COVID-19 lockdown in South Africa highlights unequal access to services - Africa Portal
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
Dispatch No. 358 | 28 April 2020 COVID-19 lockdown in South Africa highlights unequal access to services Afrobarometer Dispatch No. 358 | Thomas Isbell Summary The COVID-19 pandemic has placed unprecedented pressures on governments, economies, and families, posing what many observers consider the largest global peace-time challenge since the Great Depression a century ago (Goodman, 2020; Rogoff, 2020). In South Africa, the government moved swiftly after the first confirmed case of COVID-19 was recorded on 5 March (Mkhize, 2020), turning away arrivals from countries considered high risk (Fabricius & du Plessis, 2020). By 27 March, a national lockdown required South Africans to stay at home except for essential food shopping and medical appointments. Security forces were mobilized to enforce the lockdown (Mahlati, 2020; South African Presidency, 2020). To date, the South African measures appear to have been successful in slowing the spread of the virus, and have been lauded internationally (Brandt, 2020; Harding, 2020; Nordling, 2020). But they have also highlighted the challenges and costs of a lockdown, especially for the poor (New Humanitarian, 2020). This dispatch looks at the lived realities of ordinary South Africans in terms of how easily they are able to stay at home and stay safe. Afrobarometer survey findings from 2018 suggest the country entered the COVID-19 era with large disparities in access to essential services, such as water, toilets, markets, and banks. Many citizens, especially the economically disadvantaged, are forced to leave their homes and compounds to access water and toilets, thereby placing themselves and others at risk of contracting or spreading the virus. Many also lack the resources to work from home, stay informed, seek help, and educate their children online. In principle, South Africans are less supportive of government restrictions on free movement than most other Africans. And in enforcing COVID-19 restrictions, the army faces significant popular distrust and doubts about its professionalism and respect for the rights of all citizens. Afrobarometer survey Afrobarometer is a pan-African, non-partisan research network that provides reliable data on African experiences and evaluations of democracy, governance, and quality of life. Seven rounds of surveys were conducted in up to 38 countries between 1999 and 2018, and Round 8 surveys (2019/2020) are planned in at least 35 countries. Afrobarometer conducts face-to face interviews in the language of the respondent’s choice with nationally representative samples. The Afrobarometer team in South Africa, led by the Institute for Justice and Reconciliation and Plus 94 Research, interviewed 1,800 adult South Africans in August and September 2018. A sample of this size yields country-level results with a margin of error of +/-2.3 percentage points at a 95% confidence level. Previous surveys were conducted in South Africa in 2000, 2002, 2004, 2006, 2008, 2011, and 2015. Copyright ©Afrobarometer 2020 1
Key findings
▪ As of mid-2018, only four in 10 South Africans (43%) believed the government should
have the right to impose curfews or set up roadblocks when faced with a threat to
public security, the second-lowest level of support for such restrictions across 34
African countries surveyed in 2016/2018. While these views were recorded well before
the COVID-19 crisis, they suggest significant popular resistance to government
restrictions on free movement.
▪ While about half of South Africans have piped water (53%) and toilets (50%) in their
homes, many must leave their homes or even their compounds to access these
essential services.
▪ Rural, poor, and black South Africans face particular disadvantages in access to key
public services and infrastructure such as water and sewage systems, markets, banks,
and cell phone service, making it more difficult for them to quarantine at home.
▪ A majority (54%) of South African households do not own a computer, making it more
difficult to work remotely, engage in online learning, and stay informed.
▪ While most South Africans (91%) own a mobile phone, only 62% have access to the
Internet via their phones, and 36% said they “never” use the Internet, highlighting the
importance of using other channels to offer these citizens opportunities and
information.
▪ While members of the South African National Defence Force are being deployed to
enforce the COVID-19 lockdown, only about half (53%) of South Africans said they
trust the army, and only four in 10 (39%) said the armed forces usually operate
professionally and respect the rights of all citizens.
