State-Community Collaboration for Safe Communities – Promoting Urban Violence Prevention in Public Employment Programmes
By Selby Xinwa, Researcher, Centre for the Study of Violence and Reconciliation
The Community Work Programme (CWP) is a government led programme that was founded by the Department of Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs (DCoGTA) in April 2010. Inspired by Public Employment Programmes in India, CWP represents an attempt to directly address the high levels of unemployment in South Africa through the provision of two days of employment, per week, on an ongoing basis to individuals. Through a participatory process, community members engage with CWP participants to identify, create and implement activities that, in ideal circumstances, are both meaningful and useful to their communities. As of March 2013, CWP has grown to include just over 200 000 participants from 154 sites. While the CWP has provided an economic safety net to highly vulnerable individuals and contributing the development of their communities, research by CSVR has also highlighted how CWP has the potential to contribute to the prevention of violence through:Provision of Early Childhood Services in communities Recruiting and engaging ex-offenders (which contributes to their social reintegration) Engaging youth at risk not to engage in violent and criminal activities Substance abuse treatment skills (referral to rehabilitation services) Safety patrols of high-risk crime zones
On the basis of the above, a three year pilot project is being implemented in four Gauteng sites namely Orange Farm, Ivory Park, Tembisa and Erasmus. The focus of the project is to continue to support the work that CWP participants already do on the aforementioned six areas – providing capacitation and support to participants in a way that contributes to sustainable peace. Once trained, participants utilise their strengthened capacities to engage in violence prevention activities that include multiple stakeholder engagement, awareness-raising and mobilising community members around issues of violence prevention.
Trainings take place in Orange Farm, April 2017
During late Septemer 2016 and early 2017, a series of meetings, workshops and consultations were hosted with CWP stakeholders. The meetings helped CSVR facilitate the plans for the project with the aim of clarifying the necessary contents of the training manual that was formulated to support participants. Following its completion, CSVR also hosted a two-day workshop with leading experts in the six focus areas, held in January 2017.
Reference team members which includes, CSVR, GIZ and CWP Stakeholders, January 2017
Trainings commenced in 20th March and ended on the 10th May June 2017. The CSVR facilitators to the trainings adopted a participatory approach, where learning took place by combining formal subject-related knowledge with the participants’ own experiences, group discussions and critical reflection. The trainings were also implemented in a way that recognized that participants from different backgrounds would bring with them diverse experiences, knowledge and strengths, which contributed to shared learning and empowerment
Trainings take place in Tembisa April 2017, 2017
Overall the trainings have been a great success and learning experience for participants, implementing partners and CSVR. Participants have demonstrated high levels of commitment and enthusiasm towards the programme and are now developing their own interventions with the support of the CSVR team. The CWP capacitation process demonstrates the significant potential of the programme to contribute to greater collaboration among local stakeholders.
CWP Participants take part in the trainings in Ivory Park, 2017
Cabinet Reshuffle Raises Concerns about Increased Conflict and Violence
31 March 2017
The Centre for the Study of Violence and Reconciliation (CSVR) views the new appointments to the South African cabinet as deeply concerning because of its implications for deepening social divides and threatening stability in our country. This is a turning point for our country, one that calls on all South Africans to again speak out collectively in the name of the common cause – defending the democratic gains of our liberation.
The new cabinet appointments made by President Jacob Zuma on 30 March have raised red flags regarding the increased centralisation of authority within the presidency and the consolidation of the relations between political leadership and selected economic elites. These new cabinet appointments confirm fears of an increasingly closed off political elite who are averse to criticism and constructive engagement with transparent and accountable dialogue. Unless these deepening political divisions are addressed, it is likely to fuel violent protests, particularly in a context where the ANC members and supporters feel themselves alienated from their leadership.
In a context where state legitimacy has been increasingly questioned in recent years, the unilateral actions of the President in making controversial appointments will further feed into public alienation from the state. South Africa has experienced rise in service delivery protests (that now also gripped the education sector), pointing to a state that is facing a responsiveness and accountability crisis.
