youssra
Get Complete Project Material File(s) Now! »
CHAPTER 2 ;POVERTY AS A SOCIAL PROBLEM
INTRODUCTION
This study is about the evaluation of a Poverty Relief Programme (PRP) in the Limpopo Province within the context of the Reconstruction and Development Programme (RDP) from a social work perspective. Poverty is a social problem which is evident in both the developed and the developing countries. In this study, the researcher selects to discuss the advent of poverty only within the developing countries of the Sub-Saharan Africa and South Africa.
Poverty is endemic in Sub-Saharan Africa and according to Oakley and Clegg (1999:32), “in the early 1990’s it was estimated that almost a half of the region’s population lived below the poverty line and that Sub-Saharan Africa was the only region in the world in which the number of poor was actually growing at roughly the same rate as the population.” Sub-Saharan Africa includes countries such as South Africa, Botswana, Namibia, Zimbabwe, Zambia, Malawi, Mozambique, Tanzania, Mali, Ghana, Kenya, Angola, Sierra Leone, Chad, Ethiopia and Guinea (compare Masiye, Tembo, Chisanga & Mwanza, 1998; Oakley & Clegg, 1999; Atteh, 1999.) Sparks (1993:8) contends the reasons for the Sub-Saharan Africa to be the poorest region in Africa are that it has the highest population which exceeded 525 million during 1993, it has poor soils and harsh climates, it has poor human and physical infrastructure, it has the highest urbanization and population growth, its politicians formulate inappropriate public policies and that the region has huge foreign debt.
There is basically a decline in the socio-economic and political institutions in Sub- Saharan Africa. Spark (1993:9) says these countries’ economies have drastically declined from where they were during their independence from colonialism. This poses a serious problem of continued poverty, famine and wars. This state of affairs is disturbing to the whole region because the misfortunes felt in one Sub-Saharan state are transmitted to its neighbours. Katzen (1993:781) reported that South African economy is declining as compared to the 1960’s when she “managed to be the highest country in the world with that economic growth.” The researcher has identified as an example that the decline in the socio-economic and political setting of Zimbabwe automatically affects the South Africans. The current state affairs in South Africa is that the refugees from the neighbouring countries have migrated to the country leaving the citizens with limited job opportunities. For Robinson (2002:32-33), Zimbabwe is on the brink of economic collapse because of its President Robert Mugabe’s inappropriate economic policies, the occupation of commercial farms by war veterans who do not have the farming skills and the advent of drought. Unemployment in Zimbabwe has reached an alarming rate of 60% and is accompanied by an inflation rate of 112%. Msomi and Munusamy (2003:4) say the South African Statistics put the official unemployment figure at 30%. This is to mean that unemployment rate in Zimbabwe is twice more than it is in South Africa. There is famine in that country and the United Nations World Food Programme is feeding the nation. This circumstance results in people migrating to the nearby South Africa. Hawthorne (2002:35) states that “there are already 2 million illegal immigrants from Zimbabwe living and looking for work in South Africa.” With this shocking statistic, it symbolizes that South Africa is in a poverty problem itself.
In the near future, South Africa will be as poor as some of the countries in the Sub- Saharan Africa. Rural Development Framework (1997:15) reported that 40% of the South Africa households were poor during the 1995 October Household Survey, and that this percent represented about 52.8% of the whole population. Poverty has since then continued to increase. This trend was captured by Gumede (2001:16) who states that “poverty in SA is severe; the UN Development Programme estimates it at 45%.” And yet Bhorat (2000:795) has recorded “the total number of dwellings in South Africa is about 9.5 million, of which about 3 million are poor households.” It is shocking to note that over one thirds of the population is leaving in absolute poverty. Poverty is closely related to unemployment which is at more than 34% and that more than 26% of those employed earn R500 or less per month (LoveLife, 2001:8). South Africa Yearbook (2000:267) supports by mentioning that about 22% of South Africa’s economically active population was unemployed during 1997. In South Africa, poverty affects people differently.
