Beneficiary participation defined - a South Africa perspective
- Aigbavboa, C.O., Thwala, Wellington Didibhuku
- Authors: Aigbavboa, C.O. , Thwala, Wellington Didibhuku
- Date: 2015
- Subjects: Beneficiary participation , Housing , Housing policy
- Language: English
- Type: Conference proceedings
- Identifier: http://ujcontent.uj.ac.za8080/10210/372614 , http://hdl.handle.net/10210/81352 , uj:18817 , Citation: Aigbavboa, C.O. & Thwala, W.D. 2015. Beneficiary participation defined - a South Africa perspective.
- Description: Abstract: Beneficiaries’ participation is a rich concept that varies with its application and definition. The way participation is defined, depends on the context in which it occurs. For some scholars, it is a matter of principle; for others, a matter of practice; for even more it is an end in itself. Hence, in this paper a South Africa perspective on the definition of participation will be discussed in relation to subsidised low-income housing beneficiaries. The data used in this research were derived from secondary sources only; through a detailed review of related literature on the subject in order to meet the research objectives. The study is a South Africa perspective on the definition of participation. From the review of the extant literature, it was found that participation is a stereotyped word like children use Lego pieces. Like Lego pieces, the words fit arbitrarily together and support the most fanciful constructions. They have no content but do serve a function. As these words are separate from any context, they are ideal for manipulative purposes. Hence, it was found that ‘Participation’ belongs to this category of word. Therefore, because involvements in projects and other ventures gives people a better understanding of their interests and the interests of others, and, in some cases, brings them to see what would be best for the entire group, this study thus contribute to the body of knowledge in the conceptualisation of subsidised low-income beneficiary participation in South Africa.
- Full Text:
- Authors: Aigbavboa, C.O. , Thwala, Wellington Didibhuku
- Date: 2015
- Subjects: Beneficiary participation , Housing , Housing policy
- Language: English
- Type: Conference proceedings
- Identifier: http://ujcontent.uj.ac.za8080/10210/372614 , http://hdl.handle.net/10210/81352 , uj:18817 , Citation: Aigbavboa, C.O. & Thwala, W.D. 2015. Beneficiary participation defined - a South Africa perspective.
- Description: Abstract: Beneficiaries’ participation is a rich concept that varies with its application and definition. The way participation is defined, depends on the context in which it occurs. For some scholars, it is a matter of principle; for others, a matter of practice; for even more it is an end in itself. Hence, in this paper a South Africa perspective on the definition of participation will be discussed in relation to subsidised low-income housing beneficiaries. The data used in this research were derived from secondary sources only; through a detailed review of related literature on the subject in order to meet the research objectives. The study is a South Africa perspective on the definition of participation. From the review of the extant literature, it was found that participation is a stereotyped word like children use Lego pieces. Like Lego pieces, the words fit arbitrarily together and support the most fanciful constructions. They have no content but do serve a function. As these words are separate from any context, they are ideal for manipulative purposes. Hence, it was found that ‘Participation’ belongs to this category of word. Therefore, because involvements in projects and other ventures gives people a better understanding of their interests and the interests of others, and, in some cases, brings them to see what would be best for the entire group, this study thus contribute to the body of knowledge in the conceptualisation of subsidised low-income beneficiary participation in South Africa.
- Full Text:
Assessment of structural quality of houses delivered through the people's housing process in South Africa
- Authors: Ogunfiditimi, Olaosebikan
- Date: 2010-03-10T06:20:26Z
- Subjects: Housing , Housing policy , Structural analysis (Engineering) , Engineering standards , Construction industry quality control , Gauteng (South Africa)
- Type: Thesis
- Identifier: uj:6652 , http://hdl.handle.net/10210/3059
- Description: M.Tech. , South African government is one of the countries in the world that has delivered the highest number of houses to the poor through various delivery mechanisms to fulfill her vision to adequate housing for all as reflected in the National Housing Policy framework. Since 1994, about One Million Eight Hundred and Seventy Seven Thousand Nine Hundred and Fifty Eight (1 877 958) houses has been delivered. People’s Housing Process is a state-assisted, self help housing programme and about 3% of the total houses built were delivered through the PHP housing delivery programme. The Government’s goal is, subject to fiscal affordability, to increase housing delivery on a sustainable basis to a peak level of 350 000 units per annum until the housing backlog is overcome (South Africa’s National Housing code policy, 2000:5). The government focused on quantitative housing delivery with qualitative shortcomings. However the focus has now shifted to the quality of the end product delivered. Defects in houses manifest themselves primarily through cracking, dampness, detachment, and water leakages. Defects may be patent or latent, and could be discovered through checking, observations and tests. This research work is a study of structural qualities of houses delivered through PHP. The study investigated the causes of structural inadequacies in PHP houses focusing in the Gauteng Province of South Africa. The findings show that different types of structural defects occurred in houses delivered through PHP scheme, these defects include roof leakages, cracks in walls, wall not being straight and defects in roof trusses. The cause of these defects was as a result of poor quality control mechanism put in place by the Department of Housing.
- Full Text:
- Authors: Ogunfiditimi, Olaosebikan
- Date: 2010-03-10T06:20:26Z
- Subjects: Housing , Housing policy , Structural analysis (Engineering) , Engineering standards , Construction industry quality control , Gauteng (South Africa)
- Type: Thesis
- Identifier: uj:6652 , http://hdl.handle.net/10210/3059
- Description: M.Tech. , South African government is one of the countries in the world that has delivered the highest number of houses to the poor through various delivery mechanisms to fulfill her vision to adequate housing for all as reflected in the National Housing Policy framework. Since 1994, about One Million Eight Hundred and Seventy Seven Thousand Nine Hundred and Fifty Eight (1 877 958) houses has been delivered. People’s Housing Process is a state-assisted, self help housing programme and about 3% of the total houses built were delivered through the PHP housing delivery programme. The Government’s goal is, subject to fiscal affordability, to increase housing delivery on a sustainable basis to a peak level of 350 000 units per annum until the housing backlog is overcome (South Africa’s National Housing code policy, 2000:5). The government focused on quantitative housing delivery with qualitative shortcomings. However the focus has now shifted to the quality of the end product delivered. Defects in houses manifest themselves primarily through cracking, dampness, detachment, and water leakages. Defects may be patent or latent, and could be discovered through checking, observations and tests. This research work is a study of structural qualities of houses delivered through PHP. The study investigated the causes of structural inadequacies in PHP houses focusing in the Gauteng Province of South Africa. The findings show that different types of structural defects occurred in houses delivered through PHP scheme, these defects include roof leakages, cracks in walls, wall not being straight and defects in roof trusses. The cause of these defects was as a result of poor quality control mechanism put in place by the Department of Housing.
- Full Text:
- «
- ‹
- 1
- ›
- »