Presidential decisions that fly in the face of the national financial stability and internal political accountability reverses many of the positive achievements of the last 23 years of democracy. South Africa has seen continued or increasing levels of conflict and violence in various sectors of our society – gender violence, xenophobic violence, violent policing, vigilantism and service delivery and education protests that have become increasingly violent. Many of these forms of violence have their roots in the state’s failure to address the basic needs of communities. These social problems and conflicts erupt into violence when communities do not see the government as attentive to their concerns or willing to listen to their voices. When now, even the ANC NEC , feel that their voices are no longer being heard by the President, the powerlessness felt by the rest of the society is likely intensify and fuel more conflict.
The cabinet reshuffle also undermines the stability of the state. A strong developmental state is dependent on cabinet members that are competent and who can instil confidence in the ruling party, in the international community, and among South Africans more broadly. Our new trajectory is likely to weaken the state’s capacity and fuel conflict.We call on the President to reverse these appointments We call on the ANC to call its leadership, especially President Zuma to account. We call on South Africans to voice their concerns and engage in collective peaceful protests and through available democratic processes. We call on civil society to unite in a collective process of protest, engagement and increased activism.
Parliament should lead in breaking cycle of violence
February 10, 2017
The Centre for the Study of Violence and Reconciliation has warned that the normalisation of violence in Parliament will have long-term repercussions for South Africans trying to break the cycle of violence in the country.
The CSVR was responding to disruptions during the State of the Nation Address in Parliament on February 9, 2017 when members of the EFF were ejected from the House.
“When violence becomes the norm as a way to resolve our problems, it eats into the social fabric of our society. This normalisation of violence is a concern. Even if new actors are sworn in to power, the act of violence as a way to deal with issues will remain,” said CSVR executive director Nomfundo Mogapi.
“If this is how Parliamentarians deal with difference then what message would it send to ordinary people if those in leadership react with violence to those who disagree with them,” she added.
“The gendered aspects of the violence are also highly concerning,” stated Nonhlanhla Sibanda-Moyo, CSVR’s gender specialist. “Female parliamentarians were manhandled by men in a way that bordered on harassment. We need to understand that gender-based violence is an enormous problem in South Africa. Leaders need to set an example for the rest of the country. The use of violent force against women should not be accepted in either public or private spaces and leaders and people in authority should be held accountable for this violence”
CSVR research has found that South Africans are already dealing with the long-term emotional and psychological trauma from the impact of violence. This excludes the physical and financial costs with its broad impacts on society that reinforces existing social divisions.
As early as 2007, CSVR research on the levels of violence in South Africa found that violence had become normalised in South Africa for a variety of reasons including the limited effectiveness within the criminal justice system to deal with such challenges.
Additionally, the CSVR has continually found that the use of violence in collective spaces speaks to people not feeling heard. It is clear that the use of violence in public events such as SONA is a means for the public to raise concerns and frustrations that they are not given the opportunity to raise in normal circumstances. The learning from the SONA address remains that the people of South Africa need the opportunity to feel heard and for their frustrations to be dealt with in an ongoing and clear manner.
“Our political leadership has an opportunity to lead in breaking the cycle of violence in South Africa. How they deal with resulting crisis will sent a clear message to the rest of the country on the kind of society we want to be,” Mogapi concluded.
