provincial profile 2004 - statistics south africaprovincial profile 2004: limpopo / statistics south...

Provincial Profile 2004

Limpopo

Pali Lehohla Statistician-General Report No. 00-91-09 (2004) Statistics South Africa

Published by Statistics South Africa, Private Bag X44, Pretoria 0001 © Statistics South Africa, 2006 Users may apply or process this data, provided Statistics South Africa (Stats SA) is acknowledged as the original source of the data; that it is specified that the application and/or analysis is the result of the user's independent processing of the data; and that neither the basic data nor any reprocessed version or application thereof may be sold or offered for sale in any form whatsoever without prior permission from Stats SA. Stats SA Library Cataloguing-in-Publication (CIP) Data Provincial Profile 2004: Limpopo / Statistics South Africa. Pretoria: Statistics South Africa, 2006 110p. [Report No. 00-91-09(2004)] ISBN 0-621-36368-5 1. Demography – Limpopo (South Africa) 2. Vital Statistics – Limpopo (South Africa) 3. Households – Limpopo (South Africa) 4. Education – Statistics – Limpopo (South Africa) 5. Public Health – Limpopo (South Africa) 6. Labour Markets – Limpopo (South Africa) 7. Migration, Internal – Limpopo (South Africa) 8. Emigration and Immigration – Limpopo (South Africa) 9. Crime Statistics – Limpopo (South Africa) 10. Gross State Product – Limpopo (South Africa) 11. Prices Indexes 12. Legislative Bodies – Limpopo (South Africa) I. Statistics South Africa II. Series (LCSH 16) A complete set of Stats SA publications is available at Stats SA Library and the following libraries: National Library of South Africa, Pretoria Division National Library of South Africa, Cape Town Division Library of Parliament, Cape Town Bloemfontein Public Library Natal Society Library, Pietermaritzburg Johannesburg Public Library Eastern Cape Library Services, King William's Town Central Regional Library, Polokwane Central Reference Library, Nelspruit Central Reference Collection, Kimberley Central Reference Library, Mmabatho This report is available on the Stats SA website: www.statssa.gov.za Copies are available from: Printing and Distribution, Statistics South Africa Tel: (012) 310 8044 (012) 310 8161 Fax: (012) 321 7381 E-mail: [email protected]

i

Contents List of tables................................................................................................................................iii List of figures...............................................................................................................................v Map: South African provinces and provincial boundaries...................................................vii Executive summary.....................................................................................................................1 Objective ............................................................................................................................................ 1 Data sources ............................................................................................................................................ 1 Findings in the profile................................................................................................................................ 1 Extract from the Report of the Census Sub-committee to the South African Statistics Council on Census 2001 .............................................................................................4 Chapter 1: Demography ...........................................................................................................5 1.1 Population profile............................................................................................................... 5 1.2 Sex ratios............................................................................................................................ 9 1.3 Age distribution................................................................................................................ 11 1.4 Language .......................................................................................................................... 17 1.5 Religion ............................................................................................................................ 20 1.6 Country of birth................................................................................................................ 23 1.7 Citizenship........................................................................................................................ 24 1.8 Disability .......................................................................................................................... 25 1.9 Urbanisation ..................................................................................................................... 27 Chapter 2: Vital statistics .......................................................................................................29 2.1 Births ................................................................................................................................ 29 2.2 Deaths............................................................................................................................... 31 2.3 Marriages.......................................................................................................................... 34 2.4 Divorces ........................................................................................................................... 37 Chapter 3: Migration ..............................................................................................................39 3.1 Internal migration............................................................................................................. 39 3.2 International migration..................................................................................................... 41 Chapter 4: Health....................................................................................................................43 4.1 Public hospitals ................................................................................................................ 43 4.2 Hospital beds.................................................................................................................... 43 4.3 HIV/AIDS and malaria..................................................................................................... 44 Chapter 5: Education..............................................................................................................47 5.1 Educational attainment..................................................................................................... 47 5.2 Literacy ............................................................................................................................ 48 5.3 Schools and school data ................................................................................................... 49 5.4 Teaching personnel .......................................................................................................... 50 5.5 School attendance............................................................................................................. 51 5.6 Grade 12 pass rate ............................................................................................................ 52 5.7 Drop-out ........................................................................................................................... 54 Chapter 6: Safety and security...............................................................................................55 6.1 Number of police stations ................................................................................................ 55 6.2 Reported crimes ............................................................................................................... 55 Chapter 7: The labour market ...............................................................................................59 7.1 Labour market status ........................................................................................................ 59 7.2 Formal and informal sector employment ......................................................................... 61 7.3 Industry and occupation of the employed ........................................................................ 61 7.4 Income of the employed................................................................................................... 63 7.5 Unemployment ................................................................................................................. 63 Chapter 8: Households and household services ................................................................... 65 8.1 Distribution of households by province ........................................................................... 65 8.2 Dwelling type ................................................................................................................... 66 8.3 Female-headed households .............................................................................................. 67 8.4 Child-headed households ................................................................................................. 68 8.5 Energy .............................................................................................................................. 69

ii

8.6 Water ................................................................................................................................ 75 8.7 Toilet facilities ................................................................................................................. 76 8.8 Refuse removal................................................................................................................. 78 8.9 Access to telephones ........................................................................................................ 80 8.10 Ownership of selected household goods ........................................................................ 82 Chapter 9: Economy ...............................................................................................................85 9.1 Gross Domestic Product per Region (GDPR).................................................................. 85 9.2 Agriculture ....................................................................................................................... 91 9.3 Consumer Price Index (CPI) ............................................................................................ 95 9.4 Human Development Index (HDI)................................................................................... 96 9.5 Provincial budgets ............................................................................................................ 97 Chapter 10: Politics ...................................................................................................................99 10.1 Profile of the Limpopo Provincial Legislature................................................................. 99

iii

List of tables Table 1.1: Land area, population and population density by province, 1996 and 2001 ........... 5 Table 1.2: Population by district council, Limpopo, 1996 and 2001........................................7 Table 1.3: Population by province, sex and sex ratio, South Africa, 1996 and 2001...............9 Table 1.4: Sex ratio by district council, Limpopo, 2001.........................................................10 Table 1.5: Age distribution by population group and sex, Limpopo, 2001 ............................15 Table 1.6: Population by home language, Limpopo and South Africa, 2001.........................18 Table 1.7: Most often spoken language within each population group, Limpopo, 2001........20 Table 1.8: Religion in Limpopo and South Africa, 2001........................................................21 Table 1.9: Religion by district council, Limpopo, 2001 .........................................................22 Table 1.10: Religion within each population group, Limpopo, 2001 .......................................23 Table 1.11: Population by country of birth, Limpopo and South Africa, 2001........................24 Table 1.12: Population not born in South Africa by population group and district council,

