent domestic and sexual violence, and reduce the spread and impact of HIV and AIDS. Sonke utilises the ‘spectrum of change’ model, drawing on a broad range of social change strategies that involve working across multiple spaces and levels to achieve gender equality. Sonke works to shape South African and international legal and policy decisions on gender equality, gender-based violence, and sexual and reproductive health and rights (including HIV and AIDS). Institute of Development Studies The Institute of Development Studies (IDS) is well known for its progressive gender research, knowledge sharing and teaching, and for the central role it has played in the conceptual shift from a ‘women in development’ to a ‘gender and development’ focus, as well as for critically bringing sexuality and masculinities into gender theory, research and practice. Originating in feminist thought and practice and seeing the personal as political, IDS’ work, and that of the Gender and Sexuality Cluster, is supported by robust yet innovative participatory, reflexive methodologies and approaches to citizenship and power that engage a range of local and global actors from research, policy and civil society in a range of contexts. IDS engages progressive stakeholders and partners across movements, disciplines and domains in the generation of high-quality, ground-breaking research and knowledge that challenges gender and sexuality ‘myths’ and stereotypes, and contributes to transformative policy, practice and activism. 4 Abbreviations ANC ARV CATs CBOs CEDAW CSO DA DEVAW DST EFF GAA GDP IDS IVEP KIIs LGBTQI NCGBV NGO NSP OMC PRA SANCO SGBV SLF TCC UN African National Congress anti-retroviral Sonke Gender Justice Community Action Teams community-based organisations Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women Civil Society Organisation Democratic Alliance Declaration on the Elimination of Violence Against Women digital storytelling Economic Freedom Fighters Group Areas Act gross domestic product Institute of Development Studies Integrated Victim Empowerment Policy key informant interviews lesbian, gay, bisexual, transsexual, queer and intersex National Council on Gender-Based Violence non-governmental organisation National Strategic Plan One Man Can Population Registration Act 1950 South African National Civic Organisation sexual and gender-based violence Sustainable Livelihoods Foundation Thuthuzela Care Centres United Nations 5 Executive summary Overview The case study discussed in this Evidence Report explores the value and limitations of collective action in challenging the community, political, social and economic institutions that reinforce harmful masculinities and gender norms related to sexual and gender-based violence (SGBV). As such, the concept of structural violence is used to locate SGBV in a social, economic and political context that draws histories of entrenched inequalities in South Africa into the present. The research findings reinforce a relational and constructed understanding of gender emphasising that gender norms can be reconfigured and positively transformed. We argue that this transformation can be catalysed through networked and multidimensional strategies of collective action that engage the personal agency of men and women and their interpersonal relationships at multiple levels and across boundaries of social class, race and gender. This collectivity needs to be conscious of and engaged with the structural inequalities that deeply influence trajectories of change. Citizens and civil society must work with the institutions – political, religious, social and economic – that reinforce structural violence in order to ensure their accountability in ending SGBV. Background and rationale South Africa, a democratic parliamentary republic since 1994 and formally classed as a middle-income country, has among the highest rates of inequality in the world. Economic inequality and high unemployment relate to legacies of colonialism and apartheid that maintain poverty and marginalisation. It is in the context of socioeconomic inequality that South Africa bears witness to an epidemic of sexual and gender-based violence (SGBV): in the Western Cape, 39 per cent of women have experienced some form of SGBV in their lifetime. South Africa’s rate of rape, as a particular form of SGBV, has been found to be one of the highest in the world. The violent punishment of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer and intersex (LGBTQI) persons is also of critical concern. The widespread violation of people’s rights, particularly linked to their gender and sexuality, runs alongside an attempt in policy to respond to SGBV; South Africa has implemented a raft of progressive and comprehensive laws, policies and support systems. Looking to the implementation of policy, several integrated approaches exist that involve both government and civil society in dealing with the prevalence of SGBV at national and provincial levels. Despite these efforts legal responsibilities on SGBV are not adequately met. In response, civil society has called for an effective National Strategic Plan (NSP) on gender-based violence. South Africa’s experience with HIV has shown that an NSP can be an important tool to gain the political commitment and funding required for a multisectoral response to address large social challenges. The Evidence Report draws on the notion of structural violence to bring into perspective a long and deep history in which violence was closely tied into a particular order in which gender, race, class and sexuality were normatively constructed and enforced. Within these constructions harmful interpretations of masculinity are recognised as endorsing the use of violence as a gendered practice. An aim of this study, and one of the major challenges in post-apartheid South Africa, is identifying those actors and institutions responsible for the proliferation of these historic forms of structural violence in their contemporary form as SGBV. In turn, the case study aims to understand some of the ways that people are working collectively, to challenge these inequalities and forms of violence through their interpersonal relationships and collective and political action. 6 In this research, we explored the intersection between politics and power, social norms, and networks of actors to try and understand how transformative social change to end SGBV can be achieved. The research questions for this study are twofold: 1. 2. What are the perceived structural factors (social, political, economic) that contribute to people’s experiences of SGBV? How (i) does the individual agency of men and women, and (ii) do collective political actions (public, institutional, etc) interact to engage certain kinds of processes that aim to prevent and address SGBV? Overall, the study was conducted with the aim of providing insight into how citizens and civil society organisations find meaningful ways to engage with each other, and with the government, to challenge oppressive social norms and structures and to build transformative strategies to end SGBV. Methodology This study used a multi-layered research methodology in order to generate policy-relevant research that was empirically grounded and action-oriented. The participants of this research study were diverse actors engaged in the issue of addressing SGBV in the Cape Town metropolitan area, and the Matzikama municipality of rural Western Cape. The methods themselves were established to ensure that the research process was responsive to emerging policy dynamics linked to the development of an NSP on gender-based violence. Furthermore, we formulated the study with the aim that it would be empirically grounded and ethically accountable to those people with whom we worked and who are addressing SGBV in their everyday realities. This was achieved through the use of dialogic and open-ended research instruments that supported participants to shape the direction of the research from the outset. An inductive and comparative approach to analysis, based on grounded theory, allowed the research material to be developed into findings through an iterative and consultative process. The research was conducted July–November 2014. The findings are based on three interlinked strands of research: digital storytelling and collective analysis with 11 participants identified as community activists; qualitative research, through key informant interviews with 26 stakeholders dealing with SGBV; and policy engagement through a stakeholder dialogue event with 35 participants. Findings and discussion South Africa’s past is perhaps at its most harmful, and most visible, in the legacy of violence that its citizens continue to embody in their everyday lives. It is therefore impossible and even dangerous to de-link SGBV, as a very specific form of violence, from the broader dynamics of socioeconomic inequality that still characterises the lives of the people involved in this study. The first section of our findings describes how the persistence of this inequality was inscribed into the very spaces – townships, homes, bodies – in which most of the participants lived. This inequality, and the multiple forms of violence they experienced as a result, was articulated in particular by the community activists with whom we worked. The participants detailed the extent to which racial inequalities embedded in South Africa’s history, emerged in the present, for example in the form of ongoing economic struggle. A particular set of normative gender roles were articulated, in relation to these structural dynamics. Migration, for instance, was expressed as an action taken by men in order to earn money to support their families. The study findings also make visible the role of formal institutions and leaders in failing to address, or sometimes in maintaining, structural inequalities that underpin SGBV. These institutions include political institutions, such as government departments and the judicial 7 system, as well as religious institutions and leaders. Participants explained that without providing clear leadership on gender justice, and without transforming government departments to better respond to SGBV, the government would continue to fail in its attempt to promote gender equality. Political institutions, particularly those related to law enforcement, were also described in the study as negligent or ill-equipped to deal with the needs of people experiencing SGBV. The participants in the study described, too, how religious leaders used their power to sanction heteronormative relationships and sexist characterisations of men and women’s ‘roles’. The findings demonstrate that gender transformative collective action can provide an opportunity for different actors and organisations to work together across social issues towards change, bringing alliances and partnerships between people and across organisations. The strategies for change outlined within this case study are framed as gender transformative approaches, because they seek to change gender roles and create more respectful and egalitarian relationships. These initiatives emphasise the full participation of men, whose role is seen as essential in the transformative process. Further, community-led initiatives that work at the personal and political level providing support structures and spaces to engage diverse stakeholders have the potential to transform attitudes, behaviours and mechanisms that support male dominance and power. Collaborations between organisations and institutions can enable coordination across interventions engaging different ecological levels and addressing the multiple intersecting influences to reduce and prevent violence. Pragmatic limitations to collective action, and to social transformation, were also raised through the case study and relate, specifically, to a lack of funding for those organisations working to provide resources to people affected by SGBV. Most often, it was those same organisations that did not have funding, who were doing the work of government departments in providing support to survivors of SGBV. The work of civil society organisations has not only been to provide this basic support, but in South Africa, it has also historically been to call on the government to be accountable to and take greater responsibility for the wellbeing of its citizens. Policy and practice recommendations Citizens’ initiatives and social activism      It is important to recognise informal ways of collective action in people’s lived realities. Continued work is needed with communities to understand their innovations in addressing gender inequalities and to mobilise this knowledge into policymaking. Collective action (informal and formal) does not necessarily translate into a ‘gender transformative’ collective or movement; citizens and affiliated organisations need to invest in the work of gender equality. In doing so the political power dynamics of challenging patriarchal privilege must be recognised. Working with citizens to develop and share practical legal knowledge about their rights, and avenues for recourse and resources on SGBV is crucial to enable them to shape and hold accountable the policies and programmes that affect their lives. Sustainability of collective action in ending SGBV at the community level is important; more understanding is needed on what drives citizen action, enables ownership of the process of change, and the resources needed to support this. A focus on mobilisation has highlighted the significance of engaging with men and women in positions of power and holding them to account in their responsibilities for working to end SGBV; as power holders in these contexts, men have an important role to play in holding each other accountable on gender equality. 8 Civil society partnerships    Partnerships across social movements working for gender equality – engaging men, women, LGBTQI persons – are important for accountability within movements. Furthermore, these relationships can enable collaborative learning on gender issues and help ensure a collective response to SGBV that promotes social justice for all. A clear vision and purpose needs to be built for gender transformative collective action. Where this reflects a partnership between state, social actors and citizens, then possibilities of accountability and work to enable citizen action and rights claims at the local level will be strengthened. Civil society needs to develop clearer strategies and policies for mediating and linking across actors to strengthen networked ways of working to address SGBV across multiple levels and social and political spaces. Government institutions     Recognising citizens and civil society organisations as effective partners in ending SGBV, working collaboratively to support policy reform on the issue of SGBV, and importantly in enabling effective implementation. Political decision-makers and champions are critical for driving institutional change. Entrenched patriarchy in political and religious institutions needs to be challenged in order for these institutions to more effectively address the root causes of SGBV. Multi-sectoral consultations and citizen participation are required to develop and implement a fully-costed and funded National Strategic Plan to end SGBV that aims to fill the existing gaps in: laws and policies, services for survivors of SGBV, funding for strategies that prevent violence, and oversight and impact mechanisms. The government needs to make information on SGBV funding more transparent (including funding criteria, recipients and budgets). Ideally, this information should also be made available retrospectively, for organisations to be in a better position to lobby national and international donors for funding. International community    International donor agencies must meaningfully engage in learning from specific country contexts, to develop agendas on SGBV that can be sensitively, and effectively, implemented. The international community can play a role in ‘the collective’, as part of a global alliance that supports and enables national-level, contextualised responses to SGBV. Using the effective work being done by collective actors at local and national levels to contribute to the global dialogue and frameworks on ending SGBV. 9 1 Introduction South Africa, well known for its progressive constitution and robust democratic politics, has the unenviable reputation of being one of the most violent countries, and one of the most highly unequal places for people to live in the world (Beinart 2001; Fassin 2007; Mlatsheni and Leibbrandt 2011; Seekings and Nattrass 2005). This is particularly true for those people who do not conform to highly patriarchal gender and sexual norms (Lewin, Williams and Thomas 2013), and who, as a result, experience violence in multiple and intersecting ways. These intersecting forms of violence are rooted in subtle, and often invisible, structures that reach back to colonialism, continued under apartheid, and have persisted more recently in the forms of inequality that continue to characterise life and constrain wellbeing in postapartheid South Africa. In this Evidence Report, we refer to these influences as forms of structural violence; and we seek through this case study to make them more visible. We suggest that it is important not to focus only on the manifestations of SGBV; it is essential to understand the structural causes of the intersecting inequalities that fuel it. Through this case study we have sought to look critically at, first, the dynamics of structural violence and, second, the positive potential and limits of collective action to address violence together with the government. We have taken this approach in the case study, on which this report is based, in order to make visible to a wider range of actors the extent to which all South Africans, of all gender identities, navigate a precarious present that remains powerfully shaped by a politically violent past. The study is based on research conducted in Cape Town and the Matzikama area of the Western Cape, South Africa, between July and November 2014. Using a range of research methods, including digital storytelling, collective power analysis, stakeholder mapping and key informant interviews, the research findings from the case study iterated the importance of understanding how SGBV emerges against a backdrop of entrenched socioeconomic inequalities. In doing so, the case study explored the capacity and limits of community action to (re)build equitable interpersonal relationships and social networks in order to challenge socioeconomic inequality and the violence that stems from it. The research findings indicate that collective action in this context, although powerful at an interpersonal, family and community level, must be understood in light of structural inequalities, constructions of harmful masculinities, and hegemonic power inequalities that influence these trajectories of change. 10 2 Conceptual framework 2.1 Theoretical and policy approaches to SGBV 2.1.1 International policy and definitions of SGBV While there are many forms of SGBV, and corresponding ways of writing about them, analysts have identified three broad approaches to SGBV that map onto the evolution in theory and policy on violence against women, and gender violence more broadly (Bowman 2002; Sokoloff and Dupont 2005; Strebel et al. 2006; Yodanis 2004). The first, and most common, approach used by policymakers reflects the United Nation’s (UN’s) 1993 Declaration on the Elimination of Violence Against Women (DEVAW). DEVAW was strongly influenced by the UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), and the definition of violence against women in its General Recommendation 19 (GR 19). This definition presents SGBV as primarily men’s violence against women and girls, and situates violence in three interlinked spheres: in the family; in the community; by the state. Both CEDAW GR 19 and DEVAW emphasise that violence against women is a manifestation of unequal power relations between men and women. Importantly, they also closed a gap in international law: by explicitly denoting the above public spheres in which violence takes place, the definitions framed gender violence as a human rights violation (Watts, Osam and Win 1995).1 The emerging fields of masculinity and sexuality catalysed a second approach, primarily defining SGBV as violence used by men against women, against some males, and inclusive of sexual violence against children (Hunnicutt 2009). This approach recognises homophobic violence as a form of SGBV, and that SGBV is used to oppress some men, alongside women and girls, as a policing mechanism to enforce gender roles, norms and hierarchies (Coughtry 2011; Eves 2010). The third approach to SGBV, which builds on the previous two, is the one we use in this study: it refers to violence directed at an individual irrespective of age, including men and transgender persons or women, and is any form of violence used to assert and reproduce gender roles and norms (Benjamin and Murchison 2004). 