THE COMMUNITY INVESTMENT PROGRAMME (CIP)

Get Complete Project Material File(s) Now! »

The right to live in a working local economy

A next important characteristic of CIP is that every South African has the right to live in a working local economy. CIP therefore calls for the establishment of a working local economy where it is absent, which is mainly in rural areas and townships. A working local economy is an active economy at the local level, where production and selling takes place on a daily basis. It would stimulate the ‘local income multiplier’, which would create more local exchange leading to increasing wealth on the local level. Local income multiplier basically means ‘the cash that circulates in a locality and how it multiplies its value’ (Reynolds 2005a:1-14).

Implementation of CIP

CIP was never implemented as envisaged by Reynolds. In principle, CIP should be rolled out by the government, but this has not happened. Reynolds argued in a paper delivered to the then dplg in 2005 how CIP could be implemented nationwide. He suggested that the unit of Local Economic Development (LED), located in dplg and now CoGTA, should take the lead. LED should become the coordinating CIP body. The dplg adopted CIP as a developmental strategy in its 2006 – 2011 white paper on local economic development. A working group was established, under the leadership of the dplg, to roll out CIP nationwide. This working group met often in 2007 and 2008. A working paper was developed which outlined CIP, its implementation and governance, and how it should be resourced. The figure below illustrates the outputs of the government.

Rationale for the data collection methods

As I wanted to know, in the first place, what Reynolds meant with CIP and how he envisaged the programme, I started with collecting all available documents related to CIP in his personal library and on his computer. I had full access to these. In addition, I interviewed some of his colleagues and friends who were well informed about CIP. The interviews indeed did give me a better understanding of CIP, but also triggered new thoughts and interpretations I did not have before. To gather information about the CIP pilot projects, I used mixed data collection methods. This allowed me to gather more diverse data, to get a better understanding and to have more reliable and valid data. Besides the interviews, I developed a questionnaire informed by the interviews.

Structure and content of the interviews

I used semi-structured interviews to gather more information about CIP from Reynolds’s colleagues and about the CIP projects from relevant key informants. Hence, the interview questionnaire is open to give the interviewees the opportunity to influence the interview event. The sequencing of questions is not fully structured to allow space for probing and discussion and to have interaction with the interviewed people. I prepared some questions around key topics. However, I did not necessarily stick to the questions and did not ask all the questions identically from person to person (Terre Blanche et al. 2006:297-298). The semi-structured interview is so named because it lies between a very structured and an open interview. This option allowed me to have some questions prepared going into the interview, while also leaving leeway for the research participant to be spontaneous and bring up other thoughts that might not be related to a question.

Analysis of the interviews: interpretative framework

The underlying research paradigm for the analysis of the data, both for analysing the interviews and the data from the survey research, is interpretative. Information was gathered and interpreted with the aim of conceptualising and understanding CIP. Terre Blanche et al. (2006:6-9 and 274-277) describe interpretative analysis as ‘studying the reality through the subjective experiences of respondents’. Interpretative research relies on information gathered by the researcher, which informs the researcher to describe something, interpret it and then present the findings.

Sampling and sample validity, data collection and processing

The people participating in the CIP pilot at the South Coast are all farmers and, therefore, I took a random sample amongst all the farmers who are part of the project, spread over the different villages where the project is active. So the population for the questionnaires are farmers who are members of the CIP pilot project, from Nositha, Gcilima or Kwanzimakwe. All the farmers participating in the project have membership cards, thus simplifying the determination of their numbers and locations. Before the data collection in August 2012, the total farmer population with membership cards was 230. I planned a sample with a confidence interval of 5 and a confidence level of 95%, which would require 144 farmers to fill out the questionnaire.

TABLE OF CONTENTS :

• List of figures
• Abbreviations
• Abstract
• 1. INTRODUCTION Background, problem statement, methodology and ethical considerations
  • 1.1 Background to the research proposal
  • 1.2 Problem statement
  • 1.3 Objectives and research questions
  • 1.4 Relevance for the discipline of development studies
  • 1.5 Methodology
    • 1.5.1 Research paradigm
    • 1.5.2 Brief description of CIP projects
    • 1.5.3 Data collection and analysis
    • 1.5.4 Ethical considerations
    • 1.5.5 Quality of the research
  • 1.6 Chapter outline
• 2. LITERATURE REVIEW Development theory in relation to the Community Investment Programme
  • 2.1 Introduction
  • 2.2 A brief history of development theory
    • 2.2.1 The early days of development and its underlying theories
    • 2.2.2 The political context of the first decade of development
    • 2.2.3 The first critique on mainstream development theory: dependency theory and world systems analysis
    • 2.2.4 Mainstream development under review: the rise of neoliberalism
    • 2.2.6 The influence of neoliberalism and alternative development in South Africa
• 3. THE COMMUNITY INVESTMENT PROGRAMME (CIP) The Community Investment Programme as conceptualised by Dr N. Reynolds
  • 3.1 Understanding CIP: the Busiesvlei case study
  • 3.2 What is CIP?
  • 3.3 Characteristics of CIP
    • 3.3.1 People-centred development: participation and ownership
    • 3.3.2 Becoming self-reliable: knowing the resources available and a working local economy
    • 3.3.3 A learning process with attention for all aspects of human development
  • 3.4 Implementation of CIP
  • 3.5 Conclusion
• 4. METHODOLOGY
  • 4.1 Introduction
  • 4.2 Rationale for the data collection methods
  • 4.3 Review of documents
  • 4.4 Interviews
    • 4.4.1 Sampling and population
    • 4.4.2 Structure and content of the interviews
    • 4.4.3 Analysis of the interviews: interpretative framework
  • 4.5 Quantitative research: survey
    • 4.5.1 Sampling, sample validity, data collection and processing
    • 4.5.2 Structure of the questionnaire
    • 4.5.3 Content of the questionnaire
    • 4.5.4 Validity and reliability of the information gathered through the questionnaire
    • 4.5.5 Analysis of the data gathered through the questionnaire
  • 4.6 Ethical considerations
• 5. THE BEGINNING: ANALYSIS OF CIP PILOT PROJECTS IN HUNTINGTON AND TSAKANE
• 6. FINDINGS OF THE EMPIRICAL RESEARCH Findings related to the CIP pilot project at the South Coast, KwaZulu-Natal
• 7. CONCLUDING CHAPTER Interpretation of findings from the CIP projects in relation to CIP as conceptualised by Reynolds and recommendations for realistic implementation of CIP in South Africa
• 8. BIBLIOGRAPHY

GET THE COMPLETE PROJECT
A conceptualisation and analysis of the community investment programme with reference to South African case studies: towards a new model