Limpopo, 2001.......................................................................................................24 Table 2.1: Registration of annual live births by province, South Africa, 2004 ......................29 Table 2.2: Annual registration of births by municipality, Limpopo, 2004 .............................31 Table 2.3: Recorded deaths by province, South Africa 1997 to 2002 ....................................32 Table 2.4: Deaths due to the ten leading underlying natural causes in Limpopo and South

Africa, 2001 ...........................................................................................................33 Table 2.5: Recorded deaths by leading district, Limpopo, 1997 to 2000 ...............................33 Table 2.6: Marriage by way of solemnisation, 2003...............................................................35 Table 2.7: Marital status of people aged 15 years and above, Limpopo, 2001.......................36 Table 2.8: Marital status by population group, Limpopo, 2001 .............................................37 Table 3.1: Internal migration by province, South Africa, 1996..............................................39 Table 3.2: Internal migration by province, South Africa, 2001..............................................40 Table 3.3: Population by region of birth, 2001.......................................................................41 Table 5.1: Percentage population aged 20 years and above in each population group by

educational level, Limpopo and South Africa, 2001 .............................................48 Table 5.2: Number of people aged 20+ with no formal schooling by province and

population group, South Africa, 2001 ...................................................................49 Table 5.3: Number of schools in each province, 2001............................................................50 Table 5.4: Distribution of schools by district municipality, Limpopo, 2002..........................50 Table 5.5: Senior certificate results by province, South Africa, 2003....................................53 Table 6.1: Murder and attempted murder, 1994–2002 ...........................................................56 Table 6.2: Burglary by year, Limpopo 1994–2002.................................................................58 Table 7.1: Working-age population by labour market status, Limpopo and South Africa,

September 2004 .....................................................................................................59 Table 7.2: Labour market status of the working-age population in each population group,

Limpopo, 2004.......................................................................................................60 Table 7.3: Employment in the formal and informal sector, Limpopo and South Africa,

September 2004 .....................................................................................................61 Table 7.4: Employment by industry, Limpopo, September 2004...........................................61 Table 7.5: Employment by occupational category, Limpopo, 2004.......................................62 Table 7.6: Unemployment rate by province, September 2004 ...............................................64 Table 8.1: Distribution of total households by province, South Africa, 2004 ........................65 Table 8.2: Households by type of dwelling and population group, Limpopo, 2004 ..............67 Table 8.3: Households by source of energy for lighting, Limpopo and South

Africa, 2001 ...........................................................................................................69 Table 8.4: Households by source of energy for lighting by district council,

Limpopo, 2001.......................................................................................................70

iv

Table 8.5: Households by source of energy for cooking, Limpopo and South Africa, 2001 ...........................................................................................................71

Table 8.6: Households by source of energy for cooking by district council, Limpopo, 2001.......................................................................................................72

Table 8.7: Households by source of heating, Limpopo and South Africa, 2001 ....................73 Table 8.8: Households by source of heating by district council, Limpopo, 2001 ..................74 Table 8.9: Households by main source of water, Limpopo and South Africa, 2001..............75 Table 8.10: Households by main source of water by district council, Limpopo, 2001 ............76 Table 8.11: Households by type of toilet facility, Limpopo and South Africa, 2001...............77 Table 8.12: Households by type of toilet facility by district council, Limpopo, 2001 .............78 Table 8.13: Households by type of refuse removal, Limpopo and South Africa, 2001 ...........79 Table 8.14: Households by type of refuse removal by district council, Limpopo, 2001..........80 Table 8.15: Households by access to telephone facilities, Limpopo and South

Africa, 2001 ...........................................................................................................81 Table 8.16: Households by access to telephone facilities by district council,

Limpopo, 2001.......................................................................................................82 Table 8.17: Households with radio, television, computer and refrigerator, South

Africa, 2001 ...........................................................................................................83 Table 8.18: Households with/without radio, television, computer and refrigerator by

district council, Limpopo, 2001.............................................................................84 Table 8.19: Households with/without radio, television, computer and refrigerator by

district council, Limpopo, 2001.............................................................................84 Table 9.1: GDPR and value added estimates per industry at current prices, Limpopo,

1996–2004 .............................................................................................................87 Table 9.2: GDPR and value added estimates per industry at constant 2000 prices,

Limpopo, 1996–2004.............................................................................................89 Table 9.3: Farming operations by land surface area and province, South Africa, 2001.........91 Table 9.4: Quantity harvested by province, South Africa, 2001: Maize for grain..................92 Table 9.5: Number of farming units and market value of assets by province, South Africa,

2002 .......................................................................................................................94 Table 9.6: Breakdown of gross farming income by type of division and province, South