2.1.2 Theoretical approaches to SGBV This section outlines four overarching theoretical approaches to gender violence, and indicates their relative contributions and limitations for the purpose of this particular study. The first constellation of approaches locates the problem of violence with the individual, and with men’s psychopathology and biology in particular, thus situating the responsibility on men (to stop) and on women (to leave) (Abrahams et al. 2009; Holtzworth-Munroe and Stuart 1994; Walker 1993). These approaches, even when developed as feminist explanations, have been discredited as reductionist and open to misuse, as they fail to take into account the social and economic contexts that contribute to the prevalence of violence (Bowman and Schneider 1998; Hooks 2000). The second approach centres on family systems as the social locus in which violence takes place and in which violence can be addressed; ‘dysfunctional families’ or ‘dysfunctional relationships’ are identified within this system, and the possibility for change also rests with the individual and the relationship (Kimmel 2002). Theorists using this approach have been criticised for failing to account for the role of gendered norms and Prior to this, human rights law did not cover gender violence as it excluded the so-called ‘private sphere’ in which forms of gender violence, like domestic violence, took place. 1 11 how underlying structures reinforce patriarchal dominance in these relationships and systems (Bograd 1999; Sokoloff and Dupont 2005). Third, structuralist theories depart from individualist approaches to SGBV, and locate violence – and therefore the potential for change – in social, political, economic and cultural structures. This theoretical approach proposes that violence is not a private matter, but a public issue that draws in state and community institutions that privilege certain gender norms over others (Bowman and Schneider 1998). The social ecology model of social change (Heise 1998) is a feature of the structuralist theoretical approach, and it argues that SGBV takes place and interacts across four levels: the individual (including their personal history); the micro-system (the immediate context in which violence takes place); the exosystem (institutions and social structures); and the macro-system (the general views and attitudes shared by members of a society or culture) (Heise 1998; Minayo 1994; Oetzel and Duran 2004). Social ecology approaches to violence have been critiqued for failing to look across the four levels at how they may be interlinked, and for the absence of a critical integration of political, economic and social systems that either contribute to, or should address, the prevalence of violence. These critiques have emerged from studies in South Africa (Africa 2010; Jewkes, Levin and Penn-Kekana 2002), in particular, and echo the fourth main set of theories that reflect post-colonial and post-structuralist approaches to violence. With respect to the latter, theorists such as Butler (2009, 2004) and Bourdieu (2001) challenge the notion that the reality – of gender, of individuals, families and societies – is an empirical given, instead capturing the complex interplay of individual and structural dynamics. The possibilities available to individuals for enacting change, and the constraints they face, are recognised in these approaches – and in the case of this report – through people’s interpersonal and political relationships in relation to the unequal institutional structures that perpetuate violence linked to race, class, gender and sexuality. This links to post-colonial critiques, particularly by African feminists, who argue the need to account for violently unequal economic and social systems – like colonialism, apartheid and globalisation – and their role in entrenching intersecting forms of violence linked to class, race, gender, sexuality, age, location, and so forth (Africa 2010; Cornwall, Harrison and Whitehead 2007; Hansen and Stepputat 2009; Jones 2011; McFadden 2000). This study draws on the theoretical approach of post-structuralism insofar as it acknowledges the relational and constructed nature of gender, and the extent to which gender dynamics can be reconfigured and positively transformed through interpersonal relationships and individual and collective action. It also recognises, however, that the onus cannot solely lie on individuals, or on men, to change gender and sexual norms and their violent manifestation as gender and sexual violence. To this end, the report draws on the notion of structural violence to bring into perspective a long and deep history in which violence was closely tied into a particular order in which gender, race, class and sexuality were normatively constructed, and through which any deviation from these constructive prescriptions of ‘correct behaviour’ were punished. One of the challenges in post-apartheid South Africa lies in identifying those actors and institutions responsible for the proliferation of these historic forms of structural violence. 2.2 Structural violence and hegemonic masculinities Economic inequality and its impact on poverty and unemployment is one of the most significant and persistent forms of structural violence. Economic inequality in people’s everyday lives is made even more complex as it is tethered to the country’s longer social, political and economic history. The term, structural violence, was first coined in the 1960s by Galtung (1969), a liberation theologian, to capture this dynamic. Paul Farmer describes the concept here: 12 Structural violence is one way of describing social arrangements that put individuals and populations in harm’s way… The arrangements are structural because they are embedded in the political and economic organization of our social world; they are violent because they cause injury to people… neither culture nor pure individual will is at fault; rather, historically given (and often economically driven) processes and forces conspire to constrain individual agency. Structural violence is visited upon all those whose social status denies them access to the fruits of scientific and social progress. (Farmer 2001: n.p.) Structural violence in South Africa, shaped through apartheid and colonialism, constructed economic and racial hierarchies through discriminatory education, health and employment sectors that privileged white people over all other race groups (Mlatsheni and Leibbrandt 2011; Rankin and Roberts 2011).2 In this report, we use structural violence as a key concept because it locates the presence of violence – as experienced by individuals, families and societies – in this social, economic and political context. Harmful masculinities and gender norms that drive SGBV are understood as socially constructed and as such vary across historical and local contexts. We use this concept in order to make the case, through this report, that the potential for change lies in people coming together through their political activism and collective action to challenge the community, political, social and economic institutions that reinforce dangerous forms of masculinity, and unequal power relationships. 2.3 Collective action and structural change The interaction between people’s personal experiences, motivations and actions and their collective engagement is an important element in understanding how and why people work with others towards positive social change. As Lister (1997) articulates, human agency embedded in social relations is related to consciousness: To act as a citizen requires first a sense of agency, the belief that one can act; acting as a citizen, especially collectively, in turn fosters that sense of agency. Thus agency is not simply about the capacity to choose and act but also about a conscious capacity which is important to the individual’s self-identity. (Lister 1997: 38) This study therefore reflects the importance of understanding the interplay between personal and collective relationships and how these expressions of citizenship are mediated by structural forms of violence, and the limitations linked to them, as they intersect with gender, class, race, (dis)ability, age and also space/location. Looking out from the personal and community level to collective action for national policy change, Htun and Weldon’s (2012) analysis of policies on violence against women in 70 countries over a 30-year period finds that the activism of feminist movements plays a more important role in policy change than left-wing parties, numbers of women legislators or national wealth. They explain that national and international women’s movements have played an important role in highlighting the gap between ratification of and compliance with global treaties, and have amplified the possibilities of implementation at the national level through advocacy efforts to change discriminatory laws, and by training institutional actors and the judiciary on rights and accountability. 2 The Institute for Justice and Reconciliation, for instance, recently released its Reconciliation Barometer based on longitudinal data in which trends in South Africans’ views on race, class and politics are measured. Looking at ten years of data, the Barometer shows a steep decline in a willingness to live in a unified South Africa; this was most notably linked to a decline in a desire to socialise across race groups. The 2014 report highlights, then, the importance of keeping race in perspective alongside other intersections of inequality, as it continues to feature strongly in South African lives, albeit in very different ways (IJR 2014). 13 Transformative strategies are contentious in nature, they include dynamics of power and interests across the diverse actors involved, and are therefore non-linear. These strategies engage a form of political accountability for gender equality that sees collective action as catalysing change between and across levels to ensure effective and transformative interventions. It is this non-linearity, and open-ended conceptualisation of change that we will engage in this case study. Specifically, in our research, we looked at the intersection between politics and power, societal norms and discourse, and networks of actors to try to understand more deeply how collectivity can achieve meaningful impact in people’s lives (Keeley and Scoones 2003; Wolmer 2006). 14 3 Research background South Africa, a democratic parliamentary republic since 1994, is home to approximately 54 million residents (Statistics South Africa 2014a). In the most recent elections, held on 7 May 2014, voters again elected the African National Congress (ANC) into power with 62.2 per cent of the vote; the main opposition, the Democratic Alliance (DA), won 22.2 per cent of the vote. A very new political party, the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF), made significant inroads into South Africa’s governance landscape, winning 6.4 per cent of the vote. The real impact of the EFF’s entry into South Africa’s political configuration still remains to be seen, but the premise on which they ran for government – that of economic equality and freedom – speaks strongly to the increasingly visible anger among citizens struggling for meaningful social and economic justice. Women constitute almost half of South Africa’s population, and this is represented in parliament, with women making up 42 per cent of its representatives (compared to 2.7 per cent before 1994) (GCIS n.d.). In the first and second parliaments (1994–2004), a raft of legislation to promote gender equality was passed, including legislation on domestic violence, employment equity and marriage. While South Africa is formally classed as a middle-income country, its rates of inequality are among the highest in the world – reflected in the disparity between its rankings for total and per capita gross domestic product (GDP)3 and Gini coefficient measurement (65) which is in the top ten globally (World Bank 2011). South Africa’s unemployment rate among those aged 15–65 years is 25.4 per cent, as measured in the third quarter of 2014 (Statistics South Africa 2014b); almost half of those in the labour force cohort aged 15–24 years were found to be unemployed (Rankin and Roberts 2011). Despite the introduction of progressive legislation on gender equality, the reality of socioeconomic inequality is deeply gendered (ILO 2012; World Economic Forum 2013).4 Consistently, between 2008 and 2013, 27 per cent of women in South Africa were unemployed, compared with 23 per cent of men in 2013 (Statistics South Africa 2013). These different forms of inequality were also confirmed in the 2013 World Gender Gap Index, where South Africa ranked 8th in the world (out of 136 countries) in the political empowerment ranking, but 78th and 102nd in the economic participation and opportunity ranking, and in the health and survival ranking respectively. Spatial injustice is a further inequality that cuts across South Africa’s cities and towns. During apartheid, residential segregation along racial lines was enforced through legislation and urban planning. The 1950 Population Registration Act (PRA), legally classified every South African as one of three ‘racial types’ – White, Coloured, and Black – in order to exert control and power along racial lines. This influenced the Group Areas Act (GAA), an urban planning tool that sought to eradicate racial residential mixing by segmenting cities into racially exclusive suburbs (Beinart 2001, 1995; Parry and van Eaden 2014; Wolpe 1972).5 The Cape Flats is a region of metropolitan Cape Town that holds a large proportion of this historically displaced population. The Cape Flats area is located approximately 15–20km south east of the central business district, spanning 50km of flat, low-lying terrain. In 2008, there were an estimated 220 informal settlements housing some 150,000 shacks, or over 500,000 people. With the rise in migration alongside the rise in unemployment, peri-urban areas are extending onto former rubble dumps (such as Sweet Home Farm in Philippi) and wetlands (such as 3 www.oecd.org/fr/afriquedusud/economicassessmentofsouthafrica2008achievingacceleratedandsharedgrowth forsouthafrica.htm (accessed December 2014). 4 For full information on world rankings, the full report is available at www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_GenderGap_Report_2013.pdf (accessed 26 January 2015). 5 The 2012 National Development Plan 2030, in specifying its overarching principles for the spatial development of South African settlements, outlines the principle of spatial justice, that apartheid’s policy of confining particular groups to limited spaces must be reversed (South Africa 2012: 227). 15 Masiphumelele), limiting protection from extreme environmental conditions, resulting in flooding and structural damage (City of Cape Town 2008). Unemployment rates in the residential areas of Nyanga, Philippi, Khayelitsha, Guguletu and Delft, which are located within the Cape Flats, range from 38 per cent to 46 per cent; this is much higher than the above-mentioned national average of 25.4 per cent. These suburbs are predominantly populated by Black African persons, with Delft populated by 52 per cent Coloured persons and 46 per cent Black Africans (City of Cape Town 2011).6 It is in the context of profound socioeconomic inequality, described above, that South Africa bears witness to an ever-escalating epidemic of sexual and gender violence. Suspected rape homicides reported for non-intimate murders have increased from 13.4 per cent in 1999 to 28.5 per cent in 2009 (p<0·001) (Abrahams et al. 2009). Research in the Western Cape found that 39 per cent of women experienced some form of gender-based violence, and the same (39 per cent) proportion of men had perpetuated gendered violence in their lifetime (GenderLinks 2014). The rate of female homicide per 100,000 is five times the global average at 12.9 per cent (Abrahams et al. 2009); this is compared to 2006 statistics that show 0.2 per cent in England and Wales, and 0.3 per cent in Argentina (Abrahams et al. 2009; Esplugues et al. 2006), highlighting the urgency for policy-driven prevention. South Africa’s rate of rape, as a particular form of sexual and gender-based violence, has been found to be one of the highest in the world: in a cross-sectional study in three South African districts in the Eastern Cape and Kwa-Zulu Natal, for instance, researchers found that 27.6 per cent of all men had raped a woman or girl, and of all the men who were interviewed, almost half (42.4 per cent) had been physically violent to an intimate partner (Jewkes et al. 2009). Population-based research with adult men in South Africa has found, too, that 9.6 per cent of men reported an experience of male-on-male sexual violence and 3 per cent reported perpetration (Dunkle et al. 2013). These statistics are based on reported incidents, and of those incidents reported, a small fraction led to convictions. In 2012, 66,196 rapes were officially reported, and investigations led to a paltry 4,500 convictions. A 2013 study by Jewkes suggests that reported incidents of SGBV are so low because of the relatively low conviction rates; this in turn leads to a significant under-estimation of the prevalence and incidence of SGBV. The violent punishment of people who transgress heteronormative gender roles and identities is also of critical concern in South Africa. For LGBTQI persons this translates into the very real experience of homophobic violence including homicide and rape as a form of persecution (Lewin et al. 2013; Wells and Polders 2006). 3.1 Policy context The conspicuous and widespread violation of men and women’s rights, particularly linked to their gender and sexuality, runs alongside an attempt – in policy – to respond to SGBV: South Africa has implemented a raft of progressive and comprehensive laws, policies and support systems. Regional and international human rights instruments have been localised, giving rise to the Domestic Violence Act, the Sexual Offences Act, the Employment Equity Act, the Service Charter and Minimum Standards for Victims of Crime in South Africa and the National Policy Statement for Victim Empowerment, all of which work towards elimination of SGBV in the country. The South African National Sexual Assault Policy (2005) discusses factors that contribute to men’s use of violence, including social norms of male superiority and male sexual entitlement and poverty. It is notable that these factors and their interplay with experiences of SGBV are identified and articulated as root causes of the use of violence 6 A key difference in Cape Town from much of the rest of the country is that the ANC is not in power; the city is governed by the Democratic Alliance (DA). Piper (2014) highlights that although this undermines destructive patronage politics that typify state– society relations in poor, black, urban settlements in the rest of the country, race politics are re-invigorated, preventing the building of trust between poor, black communities and the local state. 