South Africans split on right of government to impose curfews
Since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, observers have raised concerns about African
regimes using the fight against the virus as a pretense to limit civil and political freedoms and
consolidate power (Cheeseman & Smith, 2020; Gyimah-Boadi & Logan, 2020). While each
country’s case must be scrutinized individually, the data for South Africa suggest
considerable popular resistance to government restrictions on people’s freedom to move
around.
As of September 2018, a majority (53%) of survey respondents said people should be free to
move about the country at will even when public security is threatened. Only 43% supported
the government’s right to impose curfews or set up roadblocks when faced with security
threats (Figure 1), the second-lowest level of support (after Zimbabwe) across 34 African
countries surveyed in 2016/2018 (Logan & Penar, 2019).
Freedom of movement, even in the face of security threats, enjoyed stronger support among
younger South Africans (56% among 18- to 35-year-olds) and those with higher levels of
education (56% of those with post-secondary qualifications) (Figure 2). In a comparison of
race groups, white South Africans (48%) were least likely to favour freedom of movement
over the government’s right to impose restrictions.
The government’s right to impose curfews and roadblocks found its greatest support among
respondents in North West (50%) and the Eastern Cape (48%), while only 39% of respondents
in Mpumalanga and Free State endorsed such a power (Figure 3).
Copyright ©Afrobarometer 2020 2Figure 1: Support freedom of movement vs. government right to impose curfews
| South Africa | 2018
100%
Government should have
right to limit movement
28%
(agree very strongly)
80%
Government should have
right to limit movement
14% (agree)
60%
4% Agree with neither/Don't
know
19%
40%
People should be free to
move (agree)
20%
34% People should be free to
move (agree very
strongly)
0%
Respondents were asked: Which of the following statements is closest to your view?
Statement 1: Even if faced with threats to public security, people should be free to move about
the country at any time of day or night.
Statement 2: When faced with threats to public security, the government should be able to
impose curfews and set up special roadblocks to prevent people from moving around.
(Note: Due to rounding, percentages for combined categories may differ slightly from the sum of sub-
categories (e.g. 14% “agree” and 28% “agree very strongly” combine to 43%).)
Figure 2: Support freedom of movement | by socio-demographic group | South
Africa | 2018
Rural 53%
Urban 53%
Women 54%
Men 52%
56+ years old 47%
36-55 years old 52%
18-35 years old 56%
No formal education 49%
Primary 48%
Secondary 54%
Post-secondary 56%
High lived poverty 48%
Moderate lived poverty 53%
Low lived poverty 55%
No lived poverty 52%
White 48%
Black/African 53%
Coloured 58%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
(% who “agreed” or “agreed very strongly” that “even if faced with threats to public security, people
should be free to move about the country at any time of day or night”)
Copyright ©Afrobarometer 2020 3Figure 3: Support freedom of movement vs. government right to impose curfews
| by region | South Africa | 2018
Free State 61% 39%
Mpumalanga 58% 39%
Western Cape 56% 40%
KwaZulu-Natal 55% 40%
Northern Cape 55% 43%
Eastern Cape 52% 48%
Limpopo 52% 45%
Gauteng 50% 43%
North West 46% 50%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
People should be free to move
Government should have right to limit movement
Respondents were asked: Which of the following statements is closest to your view?
Statement 1: Even if faced with threats to public security, people should be free to move about
the country at any time of day or night.
Statement 2: When faced with threats to public security, the government should be able to
impose curfews and set up special roadblocks to prevent people from moving around.
(% who “agreed” or “agreed very strongly” with each statement)
Capacity to quarantine
The government’s lockdown orders require people to stay home except to buy groceries or
seek medical attention. However, in a country of immense inequalities, staying home to stay
safe is not equally easy for everyone.
For many, accessing basic services such as water and toilets means leaving the house or
even the compound (Figure 4). For example, about half of South Africans do not have piped
water (47%) or toilet facilities (51%) in their
homes.