Africa, 2002 ...........................................................................................................95 Table 9.7: Provincial budget allocation by department, Limpopo, 2003/2004.......................98 Table 10.1: Composition of the Limpopo Provincial Legislature, 1994, 1999 and 2004.........99 Table 10.2: Provincial election results, Limpopo, 2004 .........................................................100

v

List of figures Figure 1.1: Area by province, South Africa, 2001 .....................................................................6 Figure 1.2: Population density by province, South Africa 1996 and 2001 ................................6 Figure 1.3: Population by province, South Africa, 1996 and 2001............................................ 7 Figure 1.4: Population by district council, Limpopo, 1996 and 2001........................................8 Figure 1.5: Population by population group and district council, Limpopo, 2001 ....................8 Figure 1.6: Sex ratio by province, South Africa, 1996 and 2001.............................................10 Figure 1.7: Sex ratio in each district council, Limpopo, 2001 .................................................11 Figure 1.8: Total population by age, Limpopo 1996 and 2001................................................12 Figure 1.9: Total population by age group, Limpopo and South Africa, 2001 ........................13 Figure 1.10: Population by age and sex, Limpopo 2001............................................................14 Figure 1.11: Black African population by age and sex, Limpopo, 2001 ...................................15 Figure 1.12: Coloured population by age and sex, Limpopo, 2001 ...........................................16 Figure 1.13: Indian/Asian population by age and sex, Limpopo, 2001 ..................................... 16 Figure 1.14: White population by age and sex, Limpopo, 2001 ................................................17 Figure 1.15: Population by home language, Limpopo and South Africa, 2001.........................18 Figure 1.16: Home language by district council, Limpopo, 2001..............................................19 Figure 1.17: Citizenship in Limpopo and South Africa, 2001 ...................................................25 Figure 1.18: Disability, Limpopo and South Africa, 2001......................................................... 26 Figure 1.19: Disability by district council and type of disability, Limpopo, 2001 ....................26 Figure 1.20: Population by urban and non-urban area, Limpopo and South Africa, 2001 ........27 Figure 1.21: Population by urban/non-urban area and district council, Limpopo,

1996 and 2001........................................................................................................28 Figure 2.1: Total recorded live births by province, South Africa, 2004 ..................................30 Figure 2.2: Recorded deaths by age at death and gender, Limpopo, 2000 ..............................34 Figure 2.3: Total marriages by province, South Africa, 2003..................................................35 Figure 2.4: Marital status of people aged 15 years and above, Limpopo 2001........................36 Figure 2.5: Divorce by province and way of solemnisation, South Africa, 2003 ....................38 Figure 2.6: Divorce by population group and way of solemnisation, Limpopo, 2003 ............38 Figure 3.1: Net loss or gain of people in each province through inter-provincial migration,

South Africa, 1996–2001.......................................................................................40 Figure 3.2: Number of migrants to Limpopo from other provinces, 1996–2001.....................41 Figure 3.3: Distribution of persons in each province not born in South Africa by region of

birth, 2001..............................................................................................................42 Figure 4.1: Number of public hospitals by district council, Limpopo, 2004 ...........................43 Figure 4.2: Number of hospital beds by district council, Limpopo, 2004 ............................... 44 Figure 4.3: HIV prevalence by province, South Africa, 2000–2002 .......................................44 Figure 4.4: Percentage HIV prevalence by district council, Limpopo, 2002...........................45 Figure 4.5: Malaria prevalence by month, Limpopo 2000–2002.............................................46 Figure 5.1: Percentage distribution of persons aged 20+ within each province by level of

education, 2001......................................................................................................47 Figure 5.2: Percentage population aged 20 years and above by level of education and

gender, Limpopo, 2001..........................................................................................48 Figure 5.3: Proportion of persons aged 15 years and older in each province that were

functionally literate, 2001 ......................................................................................49 Figure 5.4: Distribution of teaching personnel by gender and district council,

Limpopo, 2004.......................................................................................................51 Figure 5.5: Number of learners by district council, Limpopo, 2004........................................51 Figure 5.6: Drop-out by grade and sex, Limpopo, 2003 ..........................................................54 Figure 6.1: Distribution of police stations by district council, Limpopo, 2004 .......................55 Figure 6.2: Murder and attempted murder, 1994–2002 ...........................................................56

vi

Figure 6.3: Robbery by year, Limpopo 1994–2002 .................................................................57 Figure 6.4: Rape and related crime, Limpopo 1994–2002.......................................................57 Figure 7.1: Working-age population (15–65) by employment status in each district

council, Limpopo, 2001......................................................................................... 60 Figure 7.2: Employment by occupational category, Limpopo, 2004.......................................62 Figure 7.3: Percentage distribution of gross monthly income of the employed, Limpopo

and South Africa, September 2004........................................................................63 Figure 8.1: Percentage distribution of total households by province, 2004 .............................66 Figure 8.2: Female-headed households by age and district council, Limpopo, 2001 ..............68 Figure 8.3: Child-headed households (0–18 years) by district council, Limpopo, 2001 .........68 Figure 8.4: Households by source of energy for lighting, Limpopo and South

Africa, 2001 ...........................................................................................................69 Figure 8.5: Households by source of energy for lighting by district council,

Limpopo, 2001.......................................................................................................70 Figure 8.6: Households by source of energy for cooking, Limpopo and South

Africa, 2001 ...........................................................................................................71 Figure 8.7: Households by source of energy for cooking by district council,

Limpopo, 2001.......................................................................................................72 Figure 8.8: Households by source of heating, Limpopo and South Africa, 2001 ....................73 Figure 8.9: Households by source of heating by district council, Limpopo, 2001 ..................74 Figure 8.10: Percentage households by type of toilet facility, Limpopo and South

Africa, 2001 ...........................................................................................................77 Figure 8.11: Households by type of toilet facility by district council, Limpopo, 2001 .............78 Figure 8.12: Households by type of refuse removal, Limpopo and South Africa, 2001 ...........79 Figure 8.13: Households by type of refuse removal by district council, Limpopo, 2001..........80 Figure 8.14: Households by access to telephone facilities, Limpopo and South

Africa, 2001 ...........................................................................................................81 Figure 8.15: Households by access to telephone facilities by district council,

Limpopo, 2001.......................................................................................................82 Figure 8.16: Households with radio, television, computer and refrigerator, South

Africa, 2001 ...........................................................................................................83 Figure 9.1: Real annual economic growth rate per region for 2004.........................................85 Figure 9.2: Percentage GDPR contribution to the national GDP, South Africa, 2004 ............86 Figure 9.3: Average annual economic growth per region, South Africa, 1996–2004 .............86 Figure 9.4: Gross Domestic Product per Region – current prices (percentage contribution),

Limpopo, 2004.......................................................................................................88 Figure 9.5: Gross Domestic Product per Region for Limpopo, 2004 – constant 2000 prices