16 by some men against women and children. SGBV is however a complex phenomenon perpetrated by men and women and manifests across all socioeconomic classes and groups. Looking to the implementation of policy, several integrated approaches exist that involve both government and civil society in dealing with the prevalence of SGBV at national and provincial levels including the Integrated Victim Empowerment Policy (IVEP) and the Thuthuzela Care Centres (TCC). In 2011, the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) Committee recommended that South Africa review its 365-Day Action Plan to combat SGBV, and adopt comprehensive measures, including accountability mechanisms to better address SGBV. The following year, at the end of 2012, the National Council on Gender-Based Violence (NCGBV) was established to provide highlevel political leadership for a coordinated multisectoral response to the issue. This Council was to initiate the first National Strategic Plan (NSP) for SGBV. After nearly two years of very slow progress, the Minister of Women in the Presidency, Susan Shabangu, suspended the work of the NCGBV and the NSP development in July 2014. With the formal national process to develop an NSP for SGBV stalled, civil society has taken on the responsibility of laying out demands to push the fight for funding and political accountability forward. Civil society partners have embarked on a campaign to realise an NSP, demanding ‘No More Empty Promises’ from government.7 This case study, conducted with organisations that form part of this campaign, aims to feed into the call for an effective national response to SGBV. South Africa’s experience with HIV has shown that a National Strategic Plan can be an important tool to gain the political commitment and funding required to tackle large social challenges that require a coordinated response among diverse stakeholders. South Africa is a middle-income country that can afford an SGBV NSP.8 The development of a multisectoral National Strategic Plan will only be meaningful if it is fully costed and funded, and developed through an open and consultative process. Measures need to be put in place to work with the National Treasury on innovative mechanisms to fund a Plan; a review by Thorpe (2014) asserts that most departments do not have the funds or staff they would need for effective implementation of legal SGBV responsibilities. An initial shadow framework for the NSP has been developed by civil society through which to hold the government to account; key components include: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. A plan that will invest in evidence-based prevention to reduce SGBV incidence; Improved SGBV response in terms of breadth and quality of services for survivors; Accountability in improved reporting and performance management systems; Clear accountability institutional arrangements with clear and high-level political will and leadership; Support for strengthened civil society capacity and funding to advocate on gender issues. (Sonke 2014a) Reflecting on what we can learn from the development of the HIV-NSP, it is important to recognise that South Africa did not just face an epidemic of HIV, it also faced a dissenting government. So whilst the realisation of a HIV-NSP was driven by the constitutional human right to life, dignity and respect, it was also realised through grounded community mobilising, collective action across sectors of society and international support. Part of the strategy in realising access to treatment required civil society to take its government to court to provide the much-needed lifesaving anti-retroviral (ARV) treatment (TAC 2010). Because SGBV has recognisably become an epidemic in South Africa this kind of civil society action to hold government to account is deemed vital. 7 www.genderlinks.org.za/article/civil-society-takes-to-the-streets-to-demand-a-national-strategic-plan-to-end-gender-basedviolence-2014-11-24 (accessed December 2014). 8 Last year the Auditor General noted that wasteful, irregular and fruitless expenditure by various state departments cost the country R32bn (Sonke 2014b). 17 4 Research focus This case study set out to understand, first, the context in which people navigate multiple forms of inequality (linked to race, class, gender, sexuality, age) and their manifestations through specific forms of gender and sexual violence. This component connects to the poststructuralist and post-colonialist definition of SGBV that calls for attention to be paid to the relationship between structural violence and SGBV in the context of South Africa’s history, and present. Second, the case study aimed to understand some of the ways that people work collectively to challenge these inequalities and forms of violence through interpersonal relationships and collective and political action. The research questions for this study are twofold, articulated to explore the perceived structural factors of inequality that contribute to SGBV and the actions and actors involved in addressing inequality and SGBV. To this end, the following two research questions were used to guide the study: 1. 2. What are the perceived structural factors (social, political, economic) that contribute to people’s experiences of SGBV? How (i) does the individual agency of men and women, and (ii) do collective political actions (public, institutional, etc) interact to engage certain kinds of processes that aim to prevent and address SGBV? In this study, the term ‘structural factors’ refers to the discriminatory systems and institutions that shape, steer and drive inequalities that influence people’s lives. They include laws, policies and institutions that maintain the privilege and power of one group over another in terms of opportunity, access to resources, religious and political freedoms, fair and inclusive responses by the police and government services and benefits (Manjoo 2011). The term ‘collective action’ refers to what people and organisations do together to challenge and change inequality and its related violence. Overall, the study was conducted with the aim of providing useful insights into how citizens and civil society organisations are finding meaningful ways to engage with each other, and with the government, to challenge oppressive social norms and structures, and to build transformative strategies to end SGBV. 18 5 Research methodology This study used a multilayered research methodology in order to generate policy-relevant research that was empirically grounded and action-oriented. The participants of this research study included diverse actors engaged in the issue of addressing SGBV in the Cape Town metropolitan area and the Matzikama municipality of rural Western Cape. The research team, spanning Sonke, SLF and IDS, comprised two researchers from each organisation who co-developed the research methodology. The wider research team from the three organisations held language skills in isiXhosa, isiZulu, Afrikaans and English (the main languages spoken in this province), and participants were able to articulate their perspectives in their own language. The methods themselves were established to ensure that the research process was responsive to emerging policy dynamics linked to the development of a National Strategic Plan on gender-based violence and, principally, that it was empirically grounded and ethically accountable to those people with whom we worked and around whom this case study is centred, namely people addressing SGBV in their everyday realities. This was achieved through the use of dialogic and open-ended research instruments that supported participants to shape the direction of the research from the outset. Finally, a desk review of relevant conceptual and programmatic literature was undertaken, exploring key concepts of sexual and gender-based violence, men and masculinity, collective citizen action and national policy reform in order to ground the research approach and researchers in a shared and contextually relevant understanding of the issues. The literature and policy review evolved over the course of the project, responding to the emerging analysis and findings. 5.1 Research methods The research that underpins this case study was conducted in the Western Cape Province of South Africa, in Cape Town and Matzikama, between July and November 2014. The findings are based on three interlinked strands of research: digital storytelling with 11 participants; qualitative research, through key informant interviews with 26 participants; and policy engagement through a stakeholder dialogue event with 35 participants. More information on the stakeholder dialogue can be found in this stakeholder report. 5.1.1 Digital storytelling and power analysis The heart of the methodology was a digital storytelling (DST) process with 11 people from informal settlements and townships in Cape Town (Delft, Guguletu, Khayelitsha, Philippi and Nyanga) who are involved in taking action to address SGBV in their own lives and in their communities. As such, they defined themselves as ‘community activists’ because they were activists working in their social and geographic communities; we use this term in the report to correspond with the participants’ definition.9 By grounding the research process in the realities of community activists, the methodology gives weight to the knowledge, understanding and experiences of those living with violence and whose voices are not often prioritised in decision-making on these issues. Annex 1 includes a process map of the community activists’ participation across the different methodological components of the study. 9 19 Participants were recruited through Sonke Gender Justice Community Action Teams (CATs). CATs are groups of citizens working informally at the local level to address issues of gender inequality. Criteria for participation ensured that participants were open to talking about their personal experiences and feelings, and interested in telling their own story on the issues of gender, violence and agency, including how this would relate to their own activism. DST is a learning, creating and sharing experience supported by technology, allowing participants to share aspects of their life story through the creation of their own short digital media production (Lewin and Wheeler 2012). Creative storytelling approaches combine a participatory, collaborative methodology with the creative use of technology to generate stories aimed at catalysing action on pressing social issues (Lambert 2002; Lundby 2008; Poletti 2011). These stories provide what Geertz (1994, 2001) refers to as ‘thick description’, where visual information, coupled with dialogue that is emotionally engaged, provides a nuanced understanding of the complex issues at hand. This process was five days long and asked participants to ‘Tell us a story about when you have wanted to do something about violence experienced in your life, and what happened’. Onto these highly personal stories, we added a collective visual power analysis through a three-day workshop. Participants did a power analysis of their own story – looking at how different forms of power (to, with, within, over) moved through their story arc. Participants then reviewed the political content of the stories and discussed what they said about contemporary social and political life. These processes culminated in the presentation of digital stories and proposals for change by the activists at the stakeholder workshop (see Section 5.1.3). There are particular ethical issues involved in undertaking research in violent contexts, in terms of the risks that the research process itself can generate for participants and the researchers involved (Wheeler 2009). The rationale for the selection of a visual and participatory methodology was based on the exigencies of conducting research in a context of violence in an ethical way. The approach aims to give participants a greater degree of control over the research process itself and contribute to empowerment through selfrepresentation in the process of knowledge production (Liebenberg, Didkowsky and Ungar 2012), and holds the potential to make a positive contribution to social change (Abah, Okwori and Alubo 2009; Pearce 2009). Related to the commitment of an empowering, actionoriented approach, a final meeting with the activists offered space for reflection and to develop plans for how to use their stories and lessons learned in the future. 5.1.2 Key informant interviews The second research strand includes 26 key informant interviews (KIIs) with a range of stakeholders engaged in addressing SGBV from across the Western Cape, including two community activists and two participants, representing a national policy perspective.10 The KIIs combined an open-ended and semi-structured approach with an in-depth interview (Rubin and Rubin 1995). The reality and experience of the interviewee guided the interviewers, as they responded to the participant’s particular experiences and knowledge. This approach gives interviewees the scope to influence the emphasis of the research questioning, and interviewers are better able to broach sensitive political and social topics that are hard to address through other methods such as more structured and possibly more aggressive ‘question-response’ interviews. The KII schedule was framed around five core focus areas (see Annex 2) that responded to the research questions established for the study, and probing questions were developed through the knowledge and language generated through the process of digital storytelling with community activists. 10 The Key Informant Interview schedule can be found in Annex 2. 20 Participants were recruited to represent a cross-section of civil society, academia, service delivery, and government institutions, and the activists involved in the community engagement component; selection was enabled through a database of actors working to address SGBV, and complemented through a snowball approach in which we included recommendations made through the research interviews as we went along. Participants held different socioeconomic histories, diverse, and divergent perspectives, and included gatekeepers of particular knowledge sets and community contexts. 5.1.3 Policy engagement A stakeholder and policy dialogue event brought together the group of community activists and key informants from the qualitative stage of the research, and others for a deliberative engagement on collective action and strategies for ending SGBV in the South African context. This event represented a dialogue between the different perspectives and forms of knowledge generated through the research process, as well as drawing deliberately on the insight and experience of attendees. It was conducted as the final component of the study, in order to deliberate on current policy implications of the research and in order to bring together the 11 community activists, some of whom shared their digital stories, with the 26 stakeholders who had participated in the KIIs. Recent experience in influencing global policy through participatory research has demonstrated the importance of bringing these different forms of knowledge together in policy change (Shahrokh and Wheeler 2014). The event was explicitly framed in terms of the current context of policy and practice around addressing SGBV in Cape Town and South Africa. A central objective of the event was to support civil society’s influence in the development of the proposed National Strategic Plan on gender-based violence for South Africa. 5.2 Ethical considerations The ethics of the research were reviewed by the three partner organisations against their own ethics policies, and were monitored and evaluated throughout, enabling accountability between the organisations. The integrity of our research was ensured through the relevance of this study to citizens, civil society and government agencies in South Africa, and our grounded and inductive learning approach. Informed consent was obtained for the multiple components of the research study and tailored to the particular approaches and focus areas. Please see the participatory and qualitative consent forms used in Annex 3. Confidentiality was critical for the life history components, both for researchers and for peers in group-based processes. All participants agreed to their contributions being included in the research analysis, although with varying degrees of anonymity, and only four of 11 digital stories were given consent to be shared with a global public audience through online distribution. All participants engaged voluntarily in the study, with community activists receiving a face-toface briefing before the study began, and all KII participants were briefed via telephone. A counsellor was present throughout the work with the community activists, and participants engaged in group counselling after the digital storytelling process, which had entailed deep personal reflection. 5.3 Analytical methodology We have taken an inductive and comparative approach based on grounded theory that allowed research material to be developed into findings through an iterative process (Charmaz 1995, 2002; Corbin and Strauss 1990; Glaser and Strauss 1973; Strauss and Corbin 1994). The approach discourages the rigid application of research hypotheses or predetermined theoretical frameworks to qualitative research; instead it encourages an 21 inductive approach to conducting and analysing research in order to pay attention to the nuances of the data. This was achieved through analytical workshops with the research team after key research events and milestones. Coding of qualitative material was also inductive (digital storytelling transcripts, community engagement workshop transcripts, key informant interviews transcripts, participant observation memos, stakeholder dialogue transcripts), supported by an analytical framework that was discussed at the outset of the research, revised in the course of conducting the research and finalised in a workshop on conclusion of the research – see Annex 4. The research material has been analysed textually, including both the words and language used by participants. Visual material generated through the storytelling and power analysis were also analysed inductively to draw out a further layer of meaning from the textual information (Liebenberg et al. 2012). Weight has been given to the analysis conducted by the participants themselves at different points in the process; this was achieved, in particular, through the three-day collective analysis workshop with the 11 activists, and through the stakeholder dialogue with all activists, key informants and additional participants. The conclusions to the study have been based largely on a comparative analysis across the three research components. 5.4 Study limitations This study is not and does not claim to be fully representative of all perspectives on gender and sexual violence, and collective action, in South Africa. We recognise that, in focusing our work with these three organisations (IDS, SLF and Sonke), and basing our work in the Cape Town metropole and Matzikama district, we have not been able to draw in a nationally representative group of actors working to address gender and sexual violence. Further, while this study reflects on policy processes from a civil society perspective, it does not represent the government level on the development of the SGBV NSP, for example. This was not within the scope of the study. In drawing conclusions in relation to collective action as a strategy in addressing sexual and gender-based violence it should be recognised that all research participants had an interest or stake in the role of collectives working on these issues. While this may have generated a positive bias, the research approach was open-ended and critically reflective in order to mitigate against this as far as possible. Further, as members of South African civil society, the political position of Sonke and SLF, will have influenced the interaction with activists and stakeholders. The policy dialogue component and action-oriented nature of the study contribute to addressing these concerns. 