Do your own analysis of Afrobarometer data – And while people are encouraged to work
on any question, for any country and survey from home during the lockdown, only 58%
round. It’s easy and free at enjoy a supply of electricity that works more
www.afrobarometer.org/online-data-analysis. than half the time.
Access to basic services is unequally
distributed among different groups in South
Africa. While two in three urban residents (67%) have piped water in their homes, only one in
five rural residents (22%) do. In fact, 44% of rural dwellers said they have to leave their
compound to access water (Figure 5).
Copyright ©Afrobarometer 2020 4Figure 4: Access to water, toilets, and electricity | South Africa | 2018
Water supply
Inside the house 53%
Inside the compound 25%
Outside the compound 22%
Toilet facilities
Inside the house 50%
Inside the compound 33%
Outside the compound 16%
No latrine 2%
Works all of the time 41%
Electrical supply
Works most of the time 17%
Works about half of the time 6%
Works occasionally 20%
Never works 8%
No mains electric supply or
8%
connection to the home
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Respondents were asked:
Please tell me whether each of the following are available inside your house, inside your
compound, or outside your compound: Your main source of water for household use? A toilet or
latrine?
Do you have an electric connection to your home from the mains? [If yes:] How often is electricity
actually available from this connection?
Likewise, poor South Africans are considerably less able to stay at home than those who
experience no lived poverty.1 While 71% of those without experience of poverty have piped
water in their homes, among the poorest, only 29% have access to water in their homes, and
38% must leave their compounds to get water.
Similarly, while large majorities of white (94%) and Coloured (87%) South Africans enjoy piped
water in their homes, the same is true for fewer than half (44%) of black citizens.
The pattern is similar with respect to access to toilet facilities (not shown).
1
Afrobarometer’s Lived Poverty Index (LPI) measures respondents’ levels of material deprivation by asking
how often they or their families went without basic necessities (enough food, enough water, medical care,
enough cooking fuel, and a cash income) during the preceding year. For more on lived poverty, see Mattes,
Dulani, & Gyimah-Boadi (2016).
Copyright ©Afrobarometer 2020 5Figure 5: Access to water | by socio-demographic group | South Africa | 2018
Rural 22% 32% 44%
Urban 67% 21% 12%
High lived poverty 29% 31% 38%
Moderate lived poverty 39% 33% 27%
Low lived poverty 59% 22% 19%
No lived poverty 71% 17% 12%
Black/African 44% 29% 27%
Coloured 87% 10% 2%
White 94% 2%
4%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Inside the house Inside the compound Outside the compound
Respondents were asked: Please tell me whether each of the following are available inside your house,
inside your compound, or outside your compound: Your main source of water for household use?
Some of the differences in access to basic services are explained by the presence or
absence of the infrastructure needed to provide the services. Afrobarometer survey teams
capture these data based on their direct observations in the communities they visit. In South
Africa, most areas had built electricity infrastructure (94%), piped water systems (78%), and
cell phone service (75%), while a smaller majority had sewage systems (63%).
However, poor South Africans were far less likely than their better-off counterparts to live in
areas with basic public service infrastructure (Figure 6). For example, while 91% of the best-off
respondents lived in areas served by a piped water system, the same was true for just 61% of
the poorest respondents. The gap was 84% vs. 63% for cell phone service and 78% vs. 48% for
sewage infrastructure.
Figure 6: Access to basic infrastructure | by level of lived poverty | South Africa
| 2018
99% 95% 92% 92% 94%
100% 91%
84%
82% 78% 78%
75% 74% 75%
80% 71%
64%
61% 63% 63%
58%
60% 48%
40%
20%
0%
Electricity grid Piped water Cell phone service Sewage system
system
No lived poverty Low lived poverty Moderate lived poverty
High lived poverty Average
Survey enumerators were asked to record: Are the following services present in the primary sampling
unit/enumeration area: Electricity grid that most houses can access? Piped water system that most
houses can access? Sewage system that most houses can access? Mobile phone service? (% “yes)
Copyright ©Afrobarometer 2020 6To help contain the spread of the virus, people must limit their travel as much as possible.