(percentage changes)..............................................................................................89 Figure 9.6: Gross Domestic Product by region current prices for Limpopo and South

Africa, 2004 (percentage contributions) ................................................................ 90 Figure 9.7: Gross Domestic Product per Region for Limpopo and South Africa, 2004

(percentage changes)..............................................................................................91 Figure 9.8: Distribution of farm operations in South Africa by province, 2001...................... 92 Figure 9.9: Percentage of quantity harvested by province, maize for grain, South

Africa, 2001 ...........................................................................................................93 Figure 9.10: Gross farming income and farming debt by province, South Africa, 2002...........94 Figure 9.11: Annual inflation rate on a monthly basis, Limpopo and South Africa,

April 2003 to March 2004 .....................................................................................96 Figure 9.12: Human Development Index by population group and province, South

Africa, 2003 ...........................................................................................................97 Figure 9.13: Percentage provincial budget allocation by department, Limpopo 2003/2004 .....98

vii

Map: South African provinces and provincial boundaries Map 1 gives the geographic location of the province in relation to the other provinces in the country.

Source: Statistics South Africa, Limpopo geographic information system

1

Executive summary Objective The objective of this profile is to give the reader an overview of life circumstances in Limpopo. This information can be very useful in planning for and developing the province.

Data sources The bulk of the data in this report came from Statistics South Africa (Stats SA) publications, particularly data from Census 1996 and Census 2001. These were backed up by data from relevant Stats SA publications and from external sources such as the Independent Electoral Commission website, the Limpopo Provincial Legislature, the Department of Education, SAPS website and Department of Health.

Findings in the profile

Background Limpopo covers an area of 123 910 square kilometres, representing 10,2% of the total area of South Africa. The population density was 43 people per square kilometre in 2001, somewhat higher than the average of 37 people per square kilometre for South Africa as a whole. Limpopo was one of the least urbanised provinces as the majority of its population lived in non-urban areas.

The population of Limpopo In 2001, the total population of Limpopo was 5 273 642 (11,8% of the South African population). The province had a low level of urbanisation as 89,3% of its population lived in non-urban areas. Limpopo consisted predominantly of black African people who accounted for 97,2% of its population, the highest percentage for a province in the country. Limpopo had the lowest percentage of other population groups, with the Indian/Asian population constituting only 0,2% of the entire population. Furthermore, the Indian/Asian population constituted the lowest percentage in all provinces, except in KwaZulu-Natal, where it formed 8,5% of the province’s total population. Limpopo had a higher proportion of women (54,6% ) compared to men (45,4%). The sex ratio suggests that there was a higher proportion of women in the age groups 20 years and older. The language most often spoken at home in Limpopo was Sepedi (52,1%), followed by Xitsonga (22,4%) and Tshivenda (15,9%). Only 0,5% of the population spoke English at home as their first language.

Vital statistics Limpopo had a total of 191 124 recorded live births in 2004, and this accounted for 13,0% of the total recorded births in South Africa. The leading underlying natural causes of death in Limpopo in 2001 were tuberculosis, influenza and pneumonia. Higher proportions of male deaths were recorded compared with female deaths. In 2003, 12 649 marriages and 1 031 divorces were recorded.

2

Migration Of the 5 273 642 people living in Limpopo, 73 583 were from SADC countries followed by 2 526 coming from Asia, and 5 193 803 people were South African citizens.

Health Limpopo province had 43 public hospitals with about 7 630 hospital beds in 2004. According to a survey conducted on women attending public antenatal clinics in 2002, about 15,6% in Limpopo were infected with HIV, with the highest (23%) infected cases in Mopani. Reported malaria cases had decreased by 23,1% from 2000 to 2002.

Education In 2001, 33,4% of the population in Limpopo had no schooling. Limpopo had a total of 40 917 educators, 26 175 classrooms and 1 935 918 learners in 2004. The Grade 12 pass rate had increased by 30,8% from 1995 to 2003.

Safety and security Limpopo had a total of 99 police stations in 2004. In 2002, there were 741 reported murder and 1 052 attempted murder cases. There were 6 bank robberies and 4 433 rape cases reported in 2002.

The labour market According to the Labour Force Survey 2004, 28,2% of the people of working age in Limpopo were employed whereas 71,8% of its people were unemployed.

Households and household services According to the General Household Survey 2004, there was a total of 1 283 000 households in Limpopo, that accounted for 10,5% of the total households in South Africa. Approximately 79,4% of households lived in brick structures built on a separate stand and 11,1% lived in traditional dwellings. The General Household Survey 2004 also showed that 894 976 households in Limpopo were headed by children (0–18 years). 64% of households used electricity and 27,6% used candles for lighting. Of the Limpopo households, 58,4% used wood and 26,1% electricity for cooking. 9,9% of households had water inside the dwelling and 30,7% had water inside the yard. Approximately 16% of households had flush toilets and 49% pit latrines without ventilation. 67,4% of households used their own refuse dumps, and 15,1% had their refuse removed by local authority at least once a week. 51,2% of the Limpopo population had access to public telephones, whereas 20,2% had access to cellphones only. 69,7% had a radio in the household, 39,8% had a television set, 38,9% had a refrigerator and only 2,2% had a computer in the household.

Economy In 2004, Limpopo contributed 6,7% to the total Gross Domestic Product (GDP) of South Africa. The Consumer Price Index (CPI) figures in Limpopo showed that, from April to

3

October 2003 there was a downward trend in inflation, followed by a stabilisation, then an upward-downward trend between December 2003 and February 2004, followed by stabilisation in March 2004. The Human Development Index for the white population was leading among all population groups, followed by the Indian/Asian, coloured and then black African population groups. The main contributors to the Limpopo Gross Domestic Product per Region (GDPR) were mining and quarrying and general government services.

Politics In all the three elections, the African National Congress occupied more seats than all the other political parties, with 38 seats in 1994, 44 in 1999 and 45 in 2004. The ANC secured 89,18% of the total votes in the 2004 elections, followed by the Democratic Alliance (3,59%). The Nasionale Aksie had the smallest number of votes (0,14%). There were 1 614 514 voters in the province.