Poverty affects people according to the racial line. The poor became highly represented within the African communities as outlined by Bhorat (2000:796) who says “the racial disparities are also evident in that Africans constitute 69 per cent of the labour force and 88 per cent of all poor individuals in the labour force, while the corresponding figures for Whites are 17 and 2.2 per cent, respectively.” Poverty in South Africa affects people along the gender. Popenoe, Boult and Cunningham (1998:378) released Figure 2.1 to support this proposition.Poverty affects people according to the family type of origin. May and Vaughan (1999:68) say “the poverty rate among female-headed households in 1995 was 60%, considerably higher than the rate of 31% in male-headed households.” Women who head families without husbands usually carry the burden of socio-economically supporting their own children, parents and relatives. This condition reduces the resources intended to supplement the existence of a household. There is also an emergence of a child- headed family in South Africa today due to the high death rate of parents who are victims of HIV/AIDS and other communicable diseases such as malaria, cholera and tuberculosis (LoveLife, 2001:11). This family will be the poorest of all other forms of family because children are physically and intellectually incompetent to support themselves. This means that in the near future, there will be a challenging requirement for the community-based structures who will perform home-visits to the families of those affected.Poverty affects people according to their physical and age orientation. In this instance, poverty affects children, the aged and the disabled more than other sectors of the community. “Moreover, three in five children live in poor household, and many children are exposed to public and domestic violence, malnutrition and inconsistent parenting and schooling” (May & Vaughan, 1999:68). Children, the aged and the disabled are poor solely because they are physically and or intellectually incompetent to support themselves.Poverty affect people according to their occupations. According to Bhorat (2000:798), in South Africa “ the two poorest occupation groups are domestic services and agricultural labourers, and account for 72 per cent of all the employed poor in the labour market.” These people are in this study classified as the working poor and will be discussed in detail later in this chapter.Poverty is distributed unevenly in the nine South African provinces. Popenoe, Boult and Cunningham (1998:379) list provinces according to their poverty percentages in Table As indicated in Table 2.1 above, areas which were previously reserved for Blacks during the apartheid regime, such as the Limpopo Province, suffer the incident of poverty more than other areas. This is due to the reason that the apartheid regime through its homeland policies kept most of the rural population away from the economic cities (Cross, 2001:113). Bryceson and Bank (2001:7) contend that policies such as the influx control system ensured that Africans who were surplus to the labour needs of the cities were kept in the rural areas.
Gauteng which is the economic hub of the country but has high poverty rate due to the reason that people from other provinces have migrated to it with the hope that they will find jobs. When people cannot find jobs else where, they resort to stay in the informal settlements which are scattered allover the province and therefore Gauteng province is further faced with a challenge for providing infrastructure to this population.
Poverty is a complex issue which requires a detailed discussion such as this chapter which will discuss it as a social problem according to the following five sections:
-
- Conceptualization of the concept social problem
- Conceptualization of poverty as a condition of deprivation
- Theoretical perspectives of poverty
- Causes and effects of poverty
- Strategies to eliminate poverty
CONCEPTUALIZATION OF THE CONCEPT SOCIAL PROBLEM
Poverty is a social problem and in discussing it within that context, it is important to first contextualize the concept social problem in this section.When the systems of a society, namely: education, family, religion and culture are interacting with each other in a harmonious manner, society is said to be in an equilibrium state. When these systems are no longer interacting in harmony with each other, we term the misfortune, a social problem. Ritzer (1988:204) explains that “ the parts of the system, as well as the system as a whole, are seen as existing in a state of equilibrium, so that changes in one part lead to changes in other parts.”