However, they cannot go without certain essential services, such as places to buy groceries
and in some cases health clinics and banks. Observations by Afrobarometer teams show that
almost two-thirds (63%) of surveyed communities had market stalls or shopping facilities, 45%
had medical facilities, and 29% had banks – meaning that substantial parts of the population
would have to leave their neighborhoods to obtain these services.
Again, disparities by lived poverty level are significant (Figure 7). Only 47% of the poorest
South Africans live in areas with market stalls, compared to 71% of the best-off respondents,
who are also twice as likely to live in areas with banks than the poorest respondents (40% vs.
20%).
Figure 7: Access to key services | by level of lived poverty | South Africa | 2018
40%
32%
Bank 22%
20%
29%
34%
30%
Post office 25%
21%
28%
47%
46%
Health clinic 42%
45%
45%
71%
66%
Market stalls 60%
47%
63%
71%
73%
School 72%
78%
73%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
No lived poverty Low lived poverty
Moderate lived poverty High lived poverty
Average
Survey enumerators were asked to record: Are the following facilities present in the primary sampling
unit/enumeration area? (% “yes”)
Ability to work from home and stay informed
To be able to stay at home for an extended period, people must be able to continue their
work or find employment that is compatible with working from home. But while most South
Africans (91%) own a mobile phone, fewer than half own a computer (34%) or live in a
household where someone else owns one (11%) (Figure 8).
Urban residents (41%) and men (40%) are considerably more likely to own a computer than
are rural residents (20%) and women (28%) (Figure 9). As might be expected, well-off South
Africans (52%) are almost four times as likely as the poorest (14%) to personally own a
computer. Large racial gaps also appear: White South Africans (87%) are about three times
as likely to own a computer as black (29%) citizens.
Copyright ©Afrobarometer 2020 7Figure 8: Computer and mobile phone ownership | South Africa | 2018
100% 91%
80%
60% 54%
40% 34%
20% 11%
5% 4%
0%
Yes, do own Someone else in No, don’t own
household owns
Computer Mobile phone
Respondents were asked: Which of these things do you personally own: Computer? Mobile phone?
[If no:] Does anyone else in your household own one?
Figure 9: Own a computer | by socio-demographic group | South Africa | 2018
Rural 20% 12% 67%
Urban 41% 11% 48%
Women 28% 12% 59%
Men 40% 10% 49%
High lived poverty 14% 10% 76%
Moderate lived poverty 25% 10% 64%
Low lived poverty 38% 12% 49%
No lived poverty 52% 9% 38%
Black/African 29% 12% 58%
Coloured 43% 7% 49%
White 87% 4%10%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Yes, do own Yes, someone else owns No, don’t own
Respondents were asked: Which of these things do you personally own: Computer? [If no:] Does
anyone else in your household own one?
Being online is essential for home-based work and education as well as for staying on top of
the news, public service announcements, and possibilities for seeking help (Bright, 2020; Nash,
Copyright ©Afrobarometer 2020 82020). However, while most South Africans own a mobile phone, only about six in 10 (62%)
can use it to access the Internet (Figure 10).
Moreover, while four in 10 South Africans (41%) are daily users of the Internet, almost as many
(36%) said they “never” go online (Figure 11).
Figure 10: Mobile phone has Internet access | South Africa | 2018
100%
80%
62%
60%
40%
28%
20%
9%
0%
Yes, have Internet No, do not have Don't own mobile
access Internet access phone
Respondents were asked: Does your phone have access to the Internet?
Figure 11: How often use the Internet | South Africa | 2018
Every day 41%
A few times a week 12%
A few times a month 6%
Less than once a month 4%
Never 36%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Respondents were asked: How often do you use the Internet?
