{"doc_desc":{"title":"zaf-fh-clsds-2016-2017-v1","producers":[{"name":"DataFirst","abbreviation":"","affiliation":"University of Cape Town","role":"Metadata producer"}],"prod_date":"2020-04-09","version_statement":{"version":"Version 3"}},"study_desc":{"title_statement":{"idno":"zaf-fh-clsds-2016-2017-v1","title":"Community-Level Social Dynamics Survey 2016-2017","alt_title":"CLSDS 2016-2017"},"authoring_entity":[{"name":"Social Surveys Africa","affiliation":""},{"name":"Freedom House","affiliation":""}],"production_statement":{"funding_agencies":[{"name":"Freedom House","abbreviation":"FH","role":"Funder"}]},"distribution_statement":{"contact":[{"name":"DataFirst Support","affiliation":"University of Cape Town","email":"support@data1st.org","uri":"support.data1st.org"}]},"series_statement":{"series_name":"Household Survey [hh]","series_info":"Freedom House. Community-level Social Dynamics Survey 2016-2017 [dataset]. Version 1. Cape Town & Johannesburg: Social Surveys Africa and Freedom [producers], 2017. Cape Town: DataFirst [distributor], 2017. DOI: https:\/\/doi.org\/10.25828\/mqca-4873"},"version_statement":{"version":"V1: Edited, anonymised data for public distribution","version_date":"2017"},"study_info":{"abstract":"Freedom House South Africa commissioned Social Surveys Africa to implement the Community Level Social Dynamics Survey. The survey was designed to support the intervention \"Combatting Drivers of Xenophobic Violence programme,\" implemented by Freedom House South Africa and partners in 16 communities across South Africa. The survey in ten communities aimed to improve understanding of the factors contributing to social cohesion. It was part of a larger research programme which included in-depth qualitative case studies of all 16 communities.","time_periods":[{"start":"2017-01-17","end":"2017-02-04","cycle":"Phase 2"}],"coll_dates":[{"start":"2016-06-13","end":"2016-06-28","cycle":"Phase 1"}],"nation":[{"name":"South Africa","abbreviation":"zaf"}],"geog_coverage":"The survey covered 10 communities in 6 provinces (Eastern Cape, Gauteng, Kwa-Zulu Natal, Limpopo, North West and Western Cape) in South Africa.","geog_unit":"The lowest level of geographic aggregation of the data is sub-place, that is, the surveyed neighbourhoods.","analysis_unit":"Households and individuals","universe":"The survey enumerated residents in the 10 communities aged 18+","data_kind":"Sample survey data","notes":"The survey collected the following data on enumerated households:\n\nRespondents' neighbourhood and dwelling (from observation)\nDemographic data (age, education-level, language, nationality, place of birth)\nData on migration, mobility and relationship to place\nData on socio-economic standing (life satisfaction, family support, employment, income, transport, access to and use of media, including ICT)\nSocial activities and interactions\nPolitical activities and trust in government entities\nBeliefs and values"},"method":{"data_collection":{"data_collectors":[{"name":"Social Surveys Africa","abbreviation":"SSA","affiliation":""}],"sampling_procedure":"The sample sites for the Freedom House Social Cohesion Survey 2016-2017 were drawn from the Combatting Drivers of Xenophobic Violence programme that had been running since March 2016. \nThe programme was conducted in 16 sites in 6 provinces (Eastern Cape, Gauteng, Kwa-Zulu Natal, Limpopo, North West and Western Cape) in South Africa, and is guided by Freedom House's working model of what is likely to lead to an 'at-risk' community. \nThe initial survey design was to conduct the same survey instrument as a baseline and endline 12 months apart in the same 5 sites in order to: \na) Inform the intervention to be conducted by the local MXV implementing partner peace building teams, and \nb) Evaluate whether the intervention had had an effect. \n\nThe sites were selected purposively by FH in consultation with SSA. The sites were chosen to encapsulate the various contexts in terms of settings, that is, types of settlements (rural, peri-urban and urban) and geographical spread across provinces. \nAfter the completion of the first phase in mid-2016 the design was changed so that the second phase would be implemented in five new sites rather than returning to the same sites. This was because: \na) The timing of the intervention and the study: the intervention had already been active for a longer period, so the survey field work could not be taken as a baseline \nb) The timeframe of measuring impact would have to be longer than 12 months \nc) Phase 1 field work took place just before local government elections, which is a very particular period in which to ask community residents about political participation and perceptions, so findings would not be comparable with other periods of time. \n\nThe total sample of sites was therefore 10 out of the 16 possible intervention sites. \nWithin each broad intervention site, specific wards or sections of wards were purposively sampled by FHSA, as shown in Table 1, based on the following criteria: \n\u2022 Areas where the intervention was taking place \n\u2022 Areas representing a diversity of settlement types within the site, e.g. informal and formal housing areas; areas with predominantly Black or 'Coloured' residents; commercial farming areas, township areas and formal 'town' areas. \n\u2022 Excluding extremely dangerous or hard to access sites, such as the Glebeland Hostel in Durban South.","coll_mode":"Face-to-face [f2f]"}},"data_access":{"dataset_use":{"contact":[{"name":"DataFirst","affiliation":"University of Cape Town","email":"support@data1st.org","uri":"support.data1st.org"}],"cit_req":"Freedom House. Community-level Social Dynamics Survey 2016-2017 [dataset]. Version 1. Cape Town & Johannesburg: Social Surveys Africa and Freedom [producers], 2017. Cape Town: DataFirst [distributor], 2017. DOI: https:\/\/doi.org\/10.25828\/mqca-4873","conditions":"Licensed use files, available for non-commercial use only"}}},"schematype":"survey"}