03 May 2013
By Jabu Masitha
Social cohesion is both a protection against and a casualty of violence.Social cohesion, the social fabric that binds people in a community, is a critical building block that helps societies to achieve peace and development. Building social cohesion is a key strategy in preventing violence, which threatens to destroy this social fabric. Social cohesion is thus potentially a source of resilience against violence while also being a victim of it.Both social cohesion and violence take on many forms and the relationship between the two is not always clear. Social cohesion can be narrowly conceived as the network of relationships that bind people in a community. More broadly, it could be defined as the glue that holds people together and links individuals to a broader social community through a sense of belonging, participation, inclusion, recognition and legitimacy.Structural violence consists of institutions and systems that create and maintain disparities across individuals and groups and deprive them of life opportunities. This exclusion from social, political and economic systems is often the underlying causes of more direct forms of violence at both an interpersonal and collective level.Violence damages more than individuals and physical objects. Violence damages communities' ability to maintain relationships of trust and engage in constructive collaboration. Undermining social cohesion impacts on a community's ability to engage in effective political action, economic development or fulfilling social relationships.Violence transforms the physical and social landscape of urban communities. It inhibits social interactions through distancing individuals from others in their society and through limiting mobility within and between communities. Fear of violence prompts physical separation from surrounding areas, limits social and physical bonds between communities, and leads to the isolation and exclusion of what is viewed as high-crime neighborhoods.Chronic or unremitting violence can ultimately undermine the capacity of communities to rebuild relationships even when violence abates. This is particularly problematic when children are regularly exposed to violence as it affects the development of their emotional and social capacity to engage in healthy relationships. Post-conflict settings are often characterised by high levels of crime and interpersonal violence that take on an air of normality and are resistant to quick fix solutions.A space for communities to heal collectively is fundamental as community participation does lead to social cohesion. It is also important not to make promises that you cannot keep, accountability is an essential component of violence reduction, let there be more integrated and coordinated services.Structural violence also undermines social cohesion. Societies with severe inequalities breed insecurity among individuals and groups. The costs of exclusion or marginalization are exaggerated when the divide between rich and poor is extreme. Anxiety among individuals or groups about gaining or losing status or even ensuring basic survival is likely to result in extreme and destructive responses.Conversely, social cohesion is an important bulwark against violence. Social cohesion provides the basis for dealing with conflict constructively, for engaging creatively with competing ideas and values and pursuing shared longer term goals. The lack of such cohesion, in turn, provides fertile ground for both interpersonal and collective violence.A positive, is that social cohesion can be actively facilitated by the state and by civil society, and one strategy for doing this is through an effective response to violence. These are, however, not quick-fix solutions. An explicit strategy for creating political will is often needed.The Bokfontein community is an exceptional community that exemplified the benefits of social cohesion. Two different communities were forcibly removed from their previous places of residence and ended up living on the same piece of land. For some time there was intense violence between these two communities.In 2008, meetings and workshops were convened for the community to deal with these challenges. This enabled the community to reflect more about their pain, sufferings and mourn their losses resulting from the evictions. They then started working together to build and restore their sense of humanity and dignity. During the outbreak of xenophobic attacks, Bokfontein remained peaceful despite the presence of non-nationals and the history of such tensions.Social cohesion can also be promoted through development projects that promote inclusiveness, accountability and collaboration. Bokfontein was fortunate to also be one of the first sites chosen by the government to launch the Community Work Programme. The programme engaged the community in dialogue around their development needs, providing an inclusive process that brought together a broad cross section of the community to engage in meaningful work. This process appears to have contributed to a perception of state responsiveness and a sense of agency among members that they could play a role in developing their own community.Bokfontein has consequently not experienced the violent service delivery protests that have characterized many of its neighbours.Social cohesion is a critical element in understanding and curtailing the cycles of violence in South Africa. Developing strategies to rebuild this source of resilience needs to be a key element in the rebuilding of our social fabric.Jabu Masitha is a psychologist and community manager at the Centre for the Study of Violence and Reconciliation. www.csvr.org.za
MEMBERS of Parliament’s police committee, the new Deputy Minister of Police Maggie Sotyu and police secretariat officials pronounced themselves disappointed this week when the Centre for the Study of Violence and Reconciliation’s report on why crime in South Africa is so violent was released.
They clearly all wanted a magic wand from the academics – David Bruce and Adele Kirsten – who compiled the study, and there wasn’t one. Indeed, after a particularly robust engagement, Bruce told the committee that worldwide there had been many studies done on violent crime and no one had yet come up with an answer.