The disequilibrium is exemplified when a family system fails to socialize its member who becomes deviant, drops out of school, does crime and is sentenced to a few years in jail. Different systems were affected by this member who may for example, divorce his wife causing family disintegration, commit crime and affect the justice system, and fights with jail inmates causing problems in the correctional system. Viewed from an angle that disequilibrium caused by the disfunctioning of some of the societal systems when they interact with one another, the researcher adds other examples of social problems as wars, crime, back street abortions, HIV/AIDS, and poor housing. In order to explain the concept social problem, Sullivan and Thompson (1994:5) distinguished between personal and social problems when they mention that social problems are public issues which have an impact on a large number of people and are matters of public debate and collective solutions and are not individual or familial ones. Horton and Leslie (1981:4) maintain that « a social problem is a condition affecting a significant number of people in ways considered undesirable, about which is felt something can be done through collective social action. » Issues are categorized as social problems only if they threaten the values and goals of a large number of individuals, groups, communities and organizations. The second important characteristic of the social problem is that it can be redressed through collective action. Collectivity calls for a group of individuals, organizations and government institutions to mobilize towards a common goal of doing something to reduce or ameliorate the condition. Government institutions and nongovernmental organizations are more effective in eliminating or reducing social problems than persons individually. Weeks (1992:316) maintains that social problems are solved through approaches which should address the whole collectivity instead of particular individuals. In this context, social problems are solved through community development programmes which are formulated, implemented and evaluated by government and or the nongovernmental organizations. Lauer (1992:5-6) contends that social problems change over time, they are viewed differently from the perspectives of different individuals and groups, and that they are “an objective, observable state of affairs (for example, pollution), some “thing” that may be studied, measured, and in one way or another, manipulated or changed.” Social problems are conditions communities consider as troublesome or threatening to their well-being. The concept of manipulation impose another feature of a social problem, namely that if a condition cannot be controlled or changed, it cannot be considered a social problem. Natural conditions, eg. disasters such as floods, hurricane, winds, and volcano which cannot be caused by social systems cannot be remedied