4

Extract from the Report of the Census Sub-committee to the South African Statistics Council on Census 2001 Preliminary investigations indicate that the 2001 census probably resulted in:

• an underestimate of the number of children below age five* • an overestimate of the number of teenagers (aged between 13 and 19) • an underestimate of the number of men relative to the number of women* • an underestimate of the number in the white population • higher than expected numbers aged 80 and older, in the African population • an underestimate of the number of foreign-born, since some identified themselves

incorrectly as being South African-born • age misstatement in the range 60–74 • an overestimate of the extent of unemployment • an underestimate of those who were employed for only a few hours per week • an underestimate of household income • an overestimate of the number of paternal orphans and the number of fathers missing

from the household. * This is a common feature of censuses, particularly in developing countries. In addition:

• Scanning problems caused some births to be recorded in the wrong province. The number of cases is relatively small and should not lead to too much distortion for most purposes for which these data are used; however, it does produce obviously erroneous results when one tries to estimate the extent of inter-provincial migration of those born since the previous census.

• The fertility data (number of children ever born, children surviving) are problematic. For further details of these investigations see the full report of the Census Sub-committee, 2003.

5

Chapter 1: Demography 1.1 Population profile Table 1.1 gives an overview of the land area, population size and population density in each province. The population figures obtained from Census 1996 and 2001 show that:

• Limpopo had a population of approximately 4,9 million in 1996 and 5,3 million in 2001, and constituted 10,2% of the total area in South Africa.

• KwaZulu-Natal had the largest population (9,4 million), followed by Gauteng (8,8 million). Northern Cape had the smallest population (0,8 million) even though it comprised the largest proportion of land.

• Limpopo had a population density of 39,8 and 42,6 in 1996 and 2001 respectively, which was higher than the population density for South Africa (33,3 and 36,8 for 1996 and 2001 respectively).

• Gauteng had the smallest area in South Africa (1,4%) but had the largest population density in 2001 (520 people per square kilometre).

Table 1.1: Land area, population and population density by province, 1996 and 2001

1996 2001 Province Area (km2) No. of people Density No. of people Density Western Cape 129 370 3 956 875 30,6 4 524 335 35,0 Eastern Cape 169 580 6 302 525 37,2 6 436 763 38,0 Northern Cape 361 830 840 321 2,3 822 727 2,3 Free State 129 480 2 633 504 20,3 2 706 775 20,9 KwaZulu-Natal 92 100 8 417 021 91,4 9 426 017 102,3 North West 116 320 3 354 825 28,8 3 669 349 31,5 Gauteng 17 010 7 348 423 432,0 8 837 178 519,5 Mpumalanga 79 490 2 800 711 35,2 3 122 990 39,3 Limpopo 123 910 4 929 368 39,8 5 273 642 42,6 South Africa 1 219 090 40 583 573 33,3 44 819 778 36,8

Source: Statistics South Africa, Population Census 1996 and 2001 Figure 1.1 shows the proportion of the land area of South Africa that falls in each province. There are four provinces smaller than Limpopo and four provinces bigger than Limpopo as far as land area is concerned.

6

Figure 1.1: Area by province, South Africa, 2001

Source: Statistics South Africa, Population Census 2001 Figure 1.2 compares the population densities of each province in 1996 and 2001. Compared with Gauteng and KwaZulu-Natal, Limpopo did not record any significant increase in population density.

Figure 1.2: Population density by province, South Africa 1996 and 2001

WesternCape

EasternCape

NorthernCape

FreeState

Kw aZulu-Natal

NorthWest

Gauteng Mpuma-langa

Limpopo SouthAfr ic a

0,0

100,0

200,0

300,0

400,0

500,0

600,0

1996 30,6 37,2 2,3 20,3 91,4 28,8 432,0 35,2 39,8 33,32001 35,0 38,0 2,3 20,9 102,3 31,5 519,5 39,3 42,6 36,8

Source: Statistics South Africa, Population Census 1996 and 2001

Limpopo 10,2%

Mpumalanga6,5%

Gauteng1,4%

North West 9,5%

KwaZulu-Natal 7,6%

Free State10,6%

Northern Cape29,7%

Eastern Cape13,9%

Western Cape10,6%

7

Figure 1.3 shows a bar graph with the percentage breakdown of the South African population by province in 1996 and 2001.

Figure 1.3: Population by province, South Africa, 1996 and 2001

WesternCape

EasternCape

NorthernCape

FreeState

Kw aZulu-Natal

NorthWest

Gauteng Mpuma-langa

Limpopo0,0

5,0

10,0

15,0

20,0

25,0%

1996 9,7 15,5 2,1 6,5 20,7 8,3 18,1 6,9 12,12001 10,1 14,4 1,8 6,0 21,0 8,2 19,7 7,0 11,8 Source: Statistics South Africa, Population Census 1996 and 2001 Table 1.2 and Figure 1.4 show the population of Limpopo by district council in 1996 and 2001.

• Vhembe had the largest population in Limpopo in both 1996 and 2001 (22,3% and 22,8% respectively), followed by Capricorn with 21,6% and 21,9% for the same period.

• Waterberg had the smallest population in 1996, accounting for 11,1% of the residents in the province.

• Bohlabela District had the smallest population in 2001, accounting for 11,3% of the population in the province.

Table 1.2: Population by district council, Limpopo, 1996 and 2001

1996 2001 District council N % N % Sekhukhune 717 650 14,6 745 472 14,1 Bohlabela 632 859 12,8 595 202 11,3 Mopani 872 173 17,7 964 237 18,3 Vhembe 1 097 630 22,3 1 199 883 22,8 Capricorn 1 063 179 21,6 1 154 692 21,9 Waterberg 548 673 11,1 614 155 11,6 Total 4 932 164 100,0 5 273 642 100,0 Source: Statistics South Africa, Population Census 1996 and 2001

8

Figure 1.4: Population by district council, Limpopo, 1996 and 2001

Sekhukune Bohlabela M opani Vhem be Capricorn Waterberg0,0

5,0

10,0

15,0

20,0

25,0%

1996 14,6 12,8 17,7 22,3 21,6 11,12001 14,1 11,3 18,3 22,8 21,9 11,6

Source: Statistics South Africa, Population Census 1996 and 2001 Figure 1.5 shows the population of Limpopo by district council and population group. It can be observed that:

• A high proportion of the black African population (1 181 672) was resident in Vhembe, followed by Capricorn with 1 113 076 residents.