Committee chairman Sindi Chikunga and Freedom Front Plus MP Pieter Groenewald wanted to know why crime in South Africa was so often accompanied by hideous cruelty. They said the study had failed to find an explanation as to why victims of crime are so often tortured.Indeed, this is a good question. The study reported that the history of structural violence inherent in the way in which colonialism and apartheid worked lay at the heart of the matter.
I suppose the idea is that if you are the victim of institutional violence simply because of your race then it legitimises violence on a personal level.Also, people would have observed brutal state action from police and other departments where there were no consequences. In short, impunity.Also connected to violent crime in the study were things like poverty, education, the destruction of family structures through the migrant labour system and, curiously, the abuse of alcohol by young mothers – often accompanied by domestic violence. Still further reinforcement.
While accepting the bona fides of the research done, it would be nice if the further research which the CSVR said was ongoing could provide answers to some of the questions. For example, there are places in the world where there is far more poverty than in South Africa but where there is less violent crime.It would also be interesting to find out what role is played by the fact that South Africa negotiated its revolution rather than fighting to the end. Is there a sort of feeling that violence is justified because there were no real winners and losers in the revolution?
There were some startling findings which should sound some alarm bells, one being that more than a third of the perpetrators of violent crime are 19 years and younger. That is truly scary and it points to problems with education and socialisation.
Having said all that, the criticism of the report does seem to be unfair. It is an astonishing piece of work and really does serve the vital function of bringing together what we know about violent crime in the country and putting it in an accessible form in one place.
There have also been complaints that R3.5- million of public money was spent and not much achieved. Also unfair. Anything that contributes to a better understanding of where we are and why we behave as we do is worth every cent.
In The Herald
Johannesburg - South Africa's "gender machinery" is in "disarray" with it not even being clear who is co-ordinating the 16 Days of Activism campaign, a group of NGOs said on Wednesday.
"At a time when it is most needed, participants noted, the national gender machinery is in disarray," read a statement from Gender Links and the Centre for the Study of Violence and Reconciliation (CSVR).
"There is a lack of clarity on which agency is driving the 16 Days of Activism campaign, which used to be housed in the department of local government, following the establishment of the ministry of women, children and disability in April this year.
"The ministry has yet to hold a consultation with civil society organisations. There has also been a deafening silence on the status of the 365 National Action Plan to End Gender Violence adopted in March 2007 and co-ordinated by the National Prosecution Authority (NPA)."
They said there is also still no specific "domestic violence" category which would enable monitoring of the crime. They called on the government to resuscitate the 365 Day National Action Plan to End Gender Violence.
'We can prevent violence'
Their statement followed a three-day symposium convened by the CSVR under the banner "We can Prevent Violence". They also called for the establishment of a special fund to end gender violence, in line with regional and international commitments.
In addition they called on Fifa to use the World Cup 2010 to send out strong messages in support of the campaign to end gender violence as well as HIV/Aids.
They said the 12% increase in reported rape cases to 71 500 from April 1, 2008 to March 31, 2009 may in part be due to the expanded definition of rape under the new act. The figures are unacceptably high and likely to be understated due to under reporting.
Government was also still "well behind" in reaching the target of 81 one-stop centres for addressing gender violence by 2010 provided for in the National Sexual Assault Policy.
The 16-Days campaign takes place every year from November 25, the International Day of No Violence Against Women.
It runs until December 10, which is International Human Rights Day.
Is he an astute politician who speaks to ordinary people's concerns, or a dangerous populist who may be undermining the Constitution? Jacob Zuma's controversial remarks on the pre-election campaign trail that has taken him around the country have left in their wake a number of questions - and while his comments may have hit the right spot with his audiences, constitutional experts and gender rights activists are not amused. The ANC president told a rally in the Western Cape last weekend that truant learners and pregnant teenagers "should be caught and sent to faraway boarding schools by force until they get degrees".