22 6 Research findings As outlined above, the study was designed to understand two main areas of enquiry: the perceived structural factors (social, political, economic) that contribute to people’s experiences of SGBV, and the actions taken by men and women, individually and collectively, to address and prevent this violence. The analysis presented here, therefore, takes an approach that telescopes out from the individual to locate individuals, and their experiences of SGBV, in social, economic and political structures, before zooming in to explore how people and organisations have taken actions, collectively, to prevent and address SGBV; it is through this process that we have developed a grounded understanding of these concepts. The findings discussed below reflect on each main area of enquiry in turn, and the subsequent discussion draws these two areas together to develop a fuller understanding of whether and how actions at a personal and collective political level have broader implications and outcomes for addressing SGBV, and the actors and strategies involved. 6.1 Structural inequality and SGBV The key informant interviews and the collective accounts of the digital stories in particular, emphasised the importance of understanding the complex and intersecting inequalities – such as lack of or low levels of formal education, unemployment, poverty and labour migration – that lead to the manifestation of SGBV. This section explores these factors, and suggests that it is not only important to locate sexual and gender violence within a broader context of structural inequality, but it is also necessary, to understand the interlocking dynamics of structural violence and harmful social norms that lead to violence in the lives of men and women. 6.1.1 Legacies of inequality shape contemporary experiences of violence Participants shared how the structures and the history of South African society are embedded in the manifestation of sexual and gender violence in people’s lives. The participants with whom we conducted KIIs explained that the violence people experienced during apartheid, in particular, has a continued and destructive impact on the way people are able to live their lives: The structures and the history of our society are all embedded in the problem. The legitimacy with which we use violence in South Africa – the situation of violence and crime in which children grow up – poverty, education, and the structured inequalities our society faces are a huge problem. (Interview with Kelly, an academic stakeholder, 2014) Racial and economic inequalities have continued to articulate closely with one another and therefore with experiences of entrenched poverty. The absence of an effective social protection and welfare system and the context of dramatic levels of unemployment mean that conditions are created that offer a foundation for different forms of public and intimate violence to emerge and intersect with SGBV. The research findings show how economic inequalities interplay with normative gender roles that uphold structural violence. Activists spoke of the dominant male breadwinner ideology held in their communities, and how the experience of economic crisis in communities and households as a result of poverty and unemployment can contribute to violence. Participants explained that within traditional gender roles the unpaid labour of women often becomes a site of exploitation and abuse, with men taking on little responsibility for caring and unpaid 23 responsibilities. At the intimate partner level, women’s economic empowerment, and the acquisition of independence were also said to prompt violent backlash. A context of extreme poverty for many women living in Cape Town and the Western Cape means that leaving a violent relationship raises complex questions of strategies for survival. Spatial inequality was also closely tied to racial inequality, and the history of apartheid’s notion of ‘separate development’. In Matzikama, a rural town in the Western Cape, the key informants highlighted space as a significant issue in terms of geographic isolation for poor, marginalised and racialised communities within this town, restricting opportunities and choices for economic development. Key informants from Matzikama and Cape Town’s periurban areas explained that with such economic constraints and poverty in the lives of poor communities, building healthy relationships is very difficult. The historical legacy of segregated education and employment (including job reservation) compelled millions of Black South Africans to migrate away from their rural homes in order to take up work, often as unskilled underpaid labourers, in order to earn a living. The compound impact of South Africa’s legacy of racial and economic discrimination remains woven into the fabric of families and communities. In rural areas, high levels of unemployment and related migration continue to drive the situation of absent fathers and broken family structures. A key informant working in Matzikama explained that men may work away for up to a year at a time, and that this push for employment-seeking opportunities affects men who are committed parents and partners. 6.1.2 Discriminatory judicial systems and the limits of law enforcement In addition to experiencing the legacy of structural violence, evident in limited education and unemployment opportunities, participants across the research shared how the present actions of the post-apartheid state are failing to adequately address inequalities through the judicial system. The most significant parts of the judicial system, referred to by the community activists and key informants, were those areas where people encounter ‘law enforcement’ officials, including the police, lawyers and magistrates. Vena, a key informant and member of an LGBTQI organisation in Khayelitsha, for example, explained why people who experience SGBV are reluctant to report these crimes at police stations: [When LGBTQI] people go to the police station, [they] are then subjected to secondary rape by the police themselves. They call others and laugh at the person, and many people feel they are not going to report a case. In some instances, when someone goes to report a case, this is what happens at the police station. The perpetrator won’t be arrested, or the police won’t investigate. The government really needs to put policies in place to make sure the police prioritise these cases. (Interview with Vena, a civil society stakeholder, 2014) Community activists highlighted institutional discrimination within the justice system as especially harmful for marginalised groups. The key informants and the community activists described their own and other’s fear of violence and punishment by the police when reporting cases of SGBV, and of public humiliation when accessing health and survivor support services. This fear acted as a deterrent in accessing police resources, as highlighted across numerous key informant interviews and in the digital story of one activist, as she recounted her concern that the police would blame her for ‘looking like a man but not behaving like one’ when she was robbed at knife-point (see Vee’s story, Box 6.1). 24 The justice system was highlighted across the research as a place that is structured on patriarchal norms and maintains gender inequalities. Examples were given by key informants and community activists of police not taking responsibility for action in incidences of domestic violence. One community activist affiliated to the non-governmental organisation Mosaic spoke both of the need for protection orders and of their violation, referencing one example where a lack of responsiveness led to the murder of a woman reporting an abusive partner. Another activist described a delay of over six years and the inadequate management of a case to prosecute perpetrators of rape and murder. People living as refugees also face major barriers in going to the police as it is perceived that the issue of SGBV will be rejected in light of their citizenship status; similarly for sex workers reporting violence, their perceived identity as a sex worker is used to dismiss the legitimacy of their experience of SGBV. Customary justice systems led by men who often uphold patriarchal views or norms were also underlined as places that act to reinforce the privilege and power of men over women. This poses challenges for women who are survivors of violence and seek justice but who are bound to the male perpetrators in their families as a matter of respect and to uphold cultural institutions. Key informants and community activists spoke of the barriers to justice that men face in their experience of sexual and gender-based violence; the issue of male rape was seen as holding extreme levels of stigma related to perceived transgressions of heterosexuality and masculinity norms, preventing the reporting of such violence. Furthermore, the reporting of domestic violence against men within heterosexual and homosexual relationships was described as being met with hostility and humiliation from police officers, as further punishment for transgressing hegemonic norms of masculinity. This discrimination has a direct implication for the way that laws and policies become implemented in the lives of people experiencing violence. The amendment of the definition of rape as gender-neutral within the South Africa Sexual Offences Act was seen as a major success by a number of stakeholders in opening up possibilities of addressing sexual violence more effectively, and inclusively (Amendment Act No.32 of 2007). Despite national instructions that spell out the role of the officer who takes the statement, participants reported experiencing discrimination on the basis of their gender identity or their sexual orientation. Rather than working to operationalise these national instructions, participants explained that police officers reinforced stereotypes that ‘blame the victim’ and that punish LGBTQI persons and women for the violence they had experienced and sought to report. In doing so, the actions of these police officers continue to perpetuate an environment of impunity around SGBV, effectively endorsing violent behaviour. Men’s and women’s everyday interactions with the state shape their experience of citizenship and the way in which rights and entitlements are expressed, and understood. These institutional barriers and structures of constraint prevent people who are living with and experiencing violence from knowing their rights, or how to claim them. For example, a woman may know to go to the police station to report SGBV, but when she is sent away by the officer on duty, her understanding of the role of the state to address her case is shaped by that interaction. Key informant participants highlighted that people involved in violence are not aware of how the criminal justice system should work, what the law says or the responsibilities of the police in upholding human rights. A number of stakeholders in this study have argued, however, that the responsibility for addressing SGBV should be shared with government. In this sense, strategies for prevention must move beyond harsher sentencing, or promoting a ‘police state’, towards the roles of families, schools, the media, private sector, and traditional and religious institutions in the process of change. There needs to be a consciousness-raising within society, an awareness of ‘who am I, in relation to this issue’. For government interventions this shift means 25 engaging in a prevention agenda, as articulated in the Shadow Framework of the NSP on SGBV, discussed above. 6.1.3 Social norms and institutions that fuel gender inequality and violence Participants articulated the deeply gendered nature of politics, and how this is knitted into customary and religious institutions. These institutions, and their leaders, encourage particular gender norms and practices that fuel gender violence. For instance, one of the main discussions at the stakeholder policy dialogue centred on the way in which traditional leaders promote rigid gender norms for how to be a ‘man/woman’ in a monogamous, heterosexual relationship. For women in rural areas, according to a number of people who attended the dialogue from the Matzikama region, the boundaries within which they can live their lives were heavily prescribed by tradition and religion. Forced marriage was highlighted as a traditional practice that restricts the freedoms and choices of women and how the practice of Ukuthwala, which sees the kidnapping of young girls to catalyse a negotiation of marriage, is justified through traditional and cultural beliefs. Normative gender roles, prescribed by religious leaders and traditional institutions, mapped onto the participants’ experiences and accounts of their parents’ approach to raising girls differently from boys. In discussion during the collective power analysis workshop, three men who had struggled growing up with distant or deceased parents, now working as activists through Sonke’s CATs, heard about how Sinazo, a spoken word poet and activist, had been taught to behave as a woman. She said that women and men were ‘groomed’ differently to take on different kinds of work: Opportunities are more easily accessible for men; we as women have that stereotype mindset as a woman you’re only allowed to work in a kitchen or an office, you can’t be more creative. For guys they can feel like they can do anything. It’s how we grew up, it’s how we were groomed… The men in the group went on to say that the issue was not about the fact that these norms were restrictive for both young men and women, but that they could see – among their friends and other members of their community – that men punished their wife or girlfriend if they earned more money than them, because they did not want to be called out by their friends for ‘not being a man’. Sinazo also acknowledged that men must feel under significant pressure to be the ‘breadwinner’ because women, too, expect men to earn enough money to ‘treat them well’. For many in rural and urban contexts, rigid gender norms that are maintained through family hierarchies and religious organisations significantly curtail freedoms of expression of sexual identity. The research found that marginalisation and discrimination of lesbian, gay and transgender persons often follows a rejection or transgression of these norms. The justification of religion or ‘tradition’ becomes used as a means of violently controlling the life choices and sexuality of others. These forms of gendered violence were often described as public acts, for example in the case of the rape of lesbian women, and can be understood as an attempt to police norms of ‘right’ and ‘wrong’ kinds of gendered behaviours and corresponding forms of sexual identity and expression. This form of public policing also relates to the narratives of sexual violence that place blame on women and girls for stepping outside of their gendered position of subservience located within the home, for example by drinking alcohol in a shebeen11 or staying out late at night with friends. One digital story, for example, recounted a young woman’s experience of violence from her uncles as a form of punishment when they found her to be spending time in a tavern. Her experience of this physical violence prompted her to seek support from her older boyfriend who then raped her after she refused to have sex with him. As a young woman, without any support from her 11 Shebeens are predominantly informal establishments that sell alcohol, often without a licence. 26 family, she quickly found herself pulled into a cruel cycle of drug use and sexual exploitation. These examples show how a patriarchal gendered social order is itself a form of structural violence in that it enables the policing of gender norms limiting freedoms and rights based on gendered identity. Participants explained how inequitable gender norms enter into the lives of boys and girls from a very young age. Expectations placed on men to uphold certain masculine norms not only create the social pressures that drive the perpetration of violence and engender inequitable attitudes and behaviours, but also challenge their willingness to disclose violence. Boys as well as men are constrained from reporting sexual violence and abuse in their journey to becoming a socially preferred version of a man. The harm that violent masculinities cause men is a significant issue and was articulated across the research, including in relation to men expressing masculine power in perpetrating violence against other men. Community Action Team members highlighted how this understanding is important in engaging men in taking action against gender-based violence, and how working towards more gender-equitable societies is in the interests of both men and women. The role of political institutions and leaders in shaping gender norms was also emphasised in the key informant interviews. For instance, one participant explained that President Zuma modelled a certain form of masculinity through his rape trial, one that sanctioned violence against women by other men. And I would say that a key moment in the history of the country and the movement was the case against Zuma… the rape case was a turning point in terms of how men in this society – more traditional men – saw their role and their interaction with women. That was a key point, and many men just felt like, ‘If he can get away with certain things, why not me?’ So I think that was quite a negative influence. (Interview with Anonymous, civil society stakeholder, 2014) A lack of effective political leadership on the issue was highlighted as a major barrier to change. Participants explained that without strong commitment from leadership, including the presidency, on ending SGBV, the transformation of norms in wider social contexts, and the effective implementation of policies and programmes are vastly limited. Stakeholders highlighted a disconnect between the high number of women representatives in politics, as detailed above, and their perception that these women are not adequately empowered to take up senior positions of leadership in government, nor are these political actors committed to women’s empowerment in society. This disconnect was articulated in relation to women in politics working to maintain the power of men in political parties, which has been to the detriment of a political commitment to the issue of SGBV. Another political factor that is undermining change towards ending SGBV is the perception that members of the government are acting out of political motivations, and to enrich themselves, rather than really addressing priority issues such as SGBV. The nature of politics at the local level was described by community activists as highly clientelistic, especially in relation to SANCO (South African National Civic Organisation) and the roles of ward (local area) councillors. 6.2 Collective action to address SGBV The findings discussed in this section present a complex picture of how collective action works to build personal strength and shared accountability towards ending SGBV. Moving between the community level and wider stakeholder analysis, the research components enable us to see what enables and constrains the personal agency of men and women and how this is related to the way in which we interact with others – activists, organisations and institutions – for collective change. 27 Within this approach we hope to draw out specific insights on the role of men and boys in the process of change, and how engaging men as agents of change relates to the destabilising of repressive patriarchal gender orders that maintain structures of violence and inequality in the lives of men and women. 