Living completely offline is especially common among rural residents (49%), older
respondents (71% among those above age 55), and the poorest citizens (54% among those
with high levels of lived poverty), placing them at higher risk of lacking the tools to seek
remote employment and keep informed about the current situation (Figure 12). Black South
Africans (38%) are more likely to “never” use the Internet than white (8%) and Coloured (28%)
citizens.
Copyright ©Afrobarometer 2020 9Figure 12: How often use the Internet | by socio-demographic group | South Africa
| 2018
Rural 28% 11% 9% 49%
Urban 47% 13% 10% 30%
Women 39% 12% 9% 38%
Men 43% 12% 10% 34%
56+ years old 14% 4% 8% 71%
36-55 years old 33% 11% 10% 44%
18-35 years old 54% 15% 10% 21%
High lived poverty 23% 10% 9% 54%
Moderate lived poverty 34% 9% 10% 45%
Low lived poverty 43% 16% 10% 30%
No lived poverty 58% 9% 9% 23%
Black/African 37% 12% 10% 38%
Coloured 50% 11% 10% 28%
White 78% 9% 6% 8%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Every day
A few times a week
A few times a month/Less than once a month
Never
Respondents were asked: How often do you use the Internet?
Given the evolving pandemic and the unpredictability of its spread, it is crucial that
information be disseminated to people quickly and efficiently. Mass media are pivotal in this
regard. While a majority of South Africans said they trust both government (58%) and
independent media (59%), almost four in 10 said they trust them “just a little” or “not at all”
(Figure 13).
Trust in government broadcasting services is somewhat lower among both the most and least
educated (51% and 48%, respectively), as well as among those who feel close to the
opposition Democratic Alliance party (54%) (Figure 14).
Copyright ©Afrobarometer 2020 10Figure 13: Trust media | South Africa | 2018
58%
Government broadcasting services
39%
59%
Independent broadcasting services
37%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Somewhat/A lot Just a little/Not at all
Respondents were asked: How much do you trust each of the following, or haven’t you heard enough
about them to say: Government broadcasting services like SABC-TV and radio? Independent
broadcasting services like eTV, Radio 702, and community radio stations?
Figure 14: Trust government media ‘somewhat’ or ‘a lot’ | by level of education and
partisanship2 | South Africa | 2018
Post-secondary 51%
Secondary 60%
Primary 63%
No formal education 48%
African National Congress (ANC) 64%
Democratic Alliance (DA) 54%
Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) 64%
Inkatha Freedom Party (IFP) 64%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Respondents were asked: How much do you trust each of the following, or haven’t you heard enough
about them to say: Government broadcasting services like SABC-TV and radio? (% who said
“somewhat” or “a lot”)
Experience with security forces
To try to ensure that people abide by the lockdown measures and that property is protected
from looting, the president deployed 2,820 South African National Defence Force personnel
on 23 March and a further 73,180 a month later (Merten, 2020).
Survey results from 2018 suggest that South Africans are more trusting of the army than of the
police: 53% said they trust the military “somewhat” or “a lot,” vs. just 33% for the police. Still,
that leaves four out of 10 citizens (40%) who expressed “just a little” or no trust in the army (vs.
66% for the police) (Figure 15).
2
Afrobarometer determines political affiliation based on responses to the questions, “Do you feel close to any
particular political party?” and, if yes, “Which party is that?”
Copyright ©Afrobarometer 2020 11Figure 15: Popular trust in the army and police | South Africa | 2018
100%
80%
66%
60% 53%
40%
40% 33%
20%
0%
Trust army Trust police
Somewhat/A lot Just a little/Not at all
Respondents were asked: How much do you trust each of the following, or haven’t you heard enough
about them to say: The police? The army?