• Waterberg had the smallest number of black African residents (557 900) in the province.

• Waterberg accounted for 53 149 white people, followed by Capricorn with 33 733. • There was a small proportion of coloured and Indian/Asian people in all the districts.

Figure 1.5: Population by population group and district council, Limpopo, 2001

Sekhukhune Bohlabela Mopani Vhembe Capricorn Waterberg0

200 000

400 000

600 000

800 000

1 000 000

1 200 000

Black 744 263 590 726 940 979 1 181 672 1 113 076 557 900

Coloured 278 843 1 204 1 658 4 491 1 688

Indian/Asian 138 112 601 2 927 3 391 1 418

White 792 3 521 21 454 13 626 33 733 53 149 Source: Statistics South Africa, Population Census 2001

9

1.2 Sex ratios Table 1.3 and Figure 1.6 illustrate the population of each province by sex in 1996 and 2001. Sex ratios (i.e. the number of men per 100 women) are also shown.

• Gauteng was the only province with a slightly higher sex ratio of 104,3 in 1996, and of 101,2 in 2001.

• In all the other provinces the sex ratios were less than 100, implying that the proportion of males was lower than that of females.

• Limpopo had a sex ratio of 84,2 in 1996 and of 83,2 in 2001, which was the lowest ratio for both years. These figures imply that large proportions of males had either migrated to other provinces or died.

• The sex ratio for South Africa was 92,7 in 1996, compared to 91,7 in 2001.

Table 1.3: Population by province, sex and sex ratio, South Africa, 1996 and 2001

1996 2001 Province

Male Female Total

Sex ratio Male

Female Total

Sex ratio

Western Cape 935 494 2 021 381 3 956 875 95,8 2 192 321 2 332 014 4 524 335 94,0 Eastern Cape 2 908 056 3 394 469 6 302 525 85,7 2 975 512 3 461 251 6 436 763 86,0 Northern Cape 412 681 427 639 840 320 96,5 401 168 421 559 822 727 95,2 Free State 1 298 348 1 335 156 2 633 504 97,2 1 297 605 1 409 170 2 706 775 92,1 KwaZulu-Natal 3 950 527 4 466 493 8 417 020 88,4 4 409 091 5 016 925 9 426 017 87,9 North West 1 649 835 1 704 990 3 354 825 96,8 1 821 547 1 847 803 3 669 349 98,6 Gauteng 3 750 845 3 597 578 7 348 423 104,3 4 444 679 4 392 499 8 837 178 101,2 Mpumalanga 1 362 028 1 438 683 2 800 711 94,7 1 497 333 1 625 658 3 122 990 92,1 Limpopo 2 253 073 2 676 296 4 929 368 84,2 2 394 785 2 878 857 5 273 642 83,2 South Africa 19 520 886 21 062 685 40 583 571 92,7 21 434 041 23 385 736 44 819 776 91,7

Source: Statistics South Africa, Population Census 2001

10

Figure 1.6: Sex ratio by province, South Africa, 1996 and 2001

Source: Statistics South Africa, Population Census 1996 and 2001 Table 1.4 and Figure 1.7 compare sex ratios among district councils in Limpopo in 2001. They show that:

• Waterberg was the only district that had a sex ratio higher than 90 (92,4). • Capricorn had the second highest sex ratio (83,9). • Sekhukhune had the lowest sex ratio of 78,8.

Table 1.4: Sex ratio by district council, Limpopo, 2001

District council Male Female Total Sex ratio Sekhukhune 328 438 417 034 745 472 78,8 Bohlabela 269 068 326 134 595 202 82,5 Mopani 438 478 525 760 964 238 83,4 Vhembe 537 058 662 825 1 199 883 81,0 Capricorn 526 800 627 892 1 154 692 83,9 Waterberg 294 943 319 212 614 155 92,4


0

20

40

60

80

100

120 Sex ratio

WesternCape Eastern

Cape Northern Cape Free

StateKwaZulu-

NatalNorthWest

Gauteng Mpuma-langa

Limpopo South Africa 1996 95,8 85,7 96,5 97,2 88,4 96,8 104,3 94,7 84,2 92,7 2001 94,0 85,7 95,2 92,1 87,9 98,6 101,2 92,1 83,2 91,7

11

Figure 1.7: Sex ratio in each district council, Limpopo, 2001


1.3 Age distribution Figure 1.8 compares the 1996 and 2001 total populations of Limpopo by age group. Each five-year group in 2001 corresponds to the group five years younger in 1996. The following is observed:

• Generally, the 0–19 age group for the 1996 and 2001 population showed a higher proportion than the rest of the age groups.

• In both 1996 and 2001 a notable drop in the percentages of the population aged 20 years and above was recorded.

• The population aged 85 years and older accounted for 0,4% in 1996 and 0,5% in 2001 respectively.

• The general shape of the pyramid shows that populations for both years were young, since high proportions were found in the younger age groups. The shape of the pyramid is therefore broad-based, and tapers with increasing ages to the apex. This shape is typical of a developing country.

78,8

82,583,4

81,0

83,9

92,4

83,2

Sekhukhune Bohlabela Mopani Vhembe Capricorn Waterberg Limpopo70

75

80

85

90

95Sex ratio

12

Figure 1.8: Total population by age, Limpopo 1996 and 2001

Source: Statistics South Africa, Population Census 1996 and 2001 Figure 1.9 shows the populations of Limpopo and South Africa in 2001. The following comparisons are made:

• Children in the age group 0–14 years accounted for 39,4% in Limpopo, which was higher than the 32,0% of South Africa.

• A total of 13,2% of the population in Limpopo were in the age group 15–19 years, compared to 11,1% in the same age group in South Africa.

• There was a steeper drop in percentages from the age group 20 years and above in Limpopo than in South Africa.