He accused teenaged mothers of abusing the government's child grant and talked about "a war on street kids". He also repeated previous remarks, including one that crime suspects enjoy too many privileges. But since he sensationally pronounced last year that he was willing to reconsider the death penalty, there has been little indication of how he wants to get this past the country's progressive human rights Constitution. The man is certainly playing to his audiences across South Africa's deep social divides. His allegorical, vernacular rally style contrasts sharply with his measured and reasonable utterances last week at the Cape Town Press Club, where his audience was a world apart from the mostly poverty-stricken people who turn up at rallies. Constitutional and human rights experts believe Zuma's campaign approach to be "dangerous" and "populist", one that's testing the limits of the country's Constitution. Some are incensed by Zuma's suggestion that teenaged mothers should be separated from their babies. "There is a complete lack of acknowledgement of the responsibility of the father in any of this. Teenage girls are a nice, easy cheap target and it plays to a conservative populism to bash teenage girls," is the verdict of Lisa Vetten, senior researcher at the Tshwaranang Legal Advocacy Centre to End Violence Against Women. "Frankly, for the ANC Youth League to have not said anything about this either, just goes to show how much they care about the difficulties that face adolescent girls. Why girls fall pregnant is a lot more complicated than we think." Two legal commentators say they believe aspects of Zuma's statements may be in conflict with the country's Constitution. University of the Western Cape constitutional expert, Professor Pierre de Vos, says if Zuma indeed meant that women should be forcibly sent away for education, he was making them into "criminals" when they were not accused before the law - "even more grave if it is directed at pregnant women". "It is obviously preposterous, because you once again make women the scapegoats and the men (who made them pregnant) get away scot-free. It is the old patriarchal approach," said De Vos. While acknowledging that the scope of teenage pregnancies was a shame to society, Unisa's Professor Shadrack Gutto said the ANC president's solution was not necessarily "child friendly", did not address the root causes of the problem and "from a constitutional legal perspective (was) very problematic". "As a safeguard you should build in the question of development of children," suggests Gutto. "In legal terms, the interests of the child (babies) come first, and critical to that is the interests of the child, for instance, in breastfeeding. "We know breastfeeding is universally acknowledged to be better for the child than other forms of feeding (although) other forms are not necessarily bad for the child." He said in this context, the statement "could violate the constitutional principle of protecting the rights of children" even before considering the interests of the mother. From the child's point of view "the statements are unfortunate and in many ways opposite to the principles of law". "We need proper reflection really on this issue - which is a populist statement not properly thought through," he suggested. But ANC national spokesperson Carl Niehaus believes Zuma has been misunderstood. The comments - often mistranslated - are derived from listening to communities where the problem of teenage pregnancies "means that mothers and grannies then have to look after the children of their children" and teenage mothers are stigmatised. Niehaus said Zuma was merely raising real concerns in communities that beg for a response from the government. He said that when teenagers leave a community to give birth, they are seldom welcomed back "because there is a kind of social sanction". "It is first of all not an attitude to let men walk off scot-free. It is important that young men are also kept responsible. The suggestion is not at all to withdraw the children by force, but where possible for them to be taken into a new community where they will be able to grow with the children," he explained. On the ANC president's statements that the rights of criminals should be curtailed, experts argue that this will not solve the underlying problem of weak judicial and police systems that result in offenders walking free. But what it does do is infringe on people's constitutional rights. The constitutional legal basic rights of all persons have limitations, stresses Gutto. "But then to be saying criminals should not have rights, really the ANC president is speaking in a language (that) I think is contrary to our Constitution and the principles of the right to freedom of movement and the rights of expression and freedom of association, which will be severely limited." Centre for the Study of Violence and Reconciliation's senior researcher David Bruce says that while there's evidence that a control-orientated approach to criminal justice is likely to convict more criminals, it also comes at the cost of convicting higher numbers of people who are innocent. Bruce warns that a human rights approach, however, depends on a criminal justice system which is staffed by people who are highly skilled and knowledgeable. South Africa has been struggling to get this right, but all efforts must be exhausted before we start intruding on human rights, he stressed. "Incarceration is a process