6.2.1 Forms and functions of collective action in communities The CAT members are those that may have quit school, that don’t have formal education, but they recognise that they can come together in the community to plan for their community. They meet with teachers, nurses, police officers, and think about how to work towards our community together. (Interview with a man working as a community activist, 2014) Strengthening strategies of community engagement by building formal and informal initiatives that enable change led by men and women working together was highlighted across the research study. Community mobilisation needs to be considered in the response to violence – that is, in terms of particular cases – but what participants were interested in highlighting was how mobilisation can be strengthened within the context of prevention. Key informants highlighted the importance of both men and women as agents of change in this space of mobilisation. However, it was important that there should be opportunities to engage separately as men, and as women, in order to build the confidence and resources to work together for change. It was explained that, for women, it is important that they feel a sense of empowerment so that when they then meet with the men, they can express themselves. Community activists shared their experiences as Sonke CATs members, and as gender activists in their communities across the Cape Town metropolitan area. They explained how they work within the community system in order to shift attitudes and perspectives on gender equality. These teams come together through their commitment to addressing gender inequality in their own lives or the lives of others; they include people from diverse backgrounds, including those out of work and school, and are open to men and women. The CATs’ vision is to ensure that men are included in mobilisation against SGBV, building support networks for men and women in the community in order to address gender inequality. CATs work with men to critically reflect on their role in maintaining gender inequality and act as role models for other men and women in the way that they bring gender equality into their everyday lives. Key informants from the Matzikama Men and Boys network also spoke of work within communities to support men and women to act as positive role models on issues of gender and community development for their peers, and for girls and boys, in order to support positive pathways that are blocked by current norms and attitudes. Media campaigns with men from the area published in the local dialect have been effective in promoting positive local role models as examples of equitable parenting; in turn this has increased interest within the community in the work of the network on men’s caring roles. CATs also work to hold men across the community to account on these issues. Members of these teams work together with people in positions of responsibility such as police, pastors, ward councillors, community-based organisations, teachers and nurses, to build partnerships and create safer communities. They also work on an individual level, for example accompanying LGBTQI persons to church, and showing solidarity for their equal place in society. We also heard how support from civil society organisations (CSOs) to which community activists are affiliated can enable partnerships between different groups working to address issues of gender inequality and violence. For example, organisational partnerships between CSOs working on gender justice and LGBTQI rights provided space for community mobilisers to learn from each other on the different gendered issues and discriminations faced within the community, enabling that learning to become embedded in their work. 28 However, the issue of the lack of physical space and necessary infrastructure for communitybased organisations to function effectively was raised repeatedly. The CATs members involved in this process spoke of how new spaces can be created for creative and artistic methods that can be used in the community to enable opportunities for people to come together and discuss difficult issues around gender and violence. Drama groups can look at different characters in public places, play with things the other way around; these help to create discussion and dialogue. Along with drama, music and poetry enable the community in their process of changing beliefs to learn and start showing change in the society at large. (Presentation transcript from discussion with community activists on gendered norms, 2014) 6.2.2 Building personal power in spaces of safety and belonging The role of collectives in enabling feelings of safety, support, belonging and equality was highlighted across the research. For many participants, engagement in a collective enables a shift towards a new reality where non-violence and equality between men and women are possible. For people who have experienced and continue to experience violence, the collective helps build relationships that support an everyday form of survival, in terms of personal wellbeing and internalising your own sense of self-worth. In the narratives shared by the community activists this was clear in the lives of men and women who were building the strength to deal with complex issues of violence. The role of collectives in creating a space to connect with others who have experienced violence themselves, or providing support services, including counselling and participatory education sessions, enables a platform for healing and transforming gender-inequitable attitudes. In her digital story, Vee, who was rejected by her mother because of her sexual orientation, has rebuilt her experience of family, in the LGBTQI association Free Gender that supports her in her community and takes action against hate crimes (see Vee’s story below, Box 6.1). Narratives from the community activists in the research highlighted that where these spaces are not available, people living in adverse circumstances may seek these support systems in groups that are ultimately harmful to their wellbeing and future trajectories, for example within gangs of young men, and peer groups that are finding coping strategies through abusing drugs, alcohol and their bodies. For men and boys these spaces are also critical. As outlined by Gabeba below, work towards gender equality needs to be understood as relational, and men’s engagement in this process is critical, both for men’s own wellbeing, and the wellbeing of the women in their lives. So, when someone that you can relate to – and someone you see as your equal – tells you that that’s possible, you know, it’s almost too much. That’s the power of Embrace for me; that emotional support. But the thing is, they need that support from their partners. How do you do that when your male partner is not yet connecting with himself? How do you get him to connect with his female partner? I think that’s what’s happening with our men. They don’t know how to connect with themselves. (Interview with Gabeba, a civil society stakeholder, 2014) Key informant stakeholders highlighted that constructions of masculinity prevent men from speaking about issues of women’s rights or critically reflecting on their role in driving gender inequality. Spaces for men to talk about relationships, emotions and violence create opportunities to reconstruct gender norms and shift attitudes and behaviours away from normalised forms of violence and related gender inequalities. It was explained that in order to be effective, spaces that engage with men to end gender violence should avoid generically 29 labelling men and boys as ‘perpetrators of violence’. It is important that men and women’s complex and intersecting experiences of violence are recognised and that this enables a platform for discussion. Notions of accountability for gender equality were also explored, in order to raise awareness of how everyday attitudes and practices work to uphold the dominant masculine norms that maintain violence. Through his digital story one man shared how his decision to end his abuse towards his family was supported through Sonke’s programmes working with men through group-based education on children, parenting and men’s care work. Initiatives that challenge narrow constructions of ‘gender roles’ were highlighted across the research as important opportunities to engage men in reconstructing more equitable relationships between men and women. Box 6.1 Vee’s story The stories of people living with SGBV emphasise how critical it is to actively engage one’s most immediate relationships in processes of social change, for the realisation safety and security. In diverse ways, people who have experienced SGBV in their homes and communities are building more equitable social relationships that nurture their sense of belonging and recognition, enabling them to take action within a wider political system to transform the situations of others. Vee’s story is an example of this. My name is Velisa, I was born 1986 in Gauteng. I used to stay with my mother, sister and my brother. We were a very happy family. All this time I had a secret, and I didn’t know how I was going to tell my mother. I used to sit in my bedroom and think how I was going to tell her. They say it is not black people’s culture to be a lesbian, people used to call me names like ‘Satanist’, saying I had ‘snakes’. Because I didn’t have a boyfriend, and I sat by myself. Being called names was painful and it was breaking my spirit. One day I decided to sit down with my mother and tell her that I am a lesbian. I don’t like boys, I love women. Then she left me and went to her room, the next morning she never spoke to me. My mother and I stopped being close, we used to talk about anything now things changed. Not speaking with my mother was very painful. I sat and I thought of a better solution for myself. In December 2004 I decided to go to my grandmother in Khayelitsha in Cape Town. Then I found my grandmother accepted me, she gave me love and support and wanted me to be happy. I was happy, I even forgot how my mother treated me. It was hard in the streets of Khayelitsha, there was that group of boys sitting in the corner looking at people. One day I was robbed by these guys, in a street near my place. They took out three knives, two of them pointed a knife at me. One of them searched my pockets and took money and my cell phone. I didn’t want to go to the police, because when they see me they are going to say you were beaten by a man, but you look like one. In 2011 I joined a family called ‘Free Gender’ and they were working with a lot of lesbians like me. We used to meet and talk about all the issues that we face as lesbians. It was a relief having this new family of lesbians, I was happy. I was also happy at home with my grandmother. (Vee, a community activist participant, 2014) Watch Vee’s story, and those of other activists from this research process at: http://interactions.eldis.org/capetown-digital-stories-on-sgbv (see video). 30 6.2.3 Personal agency and empowerment to effect change For many of the activists and key informants involved in this study, the building of personal agency, empowerment and critical consciousness has translated into political expressions of power through their activism in relation to SGBV. Within the group of community activists, and some key informants, this transition had taken place in diverse ways. For many, the democratisation of social relationships within their own family was a critical space of change (as shown in Vee’s story, above). Working to establish positive gender norms often related to a parent’s position as a role model to their children, and the idea that modelling values and ways of being were shared as ways to provide important strategies for children in navigating the complex and gendered social and political contexts that they will grow up in. This has positive implications for the critical need for a change in gender dynamics presented in the research. For others, this political agency was expressed through informal relationships within their community. Activists involved in the digital storytelling workshop shared how their quest for change entered into the everyday lives of people living in their community. One participant said that he actively used his physical power and historic reputation of being a tsotsi (criminal), to walk alongside (or sit next to) people who were marginalised in his community. This included people who were gay, and women, who might have found themselves in vulnerable positions in public places. Other participants spoke of strategies for influencing peers that involved engaging their local knowledge to access their familiar environments, and finding socially and culturally appropriate ways of interacting on these issues. Reaching men and boys in community settings meant, for example, informal conversations in shebeens, one of the only forms of open public space in township communities, traditionally dominated by men. The notion of appropriateness in relationships for engaging with men and boys to address gender-based violence was raised elsewhere in the research, specifically in terms of engaging with traditional and religious leaders. Participants highlighted the importance of locating or enabling champions in community leadership positions to broker access to men in these positions, in order to catalyse the process of change. 6.2.4 Networked ways of working for gender justice Partnership working and networked approaches to addressing gender inequality were highlighted as critical across the research. A number of participants grounded this view in the history and evolution of collective action for women’s rights through apartheid. The Western Cape Network on Violence Against Women outlined how partnerships emerged between women’s rights organisations in order to fill the gap in state services to black women. In building this network, support was then demanded from the state in order to ensure that the work was being recognised. This way of networking continues today, in particular in relation to how informal and formal alliances at the local level provide referrals to support survivors of violence, and to access further support mechanisms if particular government programmes are full, or not responsive. The role of civil society in filling the gap in government services was a strong message; this is critical in rural areas that are marginalised from both government and civil society schemes. The government makes use of non-governmental organisations (NGOs) to support their programmes, implementing few initiatives themselves. The integral role of civil society in interventions to address SGBV means that people are closer to getting the services that they need, and are entitled to. However, it was highlighted in the research that there is a lack of awareness in the community of the kinds of initiatives and services available and that this lack of awareness needs to be addressed by localised responses such as directories in publically accessible locations. 31 In relation to the complex and interconnected causes of sexual and gender violence, key informants highlight that where networks are working effectively, they recognise the importance of partnership working across sectors. The example of the Matzikama Men and Boys network starts with a diverse group of organisations including community-based organisations, faith-based organisations, government service delivery agencies and community role models coming together as a platform. When we created the Matzikama Men and Boys network we wanted to provide a platform for organisations to come together and share their experiences of what they’re doing and to inform each other so that the work they are doing in each of their specialist fields is understood and they are not duplicating each other but rather support each other. (Interview with Jenee, a rural civil society stakeholder, 2014) This platform then provides a space to educate each other about the work they are doing and then to take this learning out into their work in the communities. It means that community initiatives have the potential to work more synergistically, for example on issues of parenting, health, adult education and livelihood security. Key informants in Matzikama expressed how this has enabled the organisations involved to extend the reach of their initiatives to more isolated rural communities. A number of key informants highlighted the significance of strategic alliances between women’s organisations and those engaging men and boys for gender equality to achieve a transformative agenda on gender. In relation to the church it was highlighted that shifting gender-inequitable norms means that CSOs, wider stakeholders and men and women together are standing up and demanding equality for women. An important driver of effective partnerships lies in the opportunities afforded for knowledge sharing. The significance of diverse partnerships to deepen gender analysis was highlighted, including critically engaging about the role of patriarchy as a driver of gender inequality and the structural drivers of change. Participants in civil society spoke of critical conversations between organisations with different starting points in terms of men and masculinities, queer and feminist theories. Importantly, at the community level this means working between groups that engage men, LGBTQI persons, women and girls, to deepen a shared understanding of the drivers of violence. It was also highlighted that networks working across levels and sectors play an important role in enabling and learning from community knowledge in processes of change. This includes the innovations that communities are undertaking to address gender inequalities, and their insights on how and why gender manifests as violence in people’s lives. However, an important gap was seen here in relation to how this knowledge becomes mobilised into policymaking. Networks also play an important role in translating law into the rights of citizens. Participants spoke of the importance of organisations such as the Commission for Gender Equality and the public outreach work that is done with communities on rights education and awareness raising. It is critical that this work recognises the violent realities of the people involved, including the backlash from men against women for claims to or advances in gender equality. The partnership between organisations working to raise awareness on rights and empowerment and educational institutions was highlighted across the research. This is an important space for supporting young men and women to hold an understanding of women’s rights across the life course. However, this work needs to be supported by training for teachers and institutional policies that uphold these rights, in order for those rights to be realised and internalised. Community activists spoke strongly about the role of schools as spaces for upholding rights to safety but that currently this is not the reality. 