Presentation to eThekwini Planning Commission

Municipal Services and Living Conditions Survey

Trends

PresenterBrian O’Leary

Presentation contents:

• A very short history • Aim of the MSLC Survey• Survey Sections• Sample Size and stratification• Long Term Trends• Respondent profile• Reporting on average results• Top Level MSLCS results

A Very Short HistoryThe Survey commenced in 1998 and was motivated by the following:

 Metro Vision 1996 included the following statement:

• It will be a clean and safe environment with full, effective employment, with its residents living in acceptably serviced housing, and with a generally high Quality of Life that can be sustained.

  United Nations Agenda 21

• calls for the development of indicators of quality of life to measure sustainable development.

• In particular, it puts emphasis on participatory processes towards the development of monitoring and evaluation of development processes geared towards elevating the standard of living, particularly of the currently disadvantaged communities.

“Subjective Well Being has many attractive features and advantages over objective measures.

It is a powerful measure in that it represents a very direct assessment of living conditions at the userʹs end.

In this sense it is an output measure. In a similar vein it might be argued that people themselves are the best judges of their life circumstances.

Their assessments may in fact be closer to the mark, and therefore more ʹobjectiveʹ than an outsider or expert opinion. “

V. Moller. 1992. Applications of Subjective Well‐being Measures in Quality of Life Surveys. CSDS Working Paper No. 5

Project Preparation Research Advisory Committee Local University Academics: UN and UDW

Sociology, Psychology, Socio-Legal Studies, Social Policy, Development Studies , Town Planning , Trade Union Research

Municipal Technical Working Group:

Adapted Pilot for Municipal application

 Group Composition: Service Unit Officials and Local Council Planners: Economic Development, Health, Planners from 6 local councils, Electricity, Housing, Library Services, Water, Parks, Traffic and Transportation, Urban Strategy Dept

Aim of the survey:

This survey aims to supply Municipal decision makers with a clear understanding of the residents’ perceptions of :

• their living conditions, • their satisfaction with Municipal services and • with their neighbourhoods, • and their satisfaction with the quality of their own lives.

• Survey Sections

– Housing and Dwelling Improvement– Household Services– Roads and Transport– Residential Areas and Community Services– Billing and Communication– Municipal Performance– Personal Well Being– Household Income and Economic Outlook

• Sample size formula

• n = N(pqz2)__

NE2 + (pqz2)

 • z level of confidence (95%) p variability

(0.5)• E Precision (sample error) (3%) q (1-p)• n Sample size (1200) N Total

population

• (Wenger, 2000. p461)

Sample Stratification• Sample distribution

– 40 sample areas (1200 / 30)

– Proportionally distributed in the urban core (12 ) , peri urban (20), periphery (5) and rural (3)

– Sample areas randomly selected - checked to ensure that population groups are proportionately represented.

– Households are randomly selected and each sample area must attain representivity regarding gender, employment status and population group.

Long term trends

`1998-9`1999-0

`2000-1`2001-2

`2002-3`2003-4

`2004-5`2006-7

`2007-8`2008-9

`2009-10`2010-11

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

How satisfied have you been with life over the past year?

MSLCS Satisfied

%

1983 1988 1994 1995 1997 1999 20020

20

40

60

80

100

Satisfaction with life in South Africa

SA

South African Quality of Life Trends Study

The euphoria that accompanied the advent of democracy in SA has become less noticeable in recent elections

Long term trends

`1998-9`1999-0

`2000-1`2001-2

`2002-3`2003-4

`2004-5`2006-7

`2007-8`2008-9

`2009-10`2010-11

0.010.020.030.040.050.060.0

How satisfied have you been with life over the past year? Satisfied

%

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0How satisfied have you been with life over the past year?

Satisfied

Dissatisfied

%

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0How satisfied have you been with life over the past year?

Satisfied

Neutral

Dissatisfied

%

Life satisfaction consistent around 41% to 42% between 2002-3 and 2006-7

Life dissatisfaction increased from 22% to 34% between 2007-8 and 2010-11

Neutral Responses higher than satisfaction and dissatisfaction between 2009 and 2011

Review of other Metros scales of measuring satisfaction

(b) SatisfactionPoor Excellent

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

City Of Tshwane (Cot): Resident Satisfaction Survey: 2011

Poor Fair Good Very Good Excellent

City of Cape Town Community Survey Questionnaire 2011

• These surveys did not use a neutral central point on the scale.

• eThekwini decided to amend the satisfaction scale to not have a neutral central point.