which brutalises people. We are living in a country that is already severely brutalised. So we need to be very wary of it," he said. De Vos says it's a "typical politician's quick-fix" answer to complex problems in our deeply unequal society. But Niehaus stressed that Zuma had been trying to respond to communities' serious battles against crime and to encourage discussion about whether this could be dealt with "in a tougher way without transgressing the Constitution". Gutto also acknowledges the flip-side - that South Africa offers little for victims of crime. "If you put all those together, you can see where the sentiment is coming from - but the ANC president should not be speaking so loosely." Niehaus denied Zuma was being populist. "It is more about being sensitive to the issues being raised in townships and rural communities where things are really difficult. "These are really issues that I think he is quite right to raise," he stressed.This article was originally published on page 17 of Cape Argus on November 14, 2008
There was no need for court action to force the Gauteng provincial government to keep open temporary safe sites for refugees and asylum seekers until they were reintegrated into communities, spokesperson Thabo Masebe said on Monday. He was reacting to the announcement that the Wits Law Clinic and Consortium for Refugees and Migrants in South Africa (CoRMSA) were bringing an urgent application in the Pretoria High Court. They want the government ordered to communicate and implement a reintegration strategy which protects the rights of all, and to restore and not dismantle the Rifle Range temporary safe site until the reintegration strategy is in place.
"I don't know really what these people are looking for," said Masebe. There was no need for them to take court action, he said. "All they had to do was come to us." More than 62 people died, hundreds were injured and tens of thousands displaced in a wave of xenophobic attacks which started in Alexandra, Johannesburg on May 12 and spread to the rest of the country. The displaced have been housed in temporary shelters set up throughout the province since then. "All the shelters are still open, including the Rifle Range shelter," said Masebe. However, he explained that when people left any of the shelters any excess tents were folded up. Of about 1 700 refugees and asylum seekers at the Rifle Range camp at the height of the crisis, only 250 remained, he said. The rest had left after refusing to accept temporary identity cards from the Department of Home Affairs or finding alternative accommodation in their communities. Elsewhere in the province, there were still about 3 000 occupants of the safe shelters. "It's going down because people are leaving every day," he said, adding that 10 families left the Rand Airport camp on Friday alone. The government's key role had been to create conditions in all communities - starting with those where there was violence - for people to return to their homes, Masebe said. "They should be safe to do so. They should not fear that somebody will attack them again," he said. This had involved talking to the communities, which the provincial government had started in May. "It's not something that starts and stops. It starts and continues," he said. "I don't know what plan they are looking for." Civil society organisations have come out in support of the court action. While the need for legal action was regrettable, it was needed in the absence of the government's formal communication on a reintegration strategy, said the Reintegration Working Group. The group includes representatives of, among others: the Anglican Diocese of Johannesburg; the Somali Community Board; the Refugee Ministries Centre; the Coalition Against Xenophobia; His People Church; the Centre for the Study of Violence and Reconciliation; Mthwakazi Arts and Culture; and the Salvation Army. Masebe said the various groups could assist the government as political organisations and community organisations had done from the start. "That process goes on." In addition, the provincial government was talking to displaced people still at the shelters and who could not reintegrate on their own to find out what kind of help they needed. This included assistance with the building of shacks destroyed in the violence - in Ekurhuleni, communities were already helping in rebuilding efforts - or finding alternative accommodation. "There is no way as government, there is no way we are going to keep the shelters on a permanent basis.". The government did not want to create as permanent, separate settlements for foreign nationals, he said, adding that the government would oppose the court action. "It is not properly informed." - Sapa
In the Independent Online
Police corruption is likely to skyrocket if the Scorpions are closed down, the Centre for the Study of Violence and Reconciliation (CSVR) stated in a submission to parliament. "The SAPS is already riddled with corruption and is very bad at addressing the issue," CSVR senior researcher David Bruce argued. He said that corruption within the service could only be properly addressed if investigating units, with the "investigative sophistication" of the Scorpions, were allowed to remain independent of the police. The CSVR submission is but one of many which the chairperson of the National Assembly's Safety and Security Committee, Maggie Sotyu, expects to be waiting for her when she return to parliament next Tuesday.