32 6.2.5 National advocacy and accountability for gender justice Localised groups, movements and organisations provide a first-hand understanding of the demands of people living with violence for the changes needed to produce more effective interventions, and play a critical role in engaging more marginalised groups. It is also at this level of the collective that success in national advocacy can be experienced and realised. As we have seen from this research, this needs to relate to material improvement in the reduction of SGBV, and the capabilities of people to claim rights and the strategies available to them. As one participant outlined: I think we all have different roles to play. Like ourselves – Mosaic is doing great work on the ground through some forms of mobilisation and actually providing the direct service about violence education and really capacitating community members to advocate for their rights. Then, on a larger scale. you have an organisation like Sonke, who really does large-scale national, regional and international advocacy work, which is massive in terms of putting pressure on the government to put the proper legislative reforms in place – on a national level, the Shukumisa campaign, which is one of the partnerships I mentioned, has done amazingly in terms of sexual violence legislation and around reforming sexual violence legislation to be inclusive; to make sure blueprints are in place. (Interview with Kerryn, a civil society stakeholder, 2014) Coalitions of actors, across multiple organisations working towards greater equality, can create channels and opportunities through which claims for gender justice from the local level can be amplified through to national advocacy initiatives. There is recognition that the process of change to address violence is complex and messy. I would say one of the key learnings for me in this work – through the work of GFSA [Gun Free South Africa] – is the importance of a dual approach of being able to reach up to the top and influence policy at the highest level, but to make sure that there is an interaction from the bottom up. It’s not a linear process; it’s a process of dynamic interaction, where the work that the organisation is doing on the ground with grassroots community of creating safe spaces which we did through the ‘gun free zone’ campaign. (Interview with Adele, a civil society stakeholder, 2014) A dynamic interaction between different spaces of knowledge creation – local realities, civil society strategies, and government policymaking – will mean that policies and practice can engage more effectively in the complex process of change needed in addressing SGBV. Through the research study, there was a limit to what we were able to learn about the links between these different parts of the system. Clearer strategies are needed for linking across actors that build networks that work together to influence policy and catalyse social change in a collaborative and accountable way. It is clear from this research that a strong response is needed from the state on addressing SGBV. Participants spoke of the importance of training and capacity building across state institutions, from policymakers to service providers. This training has to go beyond one-off, broad-brush approaches, to those that offer more sustainable change and feed into a prevention agenda. There also needs to be accountability within the state system, for example in terms of police brutality, or a lack of responsiveness on issues of SGBV. It was highlighted that there is currently no career path within the police system that supports work on SGBV. It was argued by key informants that the state needs to have a multipronged approach to addressing SGBV alongside structural violence. This would entail, for instance, working to address high levels of unemployment, while also strengthening law enforcement mechanisms to encourage more people to report crimes and access resources. Key informants highlighted that this involves government working more effectively in partnership 33 with NGOs. In turn they argue that there is a need to build knowledge and understanding of where government is working effectively with – and not in place of – CSOs: the Victim Empowerment Programme was highlighted as a starting point for this, including how this has been rolled out to rural areas. The focus of the Department of Social Development on early childhood development was applauded as an important shift towards understanding how violence becomes a part of people’s lives before they encounter the state system in terms of law enforcement. 6.3 Lessons for and limitations to collective action to address SGBV This final section provides some insights into the constraints and possibilities of collective action to address SGBV that works across levels and spaces, and that meaningfully engages with both men and women towards transformative change. The learning generated is focused on the practicalities of collective action across movements for gender justice, and the resources and strategies necessary to effect change. 6.3.1 Recognising constraints to engaging men for gender justice Within the research a rationale for men’s involvement in ending gender-based violence was articulated by a number of community activists and key stakeholders: participants suggested that by engaging men in this process, both men and women are recognised as being negatively affected by patriarchal inequality, but that this process needs to, and can, hold men to account for the privilege and power they embody, and implicitly or explicitly exert in relation to other men, and women. However, for others there is tension and scepticism of the possible role that men can play in addressing violence against women, and children. We first have to make sure that women understand their own power, before we can start engaging over there – because we have seen it happening over and over again that we are working towards women’s empowerment, and leadership, and capacitating women – and the minute the doors are opened, the men walk in and they haven’t dealt with their own issues (and I’m saying this as a group). (Interview with Glynis, a civil society stakeholder, 2014) Multiple key informants working in traditional women’s rights organisations highlighted the critical work they are doing on the violence and abuse that men perpetrate. They argued that this work is fundamental to the security of women, and it is therefore not their responsibility to work with men. Those organisations that are dealing with masculinities need to go beyond working on ‘gender equality’, which it was argued is a depoliticised construct. This work needs to lead to men holding men accountable, both as perpetrators of violence, and in relation to their role of upholding patriarchy, and the privilege and power that they are born into. Tension was also experienced around the implications of the perceived development of a ‘men and boys’ agenda for the women’s rights movement. One concern raised was that working with this constituency would mean that women fall off the programming priority area. Further concern was raised in relation to particular strategies for working with men and boys that find entry points through conservative, traditional and religious values, for example promoting the role of man as protector. For women’s rights organisations these strategies are seen as contributing to the maintenance of patriarchy. Holding each other to account on this is critical for enabling change towards gender equality that works towards transformative change for men and women. 34 The key informant interviews indicated that one way to hold men and women’s organisations accountable for their work on gender transformation was by encouraging these organisations to look internally at women’s leadership in the programmes and campaigns that men are a part of. In raising this point, the key informants problematised ‘gender transformation’ initiatives for, in some cases, quietly maintaining normative gender roles that situate women lower than men within the organisation’s hierarchy, while claiming – externally – to facilitate a shift in these very norms. Strategies for addressing violence have an important role to play in enabling trajectories of change that relate transformations within the home and community to wider societal structures including the gendered order of civil society organisations and movements. Collaboration between organisations/movements working to engage men for gender equality and those focused on women’s rights can help address some of these issues. This mutual learning has the potential to engender accountability for some of the limitations present in work with men and boys. 6.3.2 Funding and resource allocation Personal and political commitment to addressing SGBV can be demonstrated by the introduction and implementation of effective policies that regulate budgets and direct resources towards preventing and responding to SGBV in South Africa. Key informants also outlined how government budget restrictions as a result of contemporary austerity measures are impacting the services that are closest to the lives of those experiencing SGBV. It was highlighted in the research that how government formulates plans and budgets is not done in a way that takes gender into account. This can perpetuate stereotypes relating to, for example, what is considered women’s work versus men’s work. Furthermore, the Department of Social Development is severely underfunded, and consequently a large number of NGOs and community-based organisations (CBOs) that provide supplementary support are underfunded as well. Participants noted, too, that since 2000 there has been an overall depletion in resources to civil society organisations supporting women’s rights issues. It is argued that this is a result of shifts in the global development policy discourse that promotes certain priority areas. These shifts impact directly on the relationship between civil society organisations and development assistance agencies, but also filter through into government strategies – support for survivor services appears to be most deeply affected. The role of the international community in setting the terms of interventions to address SGBV was also raised in relation to refugee populations. It was asserted that donor agencies have the power to determine if local civil society organisations can or cannot work with women facing violence, because, as refugees, they may not have legal registration documents. This links back to the tensions between organisations working on engaging men and boys and traditional women’s rights organisations, as discussed above. When the dichotomy is unhelpfully reinforced by government and international actors, civil society can play a role in showing the way in which all people’s lives are connected but also differently influenced by those very structures the government cannot or does not address – like the failing education system, entrenched patriarchy in political and religious institutions, and entrenched levels of unemployment. 35 7 Discussion The case study creates a platform for recasting how we understand ‘collective action’ and what this means for understanding complex processes of social change towards gender and social justice. It raises questions about how collective action for gender justice contributes to shaping the sociopolitical realities within which citizens and states interact, and what this ‘collective’ experience really means. The findings above have been articulated in response to the two main research questions that centred on structural factors that contribute to SGBV, and the actions taken by people, collectively, to address and prevent SGBV. In this discussion, we look across and beyond the research findings, to highlight their relevance to the ongoing work of activists, academics and policymakers as they seek to support effective collective action and foster social and gender justice. A written document relies on a linear presentation of findings, but a far more complex picture has emerged through this research. A 3-D matrix would helpfully show how the edges of the findings meet: it is impossible, for example, to look at the way gender norms interact with violence, without also looking at the work of social movements to reshape these norms and the influence of messages communicated by social institutions and government policies. In this section, we articulate two main overarching conclusions that transect the findings, and locate this study in a broader field of work linked to collective action and gender justice. South Africa’s past is perhaps most visible in the legacy of violence that its citizens continue to embody in their everyday lives. We argue, first, therefore, that it is impossible and even dangerous to delink SGBV, as a very specific form of violence, from the broader dynamics of socioeconomic inequality that still characterises the lives of the majority of South Africa’s population. The first section of our findings describes how the persistence of this inequality was inscribed into the very spaces – townships, homes, bodies – in which most of the participants lived. This inequality, and the multiple forms of violence they experienced as a result, was articulated in particular by the community activists with whom we worked. The participants detailed the extent to which racial inequalities, threaded throughout South Africa’s history, emerged in the present with ongoing economic struggle in families. A particular set of normative gender roles were articulated, in relation to these structural dynamics. Migration, for instance, was expressed as an action taken by men in order to fulfil expectations that men should be earning money to support their families; the study revealed numerous instances of children losing contact with their fathers because they had left to seek work. The social ecology theory, developed by Heise (1998), has a core level – the individual – where children with absent fathers supposedly learn to adopt violent behaviour later in their lives. Although the model presents a further three levels where violence can take place (alongside reasons for their occurrence), this view of violence fails to take into account the broader pressures placed on men, and also on women, to ensure that their families can survive economically in a powerfully discriminatory environment. While this study does not seek to dislocate responsibility from individuals committing acts of violence, it does show the value of understanding the context in which multiple and intersecting forms of violence take place. For example, in the case of migration, high levels of unemployment and job migration predominantly affect those people who were racially discriminated against during apartheid; and migration connects to the history of job reservation (constitutionally supported racial discrimination in employment and economic opportunity) (Wolpe 1972), poor public education (Spaull 2013) and enforced migration (Klotz 2013). 36 Historically, and in the 1990s in particular, initiatives to engage with men on gender were largely based on the problematic notion that there was one dominant (and therefore one oppressive) form of masculinity (Hearn and Morrell 2012). In doing so, many of these initiatives used the idea of hegemonic masculinity to legitimise ‘individualistic’ theories and interventions that see the problem of violence lying with men’s attitudes and behaviours, in a similar way to the ‘individual’ sphere in social ecology theory. Morrell (1998, 2001), however, first used the concept of ‘hegemonic masculinities’ to explain multiple forms and dynamics of male power; importantly, these dynamics of male power related, too, to different forms of racial and economic power. Morrell argues that it is therefore possible to intervene in the politics of masculinities. They are constantly being protected and defended, and are constantly breaking down and being recreated. [A] ‘white’ masculinity (represented in the political and economic dominance of the white ruling class); an ‘African’, rurally based masculinity that resided in and was perpetuated through indigenous institutions (such as chiefship, communal land tenure, and customary law) and finally a ‘black’ masculinity that had emerged in the context of urbanization and the development of geographically separate and culturally distinct African townships. (Morrell, Jewkes and Lindegger 2012: 13) Morrell et al. (2012) describe how legacies of structural violence in South Africa interact with the construction of hegemonic masculinities and call for a differentiation of kinds of gender power. The findings in this case study show that these gendered norms also perpetuate gender violence perpetrated by women, and that different kinds of men exert violence over other men as a form of power, too. When SGBV is only approached using prevalence and incidence figures, or individual accounts of violence, then structural dynamics of inequality are obscured from view. While this is problematic because it presents a partial picture, it is also dangerous because interventions that are set up to respond to SGBV at an individual level will fail to unpick the tapestry of structural inequality that lies beneath the surface. The second conclusion of the study, then, relates to the role of institutions and leaders in failing to address, or sometimes in maintaining, structural inequalities that underpin SGBV. These institutions include political institutions, such as government departments and the judicial system, as well as religious institutions and leaders. President Zuma, for instance, was mentioned a number of times in the key informant interviews for modelling a particular kind of masculinity that legitimised forms of sexual violence, such as rape. Participants explained that without providing clear leadership on gender justice, and without transforming government departments to better respond to SGBV, the government would continue to fail in its attempt to promote gender equality. Political institutions, particularly those related to law enforcement, were also described in the study as negligent or ill-equipped to deal with the needs of people experiencing SGBV. The participants in the study described, too, how religious leaders used their power in their religious communities to sanction only heteronormative relationships that were predominantly based on sexist characterisations of men and women’s ‘roles’ within these relationships. Related to this second main argument is the role of collective actors in calling on leaders and institutions in South Africa to implement measures that can start doing the work of ‘unpicking’ this interlinked tapestry of inequality and violence. In our case study, in particular, this was explored in relation to the work of a group of NGOs and CSOs working together to call on the government to implement a National Strategic Plan to address SGBV. Gaventa and McGee’s (2010) analysis of citizen and civil society action in national policy reform also helps in understanding the relationship between ordinary citizens – like the community activists with whom we worked – and the organisations and movements they engage with to create responsive and accountable states that can more effectively address 37 poverty, protect rights and tackle social inequalities. They outline the importance of the interaction between state and society in the process of change and of an understanding about how this relationship shapes the capacity and nature of actors in both spaces (Gaventa and McGee 2010). Further, they illustrate that change is enabled through broad coalitions of deeply embedded social actors that both mobilise to drive change and work with political reformers to take up top-down opportunities underpinned by national and international norms and frameworks. In line with Gaventa and McGee’s (2010) analysis of the value of collective action, our findings demonstrate that gender-transformative collective action can provide an opportunity for different actors and organisations to work together across social issues towards change, bringing alliances and partnerships between people and across organisations. Further, approaches that address harmful gender norms in communities also have the potential to transform versions of masculinity that promote violence, and the mechanisms in society that support male dominance and power. Collaborations between organisations and institutions can enable coordination across interventions, engaging different ecological levels and addressing multiple intersecting influences to reduce and prevent violence. As shown through this case study, collectivising and alliance building both within and across spaces of change have the potential to engage the whole social system. As powerfully articulated by the group of 11 activists through their digital stories and collective analysis, community mobilisation activities to prevent and reduce violence are illustrative of how these ‘people-driven’ initiatives can address SGBV at multiple levels. In the digital stories, this emerged most strongly in terms of the relationships between individuals, families and communities. Through engaging multiple stakeholders (such as community men and women, youth, religious leaders, police, teachers, and political leaders) in their own geographic and social setting, the activist accounts articulated changes in public discourse, practices, and norms for gender and violence. The strategies for change outlined within this case study can therefore be framed as gendertransformative approaches, because they seek to change gender roles and create more respectful and egalitarian relationships (Dworkin et al. 2013). These initiatives emphasise the full participation of men, whose role is seen as essential in the transformative process. In South Africa, Sonke Gender Justice has been working within these parameters to support men and boys to take action towards gender equality and the prevention of violence and HIV/AIDS. Their initiatives include the One Man Can (OMC) programme that works to achieve these goals by engaging with men and boys in the process of understanding, reflecting on and reconfiguring gender inequalities at the personal level, in their families and communities. OMC workshops also aim to make visible inequalities between men, recognising the history of racial inequalities in South Africa, and deliberately build on the country’s legacy of social justice activism and the agency of men and women to effect change (Colvin, Human and Peacock 2009). Dworkin et al.’s evaluation shows that the programme works effectively to shift participants’ notions about male dominance and violent behaviour (Dworkin et al. 2013). The case study findings, however, also emphasised some of the limits of approaches that seek to engage men and boys in ending gender violence. These concerns relate to the reproduction of the ‘men as protector’ argument. Researchers and theorists on masculinities studies have made similar arguments about some of the limits to approaches in engaging men and boys for gender equality, both in South Africa (Morrell et al. 2013), and internationally. Research in Papua New Guinea (Eves 2010) and Tanzania (Jakobsen 2014), for instance, shows that while it is important to engage with both men and women, and the oppressive structures that reproduce harmful gender norms, there is the risk that feminist concerns about women’s rights will be quietly moved to the periphery of the policy agenda (Africa 2010; Freedman and Jacobson 2012) under the clamour to ‘engage men and boys’. 