South Africans are similarly divided on the army’s performance: One in three (34%) said the
military “often” or “always” protects the country from external and internal security threats,
while 22% said it does so only “sometimes” and 31% said it “rarely” or “never” protects the
country (Figure 16). Only four in 10 respondents (39%) said they believe the military usually
gets the training and equipment it needs to be effective.
And in what might be an important factor in how South Africans respond to military efforts to
enforce COVID-19 restrictions, only four in 10 respondents (39%) said the army “often” or
“always” acts in a professional manner and respects the rights of all citizens.
Figure 16: Perceptions and experiences of the armed forces | South Africa | 2018
Armed forces protect the country from
34% 22% 31% 14%
security threats
Armed forces get necessary resources 39% 21% 24% 16%
Armed forces are professional and
39% 22% 25% 14%
respectful to citizens
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Often/Always Sometimes Rarely/Never Don't know
Respondents were asked: In your opinion, to what extent do the armed forces of our country:
Keep our country safe from external and internal security threats?
Get the training and equipment needed to be effective?
Operate in a professional manner and respect the rights of all citizens?
Copyright ©Afrobarometer 2020 12The perception that the army usually acts professionally and respects citizens’ rights is
particularly weak among rural residents (36%), women (37%), youth (38%), less-educated
citizens (31%-33% among those with primary or no formal education), the poorest citizens
(35%), and residents of KwaZulu-Natal (29%) and the North West region (34%) (Figure 17).
Figure 17: Armed forces are professional and respect citizens’ rights | by socio-
demographic group | South Africa | 2018
Rural 36%
Urban 41%
Women 37%
Men 42%
56+ years old 42%
36-55 years old 40%
18-35 years old 38%
Post-secondary 40%
Secondary 41%
Primary 31%
No formal education 33%
High lived poverty 35%
Moderate lived poverty 37%
Low lived poverty 41%
No lived poverty 41%
Gauteng 45%
Eastern Cape 44%
Limpopo 44%
Free State 41%
Mpumalanga 40%
Northern Cape 38%
Western Cape 36%
North West 34%
KwaZulu-Natal 29%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Respondents were asked: In your opinion, to what extent do the armed forces of our country operate in
a professional manner and respect the rights of all citizens? (% who said “often” or “always”)
Conclusion
The battle against the new coronavirus will likely go on throughout 2020 and beyond. While
epidemiological forecasts vary and shift, governments around the world have
acknowledged that some forms of social distancing will continue to be core components of
slowing the spread and lightening the burden on health care systems.
Against the background of South Africa’s lockdown, Afrobarometer survey data suggest that
many citizens, especially the poorest and those who live in rural areas, lack access to the
most basic services, such as water and sanitation, that would allow them to comply with
stay-at-home rules. While this lack cannot be addressed easily or quickly, measures should be
taken to ensure that leaving the safety of their homes to access such necessary services
does not come at the risk of contracting or spreading the virus.