by collective actions, and as a consequence, they cannot be classified as social problems, but rather as natural problems. Peck and Dolch (2001:91) state that « when members of society recognize a problem, begin publicly to discuss the issue involved, and express a belief that something should be done to solve it, we witness the beginning of social problem. » A social problem is therefore visible to many individuals, groups, and or organizations. Social problems are observable and are articulated by those who are stressed by their advent.Based on the proceeding discussion, it seems as if the concept social problem has the following characteristics:
-
- it develops when the systems of a particular society fail to support each other
- it is concerned with issues which affect a number of people or communities,
- social problems can be changed through institutional collectivist approaches which means that government can formulate, implement and evaluate programmes intended to address them,
- social problems are observable and a problem is regarded as a social problem
The social problem which is relevant in this study is poverty and therefore, it will be conceptualized in the succeeding section.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
DEDICATION
SUMMARY
OPSOMMING
CHAPTER 1 GENERAL INTRODUCTION
1.1 INTRODUCTION
1.2 MOTIVATION FOR THE CHOICE OF THE STUDY
1.3 PROBLEM FORMULATION
1.4 GOAL AND OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY
1.4.1 GOAL
1.4.2 OBJECTIVES
1.5 RESEARCH QUESTION FOR THE STUDY
1.6 RESEARCH APPROACH
1.7 TYPE OF RESEARCH
1.8 RESEARCH DESIGN
1.9 RESEARCH PROCEDURE
1.9.1 DATA COLLECTION
1.9.1.1 CONTENT ANALYSIS
1.9.1.2 SEMI-STRUCTURED INTERVIEWS
1.9.1.3 SELF-ADMINISTERED QUESTIONNAIRES
1.9.2 DATA ANALYSIS
1.10 PILOT STUDY
1.10.1 PILOT TESTING OF SEMI-STRUCTURED INTERVIEW SCHEDULE AND SELF-ADMINISTERED QUESTIONNAIRE
1.10.2 FEASIBILITY OF THE STUDY
1.11 DESCRIPTION OF RESEARCH POPULATION, DELIMITATION OF SAMPLE AND SAMPLING METHOD
1.11.1 POPULATION
1.11.2 SAMPLING FRAME
1.11.3 SAMPLE AND SAMPLING METHODS
1.11.3.1 COMBINATION OF:
• JUDGEMENTAL/PURPOSIVE SAMPLING
• STRATIFIED RANDOM SAMPLING
• SIMPLE RANDOM SAMPLING
1.11.3.1 SYSTEMATIC RANDOM SAMPLING
1.12. ETHICAL ISSUES
1.13. LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY
1.14. DEFINITIONS OF KEY CONCEPTS
1.14.1 PROGRAMME EVALUATION RESEARCH
1.14.2 SOCIAL WORK
1.14.3 RECONSTRUCTION AND DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME (RDP)
1.14.4 POVERTY RELIEF PROGRAMME (PRP)
1.14.5 LIMPOPO PROVINCE
1.14.6 SOCIAL PROGRAMME
1.14.7 PUBLIC POLICY
1.14.8 POVERTY
1.15 LAYOUT OF THE RESEARCH REPORT
CHAPTER 2 POVERTY AS A SOCIAL PROBLEM
2.1 INTRODUCTION
2.2 CONCEPTUALIZATION OF THE CONCEPT SOCIAL PROBLEM
2.3 CONCEPTUALIZATION OF POVERTY
2.3.1 DEFINITION OF THE CONCEPT POVERTY
2.4 POVERTY AS A CONDITION OF DEPRIVATION
2.4.1 DISTINCTION BETWEEN INTRINSIC DEPRIVATION AND EXTRINSIC DEPRIVATION