The public has until Monday to make submissions concerning their views on whether the Directorate of Special Operations (Scorpions) should be closed and merged into the SAPS as called for by ANC resolutions passed at its December conference. The CSVR said that while it recognised that there were problems with the way the Scorpions were managed - as highlighted in the Khampepe Commission's report - these should be addressed without dissolving the unit. Closing the unit would do nothing to reduce the risk of the state abusing its power in the future by using similar units for its own political gain, the CSVR argued. "Creating a single agency with a monopoly of investigative powers is more likely to accentuate the problem," the CSVR said. Groups within the ANC along with the ANC's alliance partners have accused President Thabo Mbeki of using the Scorpions to carry out his political agenda against ANC leader Jacob Zuma. Meanwhile the Centre For Constitutional Rights (CFCR) on Wednesday described cabinet's decision to close the Scorpions as "irrational and arbitrary". It added it had a duty to draw attention to "conduct inconsistent with the constitution".This article was originally published on page 3 of Pretoria News on July 24, 2008
Brian Indrelunas The government should meet its "international obligation" to criminalise torture, says SA Human Rights commissioner Leon Wessels. He called explicitly outlawing torture "an international obligation" after speaking to representatives of non-profit groups and government departments at a seminar. "We can't just subscribe to the international rhetoric (without) ensuring that torture becomes a statutory crime," he commented. The Constitution lists the right not to be tortured and police policies refer to torture specifically, but "all other policy is devoid of the language", said Lukas Muntingh of the Civil Society Prison Reform Initiative. CSPRI and the Centre for the Study of Violence and Reconciliation (CSVR) hosted on Tuesday's seminar, which explored civil society's role in preventing torture.
Published on iol.co.za
Conducting Participatory Action Research with Apartheid Survivors: Lessons from ‘Addressing Socioeconomic Drivers of Violence in Khulumani Communities’Sishuba, Yanelisa, Sindiswa Nunu, Nompumelelo Njana, Agnes Ngxukuma, Brian Mphahlele and Jasmina Brankovic. 2017. Conducting Participatory Action Research with Apartheid Survivors: Lessons from ‘Addressing Socioeconomic Drivers of Violence in Khulumani Communities’. Cape Town: Khulumani Support Group Western Cape and Centre for the Study of Violence and Reconciliation.
CSVR. April 2016. “Evidence-based strategies for the prevention of gender-based violence in South Africa: A case study of CSVR." This study was generously funded by the Embassy of Finland.
CSVR. April 2016. “Mapping local gender-based violence prevention and response strategies in South Africa" This study was generously funded by the Embassy of Finland.
Brankovic, Jasmina. 2016. “Women’s Contribution to Social Cohesion and Violence Prevention through the Community Work Programme." CWP Policy Brief 3. Johannesburg: Centre for the Study of Violence and Reconciliation.
Langa, Malose, and Themba Masuku. 2015. "The Role of Ex-offenders in Implementing the Community Work Programme as a Crime and Violence Prevention Initiative." African Safety Promotion Journal 13, no. 2: 78-91.
Langa, Malose, Themba Masuku, David Bruce and Hugo van der Merwe. 2016. "Facilitating or hindering social cohesion? The impact of the Community Work Programme in selected South African townships" South African Crime Quarterly, No 55.
Bruce, David. 2015. “Working for Safety: The Community Work Programme as a Tool for Preventing Violence and Building Safer Communities,” CWP Policy Brief 2. Johannesburg: Centre for the Study of Violence and Reconciliation.
Mullagee, Fairuz, with David Bruce. 2015. Building a Good Nation in Manenberg: A Case Study of the Manenberg Community Work Programme. Johannesburg: Centre for the Study of Violence and Reconciliation.
Langa, Malose. 2015. The Impact of the Community Work Programme on Violence in Orange Farm. Johannesburg: Centre for the Study of Violence and Reconciliation.