Copyright ©Afrobarometer 2020 13Many South Africans are dependent on regular employment and have little in the way of savings to help them during the lockdown and the economic downturn that will likely follow. For those who can, working from home allows them to stay gainfully employed. However, many South Africans do not own a computer and enjoy only irregular electricity supply. In fact, one in three South Africans say they never use the Internet. To reach these citizens, information and assistance will have to rely on off-line channels. Public information campaigns and education materials for pupils and students must accommodate South Africans who do not use the Internet as well as those who do. At the same time, efforts are needed to expand access to the Internet to ensure inclusive opportunities for all South Africans to work remotely, search for remote employment, access education materials, and stay informed about the virus. Finally, should continued or renewed lockdowns prove necessary, the government must engage with vulnerable communities to identify workable solutions if it expects widespread compliance. In principle, as of 2018, a majority of South Africans were opposed to state restrictions on free movement, even in the face of threats to public security. While many may see things differently when it comes to COVID-19, popular resistance to government restrictions is clearly stronger in South Africa than in most other African countries. Moreover, large minorities of South Africans distrust the army and have doubts about its professionalism and respect for citizens’ rights. If lockdown measures enforced by the military are part of the lives of South Africans in the future, building a positive rapport between civilians and the armed forces will be crucial to winning the “hearts and minds” of ordinary South Africans and ensuring that the lockdown succeeds in beating the coronavirus. Copyright ©Afrobarometer 2020 14
References Brandt, K. (2020). WHO praises South Africa's efforts to curb spread of COVID-19. Eyewitness News. 23 April. Bright, C. (2020). Immediate challenges for long-term learning. Mail & Guardian. 24 April. Cheeseman, N., & Smith, J. (2020). The pandemic is being used to erode democratic freedoms. Civil society must fight back. Mail & Guardian. 17 April. Fabricius, P. & du Plessis, C. (2020). Foreign travellers turned around and sent home from SA airports. Daily Maverick. 21 March. Goodman, P. (2020). Why the global recession could last a long time. New York Times. 1 April. Gyimah-Boadi, E., & Logan, C. (2020). Global response to COVID-19 in Africa must protect lives, livelihoods, and freedoms. OECD Development Matters. 8 April. Harding, A. (2020). South Africa's ruthlessly efficient fight against coronavirus. BBC News. 3 April. Logan, C., & Penar, P. (2019). Are Africans’ freedoms slipping away? Afrobarometer Policy Paper No. 55. Mahlati, Z. (2020). Stay at home! Ramaphosa announces lockdown for South Africa. IOL. 23 March. Mattes, R., Dulani, B., & Gyimah-Boadi, E. (2016). Africa’s growth dividend? Lived poverty drops across much of the continent. Afrobarometer Policy Paper No. 29. Merten, M. (2020). The path of Ramaphosa’s letter for major SANDF deployment raises serious concerns around separation of powers. Daily Maverick. 23 April. Mkhize, Z. (2020). First case of COVID-19 coronavirus reported in SA. National Institute for Communicable Diseases. 5 March. Nash, J. (2020). Digital innovation in the COVID-19 era. Mail & Guardian. 17 April. New Humanitarian. (2020). Township lockdown: How South Africa’s poor bear the cost of coronavirus. 23 April. Nordling, L. (2020). South Africa flattens its coronavirus curve—and considers how to ease restrictions. Science. April 15. Rogoff, K. (2020). Mapping the COVID-19 recession. Project Syndicate. 7 April. South African Presidency. (2020). President Cyril Ramaphosa: Extension of coronavirus COVID-19 lockdown to the end of April. 9 April. Copyright ©Afrobarometer 2020 15
Thomas Isbell is a PhD student at the University of Cape Town in South Africa. Email:
tisbell@afrobarometer.org.
Afrobarometer, a non-profit corporation with headquarters in Ghana, directs a pan-African,
non-partisan research network. Regional coordination of national partners in about 35
countries is provided by the Ghana Centre for Democratic Development (CDD-Ghana), the
Institute for Justice and Reconciliation (IJR) in South Africa, and the Institute for Development
Studies (IDS) at the University of Nairobi in Kenya. Michigan State University (MSU) and the
University of Cape Town (UCT) provide technical support to the network.
Financial support for Afrobarometer Round 8 has been provided by Sweden via the Swedish
International Development Cooperation Agency, the Mo Ibrahim Foundation, the Open
Society Foundations, the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation, and the U.S. Agency for
International Development (USAID) via the U.S. Institute of Peace.
Donations help Afrobarometer give voice to African citizens. Please consider making a
contribution (at www.afrobarometer.org) or contact Bruno van Dyk
(bruno.v.dyk@afrobarometer.org) to discuss institutional funding.
Follow our releases on #VoicesAfrica.
/Afrobarometer @Afrobarometer
Afrobarometer Dispatch No. 358 | 28 April 2020
Copyright ©Afrobarometer 2020 16You can also read