2.4.2 CATEGORIES OF DEPRIVATION
2.4.2.1 ECONOMIC DEPRIVATION
2.4.2.2 SOCIAL DEPRIVATION
2.4.2.3 POLITICAL DEPRIVATION AND POWERLESSNESS
2.4.3 TYPES OF DEPRIVATION
2.4.3.1 MATERIAL RESOURCES DEPRIVATION
2.4.3.2 MENTAL OR EMOTIONAL DEPRIVATION
2.4.3.3 COGNITIVE DEPRIVATION
2.4.3.4 INTERPERSONAL DEPRIVATION
2.4.3.5 OPPORTUNITY DEPRIVATION
2.4.3.6 PERSONAL RIGHTS DEPRIVATION
2.4.3.7 PHYSICAL DEPRIVATION
2.4.4 FORMS OF DEPRIVATION
2.4.4.1 ABSOLUTE DEPRIVATION
2.4.4.2 RELATIVE DEPRIVATION
2.4.4.3 CULTURAL DEPRIVATION
2.4.4.4 CONJUNCTURAL DEPRIVATION
2.5 THEORETICAL PERSPECTIVES OF POVERTY
2.5.1 THE INDIVIDUALISTIC PERSPECTIVE
2.5.2 REFORMIST PERSPECTIVE
2.5.3 STRUCTURALIST PERSPECTIVE
2.6 CAUSES AND EFFECTS OF POVERTY
2.6.1 CAUSES OF POVERTY
2.6.1.1 RESOURCES DEFICIENCY
2.6.1.2 INDIVIDUAL DEFICIENCY
2.6.1.3 INSTITUTIONAL DEFICIENCY
2.6.2 EFFECTS OF POVERTY
2.6.2.1 PSYCHOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT
2.6.2.2 NATURAL/SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT
2.6.2.3 ECONOMICAL ENVIRONMENT
2.6.2.4 POLITICAL ENVIRONMENT
2.6.2.5 CULTURAL ENVIRONMENT
2.6.3 STRATEGIES FOR ELIMINATING POVERTY
2.7.1 EDUCATION AND TRAINING
2.7.2 ENTREPRENEURIAL OPPORTUNITIES
2.7.3 REDISTRIBUTION OF RESOURCES
2.7.4 INFRASTRUCTURAL DEVELOPMENT
2.7.5 IMPROVEMENT OF THE POOR’S STANDARD OF LIVING
2.7.6 GOVERNMENT’S INVOLVEMENT
2.7.7 COMPETENT ECONOMY
2.7.8 FULL EMPLOYMENT
2.7.9 COMMUNITY REVITALIZATION PROGRAMMES
2.7.10 SOCIAL SECURITY PROGRAMMES
2.8. SUMMARY
CHAPTER 3 PUBLIC POLICY
3.1 INTRODUCTION
3.2 DISTINCTION BETWEEN PUBLIC POLICY AND SOCIAL POLICY
3.2.1 PUBLIC POLICY
3.2.2 SOCIAL POLICY
3.2.3 CHARACTERISTICS OF PUBLIC POLICY AND SOCIAL POLICY
3.2.3.1 CHARACTERISTICS OF PUBLIC POLICY
3.2.3.2 CHARACTERISTICS SOCIAL POLICY
3.3 FACTORS INFLUENCING PUBLIC POLICY MAKING
3.3.1 INTERNAL FACTORS
3.3.2 EXTERNAL FACTORS
3.4 THEORETICAL MODELS REGARDING PUBLIC POLICY
3.4.1 INTRODUCTION
3.4.1.1 PILLAY’S PLURALIST AND ELITIST MODEL
3.4.1.2 CLOETE’S IDEAL TYPE MODEL
3.4.1.3 HANEKOM AND THORNHILL’S DESCRIPTIVE AND PRESCRIPTIVE MODELS
3.4.1.4 DYE’S EIGHT MODELS OF PUBLIC POLICY MAKING
3.4.2 THE DESCRIPTIVE AND PRESCRIPTIVE MODELS REGARDING PUBLIC POLICY MAKING
3.4.2.1 THE DESCRIPTIVE MODELS REGARDING PUBLIC POLICY MAKING
3.4.2.2 THE PRESCRIPTIVE MODELS REGARDING PUBLIC POLICY MAKING
3.4.2.2 PUBLIC POLICY PROCESS
3.4.2.3 PHASE 1: POLICY AGENDA
3.4.2.4 THEORETICAL APPROACHES TO POLICY AGENDA
3.4.2.5 TYPES OF POLICY AGENDA
3.4.2.6 FACTORS WHICH INFLUENCE AGENDA SETTING
3.4.3 PHASE 2: POLICY FORMULATION
3.4.3.1 ROLE PLAYERS DURING PUBLIC POLICY MAKING
3.4.4 PHASE 3: POLICY ADOPTION
PHASE 4: POLICY IMPLEMENTATION
3.4.4.1 INSTRUMENTS OF PUBLIC POLICY
3.4.4.2 PUBLIC POLICY IMPLEMENTATION PROBLEMS
3.4.5 PHASE 5: POLICY EVALUATION
3.5 SUMMARY
CHAPTER 4 THE RECONSTRUCTION AND DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME (RDP) AND THE POVERTY RELIEF PROGRAMME (PRP)