38 Pragmatic limitations to collective action, and to social transformation, were also noted through the case study and relate, specifically, to a lack of funding for those organisations working to provide resources to people affected by SGBV. Most often, it was those same organisations that did not have funding who were doing the work of government departments (and particularly the Departments of Health and Justice) in providing support to survivors of SGBV. The work of civil society organisations, described above, has not only been to provide this basic support but, in South Africa, it has also historically been to call on the government to be accountable to and take greater responsibility for the wellbeing of its citizens. 39 8 Conclusion By focusing on SGBV in isolation from its wider and deeper context, there is a risk of simultaneously laying the blame and the responsibility for redress on individuals, thus attributing agency for change to individuals, while also making the problem a matter of individual and society pathology. In essence, this shifts the focus away from the actors and institutions that need to be called to account for their role – at a micro- and macro-economic level – in perpetuating inequality and violence. The porosity of and interaction between the different ‘levels’ within the social system mean that structural dynamics of inequality become embedded in the norms of families and communities as well as the institutions that govern people’s lives. It is therefore important to establish and understand more deeply, as this case study set out to do, the link between collective action and social and political accountability in the process of addressing SGBV. It was found, across the various components of the study, that strategies of collective actors at multiple levels can work to politicise the process of change, making visible the deep-rooted structures of constraint to gender equality. Through this process the national and the local can be linked, thus utilising and deepening democratic systems to promote sustainable strategies to end SGBV, and to transform the context of structural inequality in which it is embedded. The window for real and significant collaboration, through the utilisation of democratic systems, currently exists as civil society and some government officials seek to bring an SGBV NSP to life. However, as noted throughout this case study, unless there is real galvanising of civil society effort and mobilisation at a local level, this might not be achieved. As noted by stakeholders, both in the interviews and in the stakeholder workshop, it is deeply problematic that the onus lies predominantly with actors engaged collectively to address SGBV, rather than with government departments and policymakers. Not only does this power imbalance fail to recognise the role of political leaders and government institutions in perpetuating damaging messages about sexual and gender norms, it also indicates that the crisis of gender and sexual violence does not warrant serious intervention. Further, by placing the onus on civil society to both call for policy change, and to respond to the challenges emerging from the government’s inaction, this approach will also fail to systematically address the very forms of structural violence that reinforce intersecting inequalities. In place of inaction, the case study suggests that what is needed is a government-led fully costed and funded proactive national plan that places positive prevention, accountability and transparency front and centre. 40 9 Policy and practice recommendations 9.1 Citizens’ initiatives and social activism  It is important to recognise informal ways of collective action in people’s lived realities. Continued work is needed with communities to understand their innovations in addressing gender inequalities and to mobilise this knowledge into policymaking. Collective action (informal and formal) does not necessarily translate into a ‘gender transformative’ collective or movement; citizens and affiliated organisations need to invest in the work of gender equality. In doing so the political power dynamics of challenging patriarchal privilege must be recognised. Working with citizens to develop and share practical legal knowledge about their rights, and avenues for recourse and resources on SGBV is crucial to enable them to shape and hold accountable the policies and programmes that affect their lives. Sustainability of collective action in ending SGBV at the community level is important; more understanding is needed on what drives citizen action, enables ownership of the process of change, and the resources needed to support this. A focus on mobilisation has highlighted the significance of engaging with men and women in positions of power and holding them to account in their responsibilities for working to end SGBV; as power holders in these contexts, men have an important role to play in holding each other accountable on gender equality.     9.2 Civil society partnerships  Partnerships across social movements working for gender equality – engaging men, women, LGBTQI persons – are important for accountability within movements. Furthermore, these relationships can enable collaborative learning on gender issues and help ensure a collective response to SGBV that promotes social justice for all. A clear vision and purpose needs to be built for gender transformative collective action. Where this reflects a partnership between state, social actors and citizens, then possibilities of accountability and work to enable citizen action and rights claims at the local level will be strengthened. Civil society needs to develop clearer strategies and policies for mediating and linking across actors to strengthen networked ways of working to address SGBV across multiple levels and social and political spaces.   9.3 Government institutions  Recognising citizens and civil society organisations as effective partners in ending SGBV, working collaboratively to support policy reform on the issue of SGBV, and importantly in enabling effective implementation. Political decision-makers and champions are critical for driving institutional change. Entrenched patriarchy in political and religious institutions needs to be challenged in order for these institutions to more effectively address the root causes of SGBV. Multi-sectoral consultations and citizen participation are required to develop and implement a fully-costed and funded National Strategic Plan to end SGBV that aims to fill the existing gaps in: laws and policies, services for survivors of SGBV, funding for strategies that prevent violence, and oversight and impact mechanisms.   41  The government needs to make information on SGBV funding more transparent (including funding criteria, recipients and budgets). Ideally, this information should also be made available retrospectively, for organisations to be in a better position to lobby national and international donors for funding. 9.4 International community  International donor agencies must meaningfully engage in learning from specific country contexts, to develop agendas on SGBV that can be sensitively, and effectively, implemented. The international community can play a role in ‘the collective’, as part of a global alliance that supports and enables national-level, contextualised responses to SGBV. Using the effective work being done by collective actors at local and national levels to contribute to the global dialogue and frameworks on ending SGBV.   42 Annex 1 Map of community activists’ engagement in the research Research component Date Duration Participants Research activities Digital storytelling process July 2014 5 days 11 community activists Community activists participated in a learning, creating and sharing experience supported by technology called digital storytelling (DST). DST allows participants to share aspects of their life story through the creation of their own short digital media production. Key informant interviews August 2014 1 hour per person 2 community activists Two community activists, one man one woman, from different communities, affiliated to different activist organisations with a focus on LGBTQI and men and gender equality issues were interviewed alongside key stakeholders on the issue of SGBV, and their involvement in collective action. This ensured that the voices of those living with violence and taking action in Cape Town’s marginalised contexts were given space to share their perspectives on the issues being explored by wider civil society networks. Collective story/power analysis October 2014 3 days 9 community activists Community activists were engaged in a facilitated workshop over three days that used creative and visual methods to analyse their digital stories individually and collectively in relation to the wider social, political context in which their stories were embedded. The nature of their individual and collective power in affecting change was of particular emphasis and provided a transition into understanding their relationship with others in addressing SGBV. This process concluded with the development of key messages on strategies for change in addressing SGBV under three key themes. (Cont’d.) 43 Annex 1 (cont’d.) Stakeholder policy dialogue October 2014 1 day 8 community activists The policy dialogue workshop provided a space for community activists to catalyse knowledge and learning with a wider stakeholder audience on the issue of SGBV and how it should be addressed. Three digital stories were shared by the activists, complemented by the key messages developed in the collective power analysis workshop. This process helped to ensure that the policy dialogue remained grounded in the lived realities of people living in poverty and marginalisation and a process of mutual learning was catalysed between the community activists and wider civil society participants. Community activists then engaged in the policy dialogue as participants sharing their knowledge in this forum. Advocacy planning workshop November 2014 1 day 9 community activists An advocacy planning workshop was held with the community activists at The Wellness Centre in Khayelitsha, a location where they meet to plan their activism and organising. Participants were given support to plan how they would use their learning from being involved in this case study to enhance their activism, and also to identify the resources necessary for this. Support was provided by Sonke Gender Justice to take this action planning forward. Research analysis November 2014 N/A Researchers All components of the community engagement process were analysed in-depth as primary data for this case study. This included both visual and text materials. 44 Annex 2 Key informant interview schedule SLF, Sonke Gender Justice and IDS case study on the role of men and boys, and collective action, in addressing sexual and gender-based violence (SGBV). 0. Introduce study and consent form This is brief and situates the KII in the wider study, and in relation to the DST process and the stakeholder dialogue. Please check that the interviewee is happy to have the interview audio-recorded. 1. Individual motivations for engaging on gender justice This focus area draws on a life history approach: this enables us to understand perceptions and attitudes from the key informant, helping us to appreciate their ideology and narrative of change. 1.1 Tell us about yourself, the work that you do and why you do it. 1.2 Can you tell us about any important moments that contribute to your engagement with the issue of sexual and gender-based violence over the past ten years of your experience? a) 2. How do these moments relate to you personally? The factors that inform intersecting inequalities and that specifically manifest as sexual and gender-based violence This focus area looks at the structural drivers of SGBV. Understanding the structures of constraint to gender equality and that perpetuate SGBV, specifically the intersecting inequalities that underpin the social, political and economic context of South Africa. 2.1 Can you explain how men and women experience violence? a) b) c) d) What shapes and forms does this violence come in? How do different attitudes and behaviours affect violence? Are there specific groups that are more affected by violence than others? What is specific to the rural/urban context? 2.2 2.3 3. How has your understanding of the issue of sexual and gender-based violence changed over the past ten years of your experience? How and why? What drives the violence that men and women experience in South Africa? Existing interventions to address sexual and gender-based violence (at community, organisational, provincial, national levels) 3.1 What’s being done in your organisation/community (see what’s applicable) to address gender-based violence? 3.2 What are the most significant interventions or processes addressing sexual and gender-based violence? 45 a) b) c) d) Who’s benefiting? Who is being reached? Who is not? How are attitudes and behaviours being engaged to address sexual and gender-based violence? How are the rights of those who experience SGBV being fulfilled? Are people aware of their rights, and are they claiming them? 3.3 What change have you seen as a result of these interventions? 3.4 Who are the key partners that have worked with you and your organisation to address these kinds of violence? 3.5 Who do you think is responsible for addressing sexual and gender-based violence in South Africa and why do you think this? a) 3.6 4. What is the role of government? What can the government be doing differently? What are the key policies (or policy areas) that you feel have influenced or hindered this response? Specific interventions that engage with men and boys, the role of collective action and how and why they work, or don’t work 4.1 What is the role of men and boys in addressing SGBV? 4.2 What kinds of strategies have been developed or employed to engage men in addressing SGBV? a) b) c) d) What has worked well? Why? What has worked less well? Why? Who were the people, groups or organisations involved in this process? What has changed? 4.3 What factors have influenced men’s involvement in addressing SGBV issues? 4.4 Where have men engaged collectively (in alliances/movements) to address SGBV? What has/has not worked in this strategy? Why? a) 5. Current and future priorities for working with men and boys to address SGBV 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 6. How can this be strengthened? What is your vision for change in addressing sexual and gender-based violence? What will contribute to this being realised? What is the role of collective action in this vision? What would you advise the government to do differently to realise this vision? Revisit consent form to ensure participant is happy with their representation 46 Annex 3 Participatory and qualitative consent forms Digital storytelling consent form Dear Thank you for working with us, and for sharing your knowledge and your life stories over the past few months. We have learnt so much from you. We want to make sure that you are comfortable with where we reflect on your life stories and your work. So we have made this document as a written agreement to only use your stories where you are comfortable with them being used. This agreement is between the organisations (SLF, Sonke and IDS) and yourself. Please circle ‘yes/no/maybe’ to help us to understand how you feel about the different spaces where your story might be used, and we will both sign this to show our agreement. If you change your mind at any point, please contact Sonke who will make sure this agreement is updated. There are five spaces where the stories can be used. 1. In your family. This is for you to decide. 2. In your organisation. This is for you to decide with them. 3. Do you want your story to be shown in the stakeholder dialogue workshop on Monday? a) b) 4. In a report that shares our learning on how people are working to address gender-based violence in South Africa and around the world a) b) 5. In the official workshop? Yes / No / Maybe In an informal process in the side room, on a loop? Yes / No / Maybe Are you ok for some of your life story to be shared in a report? Yes / No / Maybe Do you want your name changed? Yes / No / Maybe In the research project website. This is to share with people that are interested in learning from you. We need to think about: a) Would you like your digital stories to be shown on this website? Yes / No / Maybe By signing below, IDS/Sonke and SLF commit to ensuring that your stories are used in the ways you have told us here: __________________________________ Name and Signature By signing below, you indicate that you are comfortable with this agreement about where your stories will be used: __________________________________ Name and Signature 47 Key informant interview consent form Collective action with men and boys against gender-based violence in South Africa Consent form to participate in the study STUDY DESCRIPTION (AIMS, CONTEXT AND OUTCOMES OF STUDY) This study aims to explore – through an in-depth case study – where men play or have played significant roles in relation to sexual and gender-based violence (SGBV) in South Africa. In turn, this is intended to help improve information access and to inform strategies of relevant actors (incl. activists and policymakers) addressing this issue, with meaningful involvement of men and boys, and to facilitate the forging and strengthening of strategic alliances for gender justice to address SGBV. In addition to South Africa, similar projects are or will be conducted in five other countries, incl. Egypt, Uganda, India, South Africa and Sierra Leone. In all countries the work is funded by the UK Department for International Development (DFID). The project is conducted by the Institute of Development Studies (IDS) UK, the Sustainable Livelihoods Foundation (SLF) and Sonke Gender Justice (Sonke). We are not employed by DFID or any other government or funding organisation. INFORMATION ON CONSENT We are asking: ‘Would you agree to participate in this research by answering some questions in an individual interview or in a group discussion?’ LIST OF RESEARCHER AGREEMENTS       You are under no obligation to agree or to give up your time. You are also free to stop answering the questions and (/ask us) to leave at any point. If you are agreeable, you can decide whether you want what you say to be kept anonymous (the latter case in which we would not link your name to your comments in the study report). If you do not mind letting us link your name to your statements, you can choose for us to use just your first name or your full name. All documentation notes are kept confidential (i.e. we keep the notes and papers documenting the learning safely and nobody else has access to them). If you are HIV-positive or a survivor of violence and you choose to tell us of your status, this information will be kept strictly confidential, unless you expressly indicate otherwise. Please ask us/me for more explanation now if there are any points that you are unsure about. I agree to participate in the study: Signature/thumbprint: Signature of Documenter: _______________________ _______________________ Date: Tick as appropriate:  I do not mind if my first name and surname are linked to my comments  I do not mind if my first name is linked to my comments  I do not mind if this interview is audio-recorded  I wish to remain anonymous  Other – please tell us how you would like to be quoted/referred to _______________ 48 Annex 4 Analytical framework Analytical area Analytical sub-questions – to ensure parity in analysing the data Explanation of analysis 1. Structural drivers 1. How are discriminatory norms and attitudes expressed in people’s lives, in their families, communities, institutions and societies? Here we want to distinguish between discriminatory practices experienced by individuals and structures of inequality that shape these experiences in the contexts in which people live. Research question: What are the structural drivers (social, political, economic) that contribute to people’s experience of inequality (race, class, sexuality, age) leading to sexual and genderbased violence? 2. What kinds of inequality did the participants experience or reflect on? How did this affect the kind of violence they experienced? 3. What social factors reinforce/underpin sexual and gender violence? 4. What economic factors reinforce/underpin sexual and gender violence? 5. What political factors reinforce sexual and gender violence? 6. What forms of gender-based violence were raised in the data? 7. What forms of sexual violence were raised in the data? 2. Agency and collective action Research question: How do (i) personal agency and (ii) collective political actions (public, institutional, etc) interact to engage certain kinds of processes to prevent and address SGBV? Please specify, if possible, using the words of the participant. Please specify, if possible, using the words of the participant. 1. How have people experienced and expressed individual agency to address SGBV? How does this relate to their power ‘within’ and power ‘to act’? 2. What things have enabled people to take individual action? This will help us understand ‘what works’ for generating recommendations to support individual and collective action to address SGBV. 3. What influences have constrained people’s capacity to take individual action? How people’s experience of their gender identity, sexual orientation, class, ethnicity and age, for example, affect their ability to claim civil and political rights. (Cont’d.) 49 Annex 4 (cont’d.) 2. Agency and collective action (cont’d.) 4. How have people experienced and Forms of collective expressed collective action to address action are important here. SGBV? What was the role of men in this? 5. What factors enabled collective action? 6. What factors constrained collective action? 7. When acting collectively, how did individuals express their agency? What enabled and constrained this? What was the role of men in this? The nature of the ‘space’ in organisational/collective action influences people’s action. 8. What kind of impact was reported by individuals about their own, and/or their organisations’, ability to challenge the social, economic and political factors that contribute to SGBV? What was the role of men in these actions? 9. How are individual and collective actions to address SGBV challenging social, economic and political inequalities? 10. Where does responsibility lie in preventing and addressing sexual and gender-based violence? How is this responsibility articulated? 11. What is the state’s role in preventing and addressing sexual and genderbased violence? What action is being taken? How does this relate to collective action? To understand the state’s role in relation to rights and responsibilities, and how this interacts with collective action, and people’s everyday lives. 50 References Abah, O.S.; Okwori, J.Z. and Alubo, O. (2009) ‘Participatory Theatre and Video: Acting against Violence in Northern Nigeria’, IDS Bulletin 40.3: 19–26 Abrahams, N.; Jewkes, R.; Martin, L.J.; Mathews, S.; Vetten, L. and Lombard, C. (2009) ‘Mortality of Women from Intimate Partner Violence in South Africa: A National Epidemiological Study’, Violence and Victims 24: 546–56 Africa, A. (2010) ‘Standpoint: “Murderous women”? Rethinking Gender and Theories of Violence’, Feminist Africa 14: 79–92 Beinart, W. (2001) Twentieth-Century South Africa, Oxford: Oxford University Press Beinart, W. (1995) Segregation and Apartheid in Twentieth Century South Africa, London and New York: Taylor & Francis Benjamin, J.A. and Murchison, L. (2004) Gender-based Violence: Care and Protection of Children in Emergencies—A Field Guide, London: Save the Children Bograd, M. (1999) ‘Strengthening Domestic Violence Theories: Intersections of Race, Class, Sexual Orientation, and Gender’, Journal of Marital and Family Therapy 25: 275–89 Bourdieu, P. (2001) ‘Structure, Habitus, Practice’, in P. Erickson and I. Murphy (eds), Readings for a History of Anthropological Theory, Ontario: Broadview Press Bowman, C.G. (2002) ‘Theories of Domestic Violence in the African Context’, American University Journal of Gender, Social Policy and the Law 11: 847 Bowman, C.G. and Schneider, E.M. (1998) ‘Feminist Legal Theory, Feminist Lawmaking, and the Legal Profession’, Fordham Law Review 67: 249 Butler, J. (2009) ‘Performativity, Precarity and Sexual Politics’, Antropólogos Iberoamericanos en Red (AIBR), Revista de Antropología Iberoamericana 4.3: i–xiii Butler, J. (2004) Precarious Life: The Powers of Mourning and Violence, London and New York: Verso Charmaz, K. (2002) ‘Qualitative Interviewing and Grounded Theory Analysis’, in J.F. Gubrium and J.A. Holstein (eds), Handbook of Interview Research: Context and Method, London: Sage Charmaz, K. (1995) ‘Grounded Theory’, in J. Smith et al. (eds), Rethinking Methods in Psychology, London: Sage City of Cape Town (2011) Census Suburb Profiles, Delft, Philippi, Khayelitsha, Nyanga, Gugletu, www.capetown.gov.za/en/stats/Pages/2011-Census-Suburb-Profiles-land.aspx (accessed December 2014) City of Cape Town (2008) Number of Informal Dwellings Units, www.capetown.gov.za/en/stats/Documents/Informal%20Dwellings.htm (accessed December 2014) 51 Colvin, C.; Human, O. and Peacock, D. (2009) Report on Formative Research Conducted for Sonke Gender Justice Network’s ‘One Man Can’ Campaign, South Africa: Sonke Gender Justice Network Corbin, J. and Strauss, A. (1990) ‘Grounded Theory Research: Procedures, Canons, and Evaluative Criteria’, Qualitative Sociology 13.3: 21 Cornwall, A.; Harrison, E. and Whitehead, A. (2007) ‘Gender Myths and Feminist Fables: The Struggle for Interpretive Power in Gender and Development’, Development and Change 38: 1–20 Coughtry, S.E. (2011) ‘Patriarchy and the Trap of Masculinity: A Post-Colonial Analysis of Violence against Sexual Minorities in Uganda’, MA thesis, Smith College, Northampton, MA Dunkle, K.; Jewkes, R.; Murdock, D.; Sikweyiya, Y. and Morrell, R. (2013) ‘Prevalence of Consensual Male–Male Sex and Sexual Violence, and Associations with HIV in South Africa: A Population-based Cross-Sectional Study’, PLoS Med 10.6 Dworkin, S.; Hatcher, A.; Colvin, C. and Peacock, D. (2013) ‘Men’s Perceptions of Women’s Rights and Changing Gender Relations in South Africa: Lessons for Working With Men and Boys in HIV and Antiviolence Programs’, Gender and Society 26: 97–120 Esplugues, J.; Marmolejo, I.; García Esteve, J. and Martínez Sánchez, P. (2006) Third International Report: Partner Violence against Women Statistics and Legislation, Valencia: Instituto Centro Reina Sofia, Valencian International University, www.luisvivesces.org/upload/88/18/informe.pdf (accessed 22 January 2015) Eves, R. (2010) ‘Masculinity Matters: Men, Gender-based Violence and the AIDS Epidemic in Papua New Guinea’, in V. Luker and S. Dinnen (eds), Civic Insecurity: Law, Order and HIV in Papua New Guinea, Canberra, Australia: The Australian National University Press Farmer, P. (2001) Infections and Inequalities: The Modern Plagues, Los Angeles, CA: University of California Press Fassin, D. (2007) When Bodies Remember: Experiences and Politics of AIDS in South Africa, Los Angeles, CA: University of California Press Freedman, J. and Jacobson, S. (2012) ‘Masculinities, Gender, and Violence’, in J. Freedman (ed), Engaging Men in the Fight against Gender Violence: Case Studies from Africa, Ebook: Palgrave Macmillan, www.palgraveconnect.com/pc/doifinder/10.1057/9781137014740.0001 (accessed December 2014) Galtung, J. (1969) ‘Violence, Peace, and Peace Research’, Journal of Peace Research 6: 167–91 Gaventa, J. and McGee, R. (2010) Citizen Action and National Policy Reform, London: Zed Books GCIS (Government Communication and Information System) (n.d.) www.gcis.gov.za/sites/www.gcis.gov.za/files/Insight-Gender%20Equality_issue5.pdf (accessed 26 January 2015) Geertz, C. (2001) Available Light: Anthropological Reflections on Philosophical Topics, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press 52 Geertz, C. (1994) ‘Thick Description: Toward an Interpretive Theory of Culture’, in M. Martin and L. McIntyre (eds), Readings in the Philosophy of Social Science, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press GenderLinks (2014) The Gender-based Violence Indicators Study: Western Cape Province of South Africa, South Africa: GenderLinks Glaser, B. and Strauss, L. (1973) The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research, Chicago, IL: Aldine Hansen, T.B. and Stepputat, F. (2009) Sovereign Bodies: Citizens, Migrants, and States in the Postcolonial World, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press Hearn, J. and Morrell, R. (2012) ‘Reviewing Hegemonic Masculinities and Men in Sweden and South Africa’, Men and Masculinities 151: 3–10 Heise, L.L. (1998) ‘Violence against Women: An Integrated, Ecological Framework’, Violence Against Women 4: 262–90 Holtzworth-Munroe, A. and Stuart, G.L. (1994) ‘Typologies of Male Batterers: Three Subtypes and the Differences among Them’, Psychological Bulletin I 16.3: 476–97 Hooks, B. (2000) Feminist Theory: From Margin to Center, Chicago: Pluto Press Htun, M. and Weldon, S.L. (2012) ‘The Civic Origins of Progressive Policy Change: Combating Violence against Women in Global Perspective, 1975–2005’, American Political Science Review 106: 548–69 Hunnicutt, G. (2009) ‘Varieties of Patriarchy and Violence against Women: Resurrecting “Patriarchy” as a Theoretical Tool’, Violence Against Women 15.5: 553–73 IJR (Institute of Justice and Reconciliation) (2014) Reconciliation Barometer Survey: 2014 Report. Reflecting on Reconciliation: Lessons from the Past, Prospects for the Future, South Africa: Institute of Justice and Reconciliation ILO (International Labour Organization) (2012) Global Employment Trends for Women, Geneva: International Labour Organization Jakobsen, H. (2014) ‘What’s Gendered about Gender-based Violence? An Empirically Grounded Theoretical Exploration from Tanzania’, Gender and Society 28.4: 537–61 Jewkes, R.; Levin, J. and Penn-Kekana, L. (2002) ‘Risk Factors for Domestic Violence: Findings from a South African Cross-Sectional Study’, Social Science and Medicine 55: 1603–17 Jewkes, R.K.; Sikweyiya, Y.; Morrell, R. and Dunkle, K. (2009) ‘Understanding Men’s Health and Use of Violence: Interface of Rape and HIV in South Africa’, MRC Policy Brief, Cape Town, South Africa: South African Medical Research Council Jones, R.B. (2011) ‘Development of Feminist Postcolonial Theory’, in R.B Jones (ed), Postcolonial Representations of Women, Heidelberg: Springer Netherlands Keeley, J. and Scoones, I. (2003) Understanding Environmental Policy Processes: Cases from Africa, London: Earthscan 53 Kimmel, M. (2002) ‘“Gender Symmetry” in Domestic Violence: A Substantive and Methodological Research Review’, Violence Against Women 8.11: 1332–63 Klotz, A. (2013) Migration and National Identity in South Africa, 1860–2010, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Lambert, J. (2002) Digital Storytelling, Berkeley, CA: Digital Diner Press Lewin, T. and Wheeler, J. (2012) ‘Unruly Politics and Methodological Mash-Ups: Using Visual Methods for Social Justice’, paper presented at the ISA conference in Buenos Aires, August 2012. Publication in special edition journal of Collaborative Visual Methodologies, forthcoming Lewin, T.; Williams, K. and Thomas, K. (2013) A Progressive Constitution Meets Lived Reality: Sexuality and the Law in South Africa, IDS Evidence Report 7, Brighton: IDS Liebenberg, L.; Didkowsky, N. and Ungar, M. (2012) ‘Analysing Image-based Data Using Grounded Theory: The Negotiating Resilience Project’, Visual Studies 27.1: 59–74 Lister, R. (1997) Citizenship: Feminist Perspectives, Basingstoke: Macmillan Lundby, K. (2008) Digital Storytelling, Mediatized Stories: Self-representations in New Media, New York: Peter Lang Publishing McFadden, P. (2000) ‘“The State of Feminism in Africa Today”, News from the Nordic Africa Institute, 2’, www.nai.uu.se/publications/news/archives/002mcfadden/ (accessed December 2014) Manjoo, R. (2011) Report of the Special Rapporteur on Violence against Women, its Causes and Consequences, New York: United Nations Human Rights Council Minayo, M.C.D.S. (1994) ‘Inequality, Violence, and Ecology in Brazil’, Cadernos de Saúde Pública 10: 241–50 Mlatsheni, C. and Leibbrandt, M. (2011) ‘Youth Unemployment in South Africa: Challenges, Concepts and Opportunities’, Journal of International Relations and Development 14: 118–26 Morrell, R. (ed) (2001) Changing Men in Southern Africa, Pietermaritzburg/London: University of Natal Press/Zed Books Morrell, R. (1998) ‘Of Boys and Men: Masculinity and Gender in Southern African Studies’, Journal of Southern African Studies 24: 605–30 Morrell, R.; Jewkes, R. and Lindegger, G. (2012) ‘Hegemonic Masculinity/Masculinities in South Africa: Culture, Power, and Gender Politics’, Men and Masculinities 16.2: 181–202 Morrell, R.; Jewkes, R.; Lindegger, G. and Hamlall, V. (2013) ‘Hegemonic Masculinity: Reviewing the Gendered Analysis of Men’s Power in South Africa’, South African Review of Sociology 44: 3–21 OECD (2008) Economic Assessment of South Africa 2008: Achieving Accelerated and Shared Growth for South Africa, www.oecd.org/fr/afriquedusud/economicassessmentofsouthafrica2008achievingaccelerateda ndsharedgrowthforsouthafrica.htm (accessed 26 January 2015) 54 Oetzel, J. and Duran, B. (2004) ‘Intimate Partner Violence in American Indian and/or Alaska Native Communities: A Social Ecological Framework of Determinants and Interventions’, American Indian and Alaska Native Mental Health Research 11: 49–68 Parry, K. and van Eaden, A. (2014) ‘Measuring Racial Residential Segregation at Different Geographic Scales in Cape Town and Johannesburg’, South African Geographical Journal 97.1: 31–49 Pearce, J. (2009) ‘Introduction: Researching Democracy and Social Change with Violence in the Foreground’, IDS Bulletin 40.3: 1–9 Piper, L. (2014) ‘From Party-State to Party-Society in South Africa: SANCO and the Informal Politics of Community Representation in Imizamo Yethu, Hout Bay, Cape Town’, in C. Bénit Gbaffou (ed), Voice of the Poor in Urban Governance: Participation, Mobilisation and Politics in South African Cities, Pretoria: HSRC Press (forthcoming) Poletti, A. (2011) ‘Coaxing an Intimate Public: Life Narrative in Digital Storytelling’, Continuum 25: 73–83 Rankin, N.A. and Roberts, G. (2011) ‘Youth Unemployment, Firm Size and Reservation Wages in South Africa’, South African Journal of Economics 79: 128–45 Rubin, H. and Rubin, I. (1995) Qualitative Interviewing: The Art of Hearing Data, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Seekings, J. and Nattrass, N. (2005) Class, Race and Inequality in South Africa, New Haven, CT: Yale University Press Shahrokh, T. and Wheeler, J. (2014) Knowledge from the Margins: An Anthology from a Global Network on Participatory Practice and Policy Influence, Brighton: IDS Sokoloff, N.J. and Dupont, I. (2005) ‘Domestic Violence at the Intersections of Race, Class, and Gender: Challenges and Contributions to Understanding Violence against Marginalized Women in Diverse Communities’, Violence Against Women 11: 38–64 Sonke (2014a) National Strategic Plan Research Brief, South Africa: Sonke Gender Justice Sonke (2014b) ‘10 Reasons why South Africa Can and Must Spend R10 billion to End Gender-based Violence’, press release, 8 March, www.genderjustice.org.za/news-item/10reasons-why-south-africa-can-and-must-spend-r10-billion-to-end-gender-based-violencegbv/?option=com_docman&task=doc_download&gid=101865&Itemid=153 (accessed 23 February 2015) South Africa (2012) National Development Plan 2030: Our Future – Make it Work, South Africa: National Planning Commission Spaull, N. (2013) ‘Poverty and Privilege: Primary School Inequality in South Africa’, International Journal of Educational Development 33: 436–47 Statistics South Africa (n.d.) ‘Quarterly Labour Force Survey (QLFS), 1st Quarter 2012’, www.statssa.gov.za/publications/statsdownload.asp?PPN=P0211&SCH=5222 (accessed 26 January 2015) Statistics South Africa (2014a) Population Mid-Year Estimate, 2014, http://beta2.statssa.gov.za/ (accessed December 2014) 55 Statistics South Africa (2014b) Quarterly Labour Force Survey, Quarter 3, 2014, http://beta2.statssa.gov.za/publications/P0211/P02113rdQuarter2014.pdf (accessed December 2014) Statistics South Africa (2013) Quarterly Labour Force Survey, Quarter 3, 2013, www.statssa.gov.za/publications/p0211/p02113rdquarter2013.pdf (accessed December 2014) Strauss, A. and Corbin, J. (1994) ‘Grounded Theory Methodology – An Overview’, in N. Denzin and Y. Lincoln (eds), Handbook of Qualitative Research, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications Strebel, A.; Crawford, M.; Shefer, T.; Cloete, A.; Henda, N.; Kaufman, M.; Simbayi, L.; Magome, K. and Kalichman, S. (2006) ‘Social Constructions of Gender Roles, Gender-based Violence and HIV/AIDS in Two Communities of the Western Cape, South Africa’, SAHARA: Journal of Social Aspects of HIV/AIDS Research Alliance 3: 516–28 TAC (Treatment Action Campaign) (2010) Fighting for Our Lives. The History of the Treatment Action Campaign, Cape Town: Treatment Action Campaign Thorpe, J. (2014) The 2013/2014 Financial Year Estimates for Spending on Gender-based Violence by the South African Government, South Africa: Parliament of the Republic of South Africa Walker, L.E. (1993) ‘The Battered Woman Syndrome is a Psychological Consequence of Abuse’, Current Controversies On Family Violence: 133–53 Watts, C.; Osam, S. and Win, E. (1995) The Private is Public: A Study of Violence Against Women in Southern Africa, Zimbabwe: Women in Law and Development in Africa (WiLDAF) Wells, H. and Polders, L. (2006) ‘Anti-gay Hate Crimes in South Africa: Prevalence, Reporting Practices, and Experiences of the Police’, Agenda: Empowering Women for Gender Equity 20.67: 20–8 Wheeler, J. (2009) ‛“The Life That We Don’t Want”: Using Participatory Video in Researching Violence’, IDS Bulletin 40.3: 10–18 Wolmer, W. (2006) Understanding Policy Processes: A Review of IDS Research on the Environment, Brighton: IDS Wolpe, H. (1972) ‘Capitalism and Cheap Labour Power in South Africa’, Economy and Society 1.4: 425–56 World Bank (2011) GINI Index (World Bank Estimate), http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SI.POV.GINI (accessed December 2014) World Economic Forum (2013) Top 10 Most Gender Equal Countries in Africa, http://forumblog.org/2013/10/top-10-most-gender-equal-countries-in-africa/ (accessed 26 January 2015) Yodanis, C.L. (2004) ‘Gender Inequality, Violence against Women, and Fear: A CrossNational Test of the Feminist Theory of Violence against Women’, Journal of Interpersonal Violence 19: 655–75 56 Brighton BN1 9RE T +44 (0)1273 606261 F +44 (0)1273 621202 E ids@ids.ac.uk www.ids.ac.uk