• People aged 85 years and above accounted for 0,5% in Limpopo, compared to 0,4% in South Africa.

0,4

0,5

1,1

1,1

2,0

1,9

2,1

2,2

3,0

3,8

4,7 5,6

6,6 9,2

12,1 14,4

14,7 13,1

0,5

0,8

0,9

1,7

1,8

2,1

2,1

2,9

3,6

4,3

5,2

5,6

7,0

9,0

13,2 14,3

13,7 11,4

85+80-8475-7970-7465-6960-6455-5950-5445-4940-4435-3930-3425-2920-2415-1910-14

5-90-4

Age group

0.02,04,06,08,010,012,014,016,018,0

% 0,0 2,0 4,0 6,0 8,0 10,0 12,0 14,0 16,0

%

1996 2001

13

Figure 1.9: Total population by age group, Limpopo and South Africa, 2001

0,50,80,9

1,71,8

2,12,1

2,93,6

4,35,2

5,67,0

9,013,2

14,313,7

11,4

0,40,60,8

1,41,8

2,42,7

3,74,7

5,86,9

7,58,8

9,611,111,3

10,89,9

85+80-8475-7970-7465-6960-6455-5950-5445-4940-4435-3930-3425-2920-2415-1910-14

5-90-4

Age group

0,02,04,06,08,010,012,014,016,0

%

0,0 2,0 4,0 6,0 8,0 10,0 12,0 14,0

%

Limpopo South Af rica Source: Statistics South Africa, Population Census 2001 Figure 1.10 shows the population of Limpopo in 2001 by age and sex:

• Limpopo had a higher total proportion of females (54,6%) than of males (45,4%). • In the age groups 0–4 years and 5–9 years, the proportion of males and females was

equal. • The highest proportion of males and females was found in the age group 10–14. • The proportion of males aged 85 years and above was smaller than the proportion of

females in the same age group, that is 0,1% males and 0,4% females. • This population pyramid shows increasing proportions of males and females from

the age groups 5–9 and 10–14, and then sharply decreasing proportions from the age group 15–19 upwards.

14

Figure 1.10: Population by age and sex, Limpopo 2001

0,1

0,2

0,3

0,5

0,6

0,8

0,9

1,2

1,4

1,7

2,1

2,3

2,9

4,2

6,5

7,1

6,8

5,7

0,4

0,6

0,6

1,2

1,2

1,3

1,2

1,7

2,2

2,5

3,1

3,3

4,1

4,9

6,6

7,2

6,8

5,7

85+80-8475-7970-7465-6960-6455-5950-5445-4940-4435-3930-3425-2920-2415-1910-14

5-90-4

Age group

0,02,04,06,08,0

% of total

0,0 2,0 4,0 6,0 8,0 10,0

% of total

Male Female Note: In the above graph the percentages total 100% of the entire population, not for male and female separately as in the 1996 age pyramids previously published by Stats SA Source: Statistics South Africa, Population Census 2001 Table 1.5 and Figures 1.11, 1.12, 1.13 and 1.14 show the population of Limpopo by age, sex and population group, 2001.

• The highest proportion of both males and females was in the 10–14 age group in the case of the black African population group, whereas the highest proportion of the coloured population group was in the age group 5–9 in the case of males, and 15–19 in the case of females.

• In the case of the Indian/Asian population, the highest proportion of males was found in the 25–29 age group, and the highest proportion of females was found in the age group 0–4 years.

• The highest proportion of both the male and female white population was found in the 15–19 age group.

• From these comparisons it is clear that the black African and coloured population groups had more members at much younger ages than the Indian/Asian and white population groups.

15

Table 1.5: Age distribution by population group and sex, Limpopo, 2001

Black African Coloured Indian/Asian White Age group Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female 0-4 294 583 297 903 526 543 433 428 4 109 3 996 5-9 353 174 356 023 589 529 395 340 4 605 4 326 10-14 368 168 373 407 561 578 353 352 5 575 5 249 15-19 338 368 344 230 541 598 321 324 5 647 5 531 20-24 214 916 252 840 457 513 494 316 3 754 3 621 25-29 147 639 208 873 402 484 622 413 4 332 4 678 30-34 116 261 169 009 385 392 518 300 4 857 5 048 35-39 104 273 159 830 312 427 369 259 4 717 4 892 40-44 85 916 128 790 277 297 296 236 4 861 4 849 45-49 71 468 108 885 203 260 221 226 4 263 4 379 50-54 58 999 83 088 168 204 253 213 3 926 3 945 55-59 42 695 60 553 117 153 175 137 3 331 3 383 60-64 38 910 67 297 82 113 117 112 2 744 2 910 65-69 27 737 60 403 67 116 83 74 2 117 2 358 70-74 25 697 58 994 53 68 48 52 1 703 1 966 75-79 14 764 27 788 28 41 31 20 955 1 422 80-84 12 207 28 709 8 33 8 22 576 849 85+ 7 186 19 031 7 30 12 12 217 585 Total 2 322 962 2 805 654 4 785 5 378 4 749 3 838 62 289 63 987