4.1 INTRODUCTION
4.2 THE RECONSTRUCTION AND DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME (RDP)
4.2.1 CONCEPTUALIZATION OF THE RDP
4.2.2 OBJECTIVES OF THE RDP
4.2.2.1 MEETING THE BASIC NEEDS
4.2.2.2 DEVELOPMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES
4.2.2.3 BUILDING THE ECONOMY
4.2.2.4 DEMOCRATIZING THE STATE AND SOCIETY
4.2.2.5 IMPLEMENTATION OF THE RDP
4.2.3 LIMITATIONS OF THE RDP
4.2.4 EFFECTIVE GUIDELINES TO THE SUCCESSFUL IMPLEMENTATION OF THE RDP
4.3 THE POVERTY RELIEF PROGRAMME (PRP)
4.3.1 CONCEPTUALIZATION OF THE POVERTY RELIEF PROGRAMME (PRP)
4.3.2 THE STRATEGIC NATURE OF THE PRP
4.3.3 THE OBJECTIVES OF THE PRP
4.3.3.1 FOOD SECURITY INITIATIVES
4.3.3.2 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STRUCTURES
4.3.3.3 YOUTH WHO ARE DEVIANT
4.3.3.4 DEVELOPMENT OF SELF-HELP ORGANIZATIONS
4.3.3.5 THE AGED AND CHILD CARE
4.3.3.6 THE DISABLED
4.3.3.7 FINANCIAL PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT
4.3.3.8 MONITORING AND EVALUATION
4.3.4 THE BASIC PRINCIPLES OF THE POVERTY RELIEF PROGRAMME (PRP)
4.2.4.1 PRINCIPLE OF ABSTRACT HUMAN NEEDS
4.2.4.2 PRINCIPLE OF LEARNING
4.2.4.3 PRINCIPLE OF PARTICIPATION
4.2.4.4 PRINCIPLE OF EMPOWERMENT
4.2.4.5 PRINCIPLE OF OWNERSHIP
4.2.4.6 PRINCIPLE OF RELEASE
4.2.4.7 PRINCIPLE OF ADAPTIVENESS
4.2.4.8 PRINCIPLE OF SIMPLICITY
4.2.4.9 PRINCIPLE OF FREEDOM
4.2.4.9.1 PRINCIPLE OF EQUALITY
4.2.4.10 PRINCIPLE OF JUSTICE
4.2.4.11 PRINCIPLE OF RIGHTS
4.2.4.12 PRINCIPLE OF DIVERSITY
4.2.4.13 PRINCIPLE OF CITIZENSHIP
4.2.5 POVERTY RELIEF PROGRAMME PROCESS
4.3.5.1 PHASE I: IDENTIFICATION
4.3.5.2 PHASE II: PREPARATION
4.3.5.3 PHASE III:APPRAISAL
4.3.5.4 PHASE IV: NEGOTIATIONS
4.3.5.5 PHASE V: IMPLEMENTATION
4.3.5.6 PHASE VI: EVALUATION
4.4 SUMMARY
CHAPTER 5 PROGRAMME EVALUATION RESEARCH
5.1 INTRODUCTION
5.2 CONCEPTUALIZATION OF PROGRAMME EVALUATION RESEARCH
5.2.1 DEFINITION OF PROGRAMME EVALUATION RESEARCH
5.2.2 CHARACTERISTICS OF PROGRAMME EVALUATION RESEARCH
5.3 AIM AND OBJECTIVES OF PROGRAMME EVALUATION RESEARCH
5.3.1 AIM OF PROGRAMME EVALUATION RESEARCH
5.3.2 OBJECTIVES OF PROGRAMME EVALUATION RESEARCH
5.4 CATEGORIES OF PROGRAMME EVALUATION RESEARCH
5.4.1 PROGRAMME IMPROVEMENT
5.4.2 ACCOUNTABILITY
5.4.3 KNOWLEDGE GENERATION
5.4.4 POLITICAL RUSES OR PUBLIC RELATIONS
5.5 THEORETICAL PERSPECTIVES OF PROGRAMME EVALUATION RESEARCH
5.5.1 POSITIVIST PERSPECTIVE OF PROGRAMME EVALUATION RESEARCH
5.5.2 INTERPRETIVE PERSPECTIVE OF PROGRAMME EVALUATION RESEARCH
5.5.3 CRITICAL-EMANCIPATORY PERSPECTIVE OF PROGRAMME EVALUATION RESEARCH
5.6 TYPES OF PROGRAMME EVALUATION RESEARCH
5.6.1 MONITORING EVALUATION
5.6.2 IMPACT EVALUATION
5.6.3 FORMATIVE EVALUATION
5.6.4 SUMMATIVE EVALUATION
5.7 THE PROCESS OF PROGRAMME EVALUATION RESEARCH
5.7.1 DETERMINE WHAT IS TO BE EVALUATED
5.7.2 IDENTIFY THE CONSUMERS OF RESEARCH
5.7.3 OBTAIN THE COOPERATION AND SUPPORT OF THE SERVICE GIVERS AND MANAGEMENT CONCERNED
5.7.3.1 TYPES OF PARTICIPATION