• The change in methodology was introduced in the first year of the next Municipal Electoral cycle 2011-12

• Reporting on average results of 5 point scales:

• Satisfaction scale

1 Very satisfied2 Satisfied3 Slightly satisfied4 Dissatisfied5 Very dissatisfied

Very Satisfied Satisfied Dissatisfied Very Dissatisfied

1 to 2 2.1 to 3 3.1 to 4 4.1 to 5

• The results are summarised by using the average, or mean, of the scores from 1 through to 5:

Top Level MSLCS Results: Slide 1 of 4

The Vision and Mission, National KPI, Batho Pele and Satisfaction with Municipal Services slipped from good in 2011-12 to poor ratings in 2012-13 and 2013-14..

Attainment of Vision and Mission

Attainment of National KPI

Adherence to Batho Pele

Satisfaction with municipal service delivery in the past

year

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00

2.82

3.05

3.05

2.99

3.04

3.34

3.34

3.24

3.05

3.32

3.22

3.22

`2013-14

`2012-13

`2011-12

Good Poor

Very Poor

Very Good

Top Level MSLCS Results: Slide 2 of 4Satisfaction with dwellings declined from a good base in 2011-12 to being only marginally good in 2013-14.

Satisfaction with basic household services and residential areas was on average good in all 3 years.

Provision of public transport and satisfaction with modes of public transport retained good ratings in all 3 years

Roads maintenance sipped from a good rating to a marginally poor ratings in 2012-13 and 2013-14

Satisfaction with the current dwelling

Satisfaction with basic household services

Satisfaction with Residential Areas'

Performance of Public Transport Provision

Satisfaction with modes of public transport

Performance on maintaining Roads, markings, signs and

lights

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00

2.75

2.33

2.53

2.63

2.05

2.66

2.90

2.50

2.86

2.83

2.35

3.11

2.98

2.57

2.74

2.8

2.03

3.04

`2013-14

`2012-13

`2011-12

Good Poor

Very PoorVery

Good

Top Level MSLCS Results: Slide 3 of 4 • Office and Call Centre Staff

retained a good ratings but these were slightly reduced each year.

• Access to Community facilities achieved good and very good ratings over 3 years.

• Maintenance of community facilities maintained a good rating each year.

• Emergency Services and Clinics maintained good ratings over 3 years.

Municipal Office and Call Centre Staff Performance

Rating of Access to Community Facilities

Rating for maintainance of Community Facilities

Performance of Emergency Services

Rating of Municipal Clinics

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00

2.41

2.07

2.08

2.68

2.79

2.53

1.98

2.10

2.51

2.57

2.59

2.1

2.23

2.55

2.56

`2013-14

`2012-13

`2011-12

Good Poor

Very Poor

Very Good

Top Level MSLCS Results: Slide 4 of 4

Life satisfaction on average declined from a good base in 2011-12 to poor in 2013-14.

Respondents on average had a very strong sense of belonging in all 3 years. .

Satisfaction with standard of living has slipped into poor ratings for the last 2 years.

Likewise the effectiveness of law enforcement has slipped into a poor rating in the last 2 years.

Satisfaction with life

Sense of belonging

Satisfaction with standard of living

Effectiveness of law enforcement

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00

2.74

1.76

2.94

2.60

2.88

1.94

3.08

3.02

3.05

1.86

3.05

3.09

`2013-14

`2012-13

`2011-12

Good Poor

Very Poor

Very Good

Recommendations

The following recommendations are based on the problems experienced and dissatisfaction with services mentioned by respondents.

•Steps must be taken to improve the image of eThekwini. The poor performance scores given for the National KPIs, Batho Pele and the Mission and Vision indicate that the public have negative view of the Municipality regarding these three elements.

•Delivery against the housing and basic services backlog is very important as most of the dissatisfaction regarding dwellings came from informal and traditional dwellings.

•The affordability and reliability of public transport busses must be improved.

•Maintenance of public assets must be improved as respondents have mentioned poor road maintenance and run down infrastructure.

•Access to local area parks and recreational amenities must be improved.

•The following environmental issues need to be attended to: rodent and insect control; pollution of water, air and soil; noise pollution; and overgrown public spaces.

•Awareness campaigns on HIV must be increased as Public concern with HIV is not high enough.

•The long waiting times and slow processing of forms at Municipal Offices must be improved.

•The opportunities for public consultation on Municipal Affairs must be improved.

•The information supplied to the Public must be improved.

•The safety of the city must be improved as the percentage of crime victims has increased over each of the past three years of this study. Half of all households do not feel safe at night. Crime was also mentioned by respondents as one of the most pressing everyday problems.

•Local Economic Development with significant labour absorption is of high importance. Respondents have mentioned that low standards of living and low household and personal incomes are the main reasons for dissatisfaction with life.

•Food security must be improved as up to 28% of households in this survey are living at or below the food poverty line of R1500 per month.