5.7.4 SPECIFY PROGRAMME OBJECTIVES CLEARLY AND IN MEASURABLE TERMS
5.7.5 SPECIFY OBJECTIVES OF THE EVALUATION PROCESS ITSELF
5.7.6 CHOOSE VARIABLES THAT CAN BE MEASURED TO REFLECT DESIRED OUTCOMES
5.7.7 CHOOSE AN APPROPRIATE RESEARCH DESIGN
5.7.8 IMPLEMENT MEASUREMENT
5.7.9 ANALYSE AND INTERPRET THE FINDINGS
5.7.10 REPORT AND IMPLEMENT THE RESULTS
5.8 SUMMARY
CHAPTER 6 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY AND RESEARCH FINDINGS
6.1 INTRODUCTION
6.2 PART 1: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
6.2.1 RESEARCH APPROACH
6.2.2 RESEARCH QUESTION
6.2.3 RESEARCH DESIGN
6.2.4 TYPE OF RESEARCH
6.2.5 DESCRIPTION OF THE RESEARCH POPULATION, SAMPLING FRAME AND THE SAMPLING METHODS
6.2.6 RESEARCH PROCEDURE
6.2.7 ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS
6.2.7.1 INFORMED CONSENT
6.2.7.2 ANONYMITY AND CONFIDENTIALITY
6.2.7.3 OBTAINING PERMISSION
6.3 PART II: EMPIRICAL RESEARCH FINDINGS OF THE STUDY
6.4 SECTION 1: CONTENT ANALYSIS
6.4.1 INTRODUCTION
6.4.2 THE PRP FRAMEWORK
6.4.2.1 DEFINITION
6.4.2.2 AIM OF THE PRP
6.4.2.3 STATEMENT ABOUT THE OBJECTIVES OF THE PRP
6.4.2.4 CHARACTERISTICS OF A SOCIAL PROGRAMME
6.4.2.5 FACTORS INFLUENCING POLICY MAKING
6.4.2.6 THEORETICAL MODELS REGARDING POLICY MAKING
6.4.2.7 FORMS OF POVERTY
6.4.2.8 EFFECTS OF POVERTY
6.4.2.9 THE PROCESS OF THE PRP
6.4.2.10 IMPLEMENTATION PROBLEMS OF THE PRP
6.4.2.11 THE PARTICIPANTS IN THE MONITORING AND EVALUATION PROCESS OF THE PRP
6.5 SECTION 2: RESEARCH FINDINGS THROUGH SEMI-STRUCTURED INTERVIEWS
6.5.1 INTRODUCTION
6.5.2 BIOGRAPHICAL INFORMATION OF THE KEY-INFORMANTS AND THE FEATURES OF THE PRP PROJECTS INVOLVED
6.5.3 QUANTITATIVE DATA AND QUALITATIVE RESPONSES GIVEN BY THE KEY-INFORMANTS
6.5.3.1 INTRODUCTION
6.5.3.2 THE OPINIONS OF THE RESPONDENTS REGARDING THE AIM, THE OBJECTIVES, FORMULATION, THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK, EFFECTIVITY AND OUTCOMES OF THE PRP IN THE LIMPOPO PROVINCE
6.6 SECTION 3: RESEARCH FINDINGS THROUGH SELF- ADMINISTERED QUESTIONNAIRES
6.6.1 INTRODUCTION
6.6.2 BIOGRAPHICAL INFORMATION OF THE RESPONDENTS AND FEATURES OF THE PRP PROJECTS INVOLVED
6.6.2.1 THE FEATURES OF THE PRP PROJECTS IN THE LIMPOPO PROVINCE AS REPORTED BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT OFFICERS THROUGH A CHECKLIST S A QUANTITATIVE METHOD OF DATA COLLECTION
6.6.2.2 QUANTITATIVE DATA AND QUALITATIVE INFORMATION REGARDING THE FORMULATION, IMPLEMENTATION AND EVALUATION OF THE PRP PROJECTS IN THE LIMPOPO PROVINCE AS REPORTED BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT OFFICERS THROUGH OPEN-ENDED QUESTIONS IN THE QUESTIONNAIRE
6.6.2.3 THE OPINIONS OF THE RESPONDENTS WITH REGARD TO THE AIM, THE OBJECTIVES, THE FORMULATION, THE THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK, EFFECTIVITY AND THE OUTCOMES OF THE PRP
6.7 SUMMARY
CHAPTER 7 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
7.1 INTRODUCTION
7.2 SECTION 1: CONTENT ANALYSIS
7.2.1 INTRODUCTION
7.3 THE STRUCTURE OF THE PRP FRAMEWORK
7.3.1 ISSUE IDENTIFICATION AND DEFINITION
7.3.1.1 FORMS OF POVERTY
7.3.1.2 CHARACTERISTICS OF THE PRP
7.3.2 OBJECTIVES OF THE PRP
7.3.3 CONCEPTUAL MODEL OF THE PRP
7.3.3.1 EFFECTS OF POVERTY
7.3.3.2 THE PROCESS OF THE PRP
7.3.3.3 IMPLEMENTATION PROBLEMS OF THE PRP
7.3.4 FORCES SURROUNDING THE DEVELOPMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PRP
7.3.4.1 FACTORS WHICH INFLUENCE THE FORMULATION OF THE PRP
7.3.4.2 THEORETICAL MODELS REGARDING THE FORMULATION OF THE PRP
7.3.5 EVALUATION OF THE PRP
7.3.5.1.1 THE PARTICIPANTS IN THE MONITORING AND EVALUATION PROCESS OF THE PRP
7.4 SECTION 2: SEMI-STRUCTURED INTERVIEWS WITH KEY-INFORMANTS
7.4.1 INTRODUCTION
7.4.2 BIOGRAPHICAL INFORMATION OF THE KEY-INFORMANTS AND THE FEATURES OF THE PRP PROJECTS INVOLVED
7.4.3 QUALITATIVE RESPONSES BY THE KEY-INFORMANTS REGARDING THE FORMULATION AND IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PRP
7.4.4 THE OPINIONS OF THE RESPONDENTS REGARDING THE AIM, THE OBJECTIVES, FORMULATION, THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK, EFFECTIVITY AND
OUTCOMES OF THE PRP
7.5 SECTION 3: SELF-ADMINISTERED QUESTIONNAIRE COMPLETED BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT OFFICERS
7.5.1 INTRODUCTION
7.5.2 BIOGRAPHICAL INFORMATION OF THE RESPONDENTS AND FEATURES OF THE PRP PROJECTS INVOLVED
7.5.3 QUALITATIVE DATA REGARDING THE FEATURES OF THE PRP PROJECTS IN THE LIMPOPO PROVINCE WHICH WERE COLLECTED THROUGH A CHECKLIST
7.5.3.1 THE STAKEHOLDERS WHO WERE INVOLVED IN THE PRP PROJECTS IN THE LIMPOPO PROVINCE
7.5.3.2 THE STRATEGIES WHICH WERE INCLUDED IN THE PRP PROJECTS
7.5.3.3 THE TARGET GROUPS
7.5.3.4 CAPACITY BUILDING
7.5.3.5 THE CHARACTERISTICS OF PARTICIPATION WHICH WERE IDENTIFIED DURING THE PRP PROJECTS
7.5.3.6 PRINCIPLES OF THE PRP WHICH WERE CONSIDERED DURING THE PROJECTS
7.5.3.7 THE GOALS WHICH WERE ACHIEVED AFTER THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PRP PROJECTS
7.5.3.8 THE PROCESS WHICH WAS FOLLOWED WHEN PRP PROJECTS WERE MONITORED AND EVALUATED
7.5.4 SPONTANEOUS RESPONSES REGARDING THE FORMULATION, IMPLEMENTATION AND EVALUATION OF THE PRP AS QUALITATIVELY REPORTED BY THE RESPONDENTS
7.5.4.1 IDENTIFICATION OF THE PRP PROJECTS WHICH ARE RELEVANT TO THE COMMUNITY NEEDS
7.5.4.2 THE PROCESS WHICH COMMUNITIES FOLLOWED WHEN THEY CONTACTED THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND WELFARE TO REQUEST FOR THE PRP PROJECTS
7.5.4.3 THE PROCESS WHICH WAS FOLLOWED WHEN COMMUNITIES WERE ACCESSED THE PRP FUNDING
7.5.4.4 QUALITIES OF THE PRP WHICH WERE IDENTIFIED DURING THE PROJECTS
7.5.4.5 DELIMITATION OF THE PRP WHICH WERE IDENTIFIED DURING THE IMPLEMENTATION PHASE
7.5.5 THE OPINIONS OF THE RESPONDENTS REGARDING THE AIM, THE OBJECTIVES, FORMULATION, THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK, EFFCETIVENESS AND OUTCOMES OF THE PRP
7.6 SUMMARY
BIBLIOGRAPHY