Figure 1.11: Black African population by age and sex, Limpopo, 2001


0,3

0,5

0,6

1,1

1,2

1,7

1,8

2,5

3,1 3,7

4,5 5,0

6,4 9,3

14,6 15,8

15,2 12,7

0,7

1,0

1,0

2,1

2,2

2,4

2,2

3,0

3,9

4,6

5,7

6,0

7,4

9,0

12,3 13,3

12,7 10,6

85+ 80-84

75-7970-74

65-6960-6455-59

50-5445-4940-4435-39

30-3425-2920-2415-19

10-145-9

0-4

Age

0.02,04,06,08,010,012,014,016,018,0

% Male

0,0 2,0 4,0 6,0 8,0 10,0 12,0 14,0 16,0

% Female

16

Figure 1.12: Coloured population by age and sex, Limpopo, 2001


Figure 1.13: Indian/Asian population by age and sex, Limpopo, 2001


0,3

0,2

0,7

1,0

1,8

2,5 3,7

5,3 4,6

6,2 7,8

10,9 13,1

10,4 6,8

7,4 8,3

9,1

0,3

0,6

0,5

1,4

1,9

2,9

3,6

5,6

5,9

6,1

6,7

7,8

10,8 8,2

8,4

9,2

8,9

11,2

85+

80-8475-7970-74

65-6960-64

55-59

50-5445-4940-44

35-39

30-3425-29

20-24

15-1910-14

5-9

0-4

Age

0.02,04,06,08,010,012,014,016,0

% Male

0,0 2,0 4,0 6,0 8,0 10,0 12,0 14,0

% Female

0,1

0,2

0,6

1,1

1,4

1.7

2,4 3,5

4,3 5,8

6,5 8,1

8,4 9,6

11,3 11,7

12,3 11,0

0,6

0,6

0,8

1,3

2,2

2,1

2,8

3,8

4,8

5,5

7,9

7,3

9.0

9,5

11,1 10,7

9,8

10,1

85+

80-8475-7970-74

65-6960-64

55-59

50-54

45-4940-4435-39

30-3425-29

20-24

15-1910-14

5-9

0-4

Age

0.02,04,06,08,010,012,014,0

% Male

0,0 2,0 4,0 6,0 8,0 10,0 12,0 14,0

% Female

17

Figure 1.14: White population by age and sex, Limpopo, 2001


1.4 Language In this section we report on language. It must be remembered that the language reported is the language ‘most commonly spoken at home’. In Table 1.6 and Figure 1.15 it can be seen that:

• Sepedi was the most common home language (52,1%), followed by Xitsonga (22,4%) and Tshivenda (15,9%).

• The least spoken language in Limpopo was isiXhosa (0,3%), as opposed to the fact that nationally it was the second most common home language (17,6%).

• Nationally, isiZulu was the most common home language (23,8%), whereas only 0,7% of the population in Limpopo spoke isiZulu as their home language.

0,3

0,9

1,5

2,7 3,4

4,4 5,3

6,3

68 7,8

7,6 7,8

7,0 6,0

9,1 8,9

7,4 6,6

0,9

1,3

2,2

3,1

3,7

4,5

5,3

6 ,

6,7.8

7,6 7 .6

,.9 7,3

5,7

8.6 8,2

6,8

6,2

85+ 80-8475-7970-74

65-6960-64

55-59

50-5445-4940-4435-3930-34

25-2920-24

15-1910-14

5-9

0-4

Age

0.02,04,06,08,010,012,0

% Male

0,0 2,0 4,0 6,0 8,0 10,0

% Female

18

Table 1.6: Population by home language, Limpopo and South Africa, 2001

Limpopo South Africa Language N % N % Afrikaans 122 531 2,3 5 983 426 13,3 English 28 939 0,5 3 673 203 8,2 IsiNdebele 78 617 1,5 711 821 1,6 IsiXhosa 14 225 0,3 7 907 153 17,6 IsiZulu 34 358 0,7 10 677 305 23,8 Sepedi 2 750 175 52,1 4 208 980 9,4 Sesotho 69 370 1,3 3 555 186 7,9 Setswana 83 130 1,6 3 677 016 8,2 Siswati 57 703 1,1 1 194 430 2,7 Tshivenda 839 704 15,9 1 021 757 2,3 Xitsonga 1 180 611 22,4 1 992 207 4,4 Other 14 278 0,3 217 293 0,5 Total 5 273 642 100,0 44 819 778 100,0


Figure 1.15: Population by home language, Limpopo and South Africa, 2001

Afrikaans English IsiNdebele IsiXhosa IsiZulu Sepedi Sesotho Setsw ana Sisw ati Tshivenda Xitsonga Other0,0

10,0

20,0

30,0

40,0

50,0

60,0%

Limpopo 2,3 0,5 1,5 0,3 0,7 52,1 1,3 1,6 1,1 15,9 22,4 0,3South Af rica 13,3 8,2 1,6 17,6 23,8 9,4 7,9 8,2 2,7 2,3 4,4 0,5 Source: Statistics South Africa, Population Census 2001 Figure 1.16 shows the population of Limpopo by home language and district council. The following is observed:

• The majority of the population in Limpopo spoke Sepedi. In Capricorn 1 018 218 people spoke Sepedi, followed by Sekhukhune where 685 684 of the population spoke Sepedi.

• In Vhembe 818 902 people spoke Tshivenda.

19

• Xitsonga was spoken by 468 122 people in Mopani. • English and isiNdebele were spoken by a small percentage of the population in all

the districts.

Figure 1.16: Home language by district council, Limpopo, 2001

Afrikaans English IsiNdebele IsiXhosa IsiZulu Sepedi Sesotho Setswana Siswati Tshivenda Xitsonga Other0

200 000

400 000

600 000

800 000

1 000 000

1 200 000Number

Sekhukhune 1 369 1 027 20 268 988 8 415 685 684 5 031 1 352 13 263 610 6 786 680Bohlabela 3 328 1 308 175 466 16 977 214 256 23 114 813 38 244 597 295 497 427

Mopani 18 132 6 030 335 831 2 151 446 989 13 148 1 044 2 012 4 519 468 122 924Vhembe 13 699 4 547 1 761 659 872 27 920 7 709 837 331 818 902 316 705 5 942

Capricorn 33 627 10 182 26 352 1 201 2 973 1 018 218 8 620 3 335 2 064 10 630 35 984 1 505Waterberg 52 377 5 845 29 727 10 080 2 971 357 108 11 749 75 748 1 789 4 445 57 518 4 799

Source: Statistics South Africa, Population Census 2001 Table 1.7 gives the breakdown of language by population group.

• The most common home language among the black African people in Limpopo was Sepedi, followed by Xitsonga and Tshivenda.

• The least spoken languages among the black African people of Limpopo were English and other languages.

• The language most often spoken among the coloured people of Limpopo was Afrikaans, followed by English.

• The least spoken language among the coloured population was isiXhosa. • The most common home language among the Indian/Asian people in Limpopo was

English, followed by other languages. • IsiZulu, Setswana and Siswati were the languages least spoken among the

Indian/Asian people. • The language most often spoken among the white population of Limpopo was

Afrikaans, followed by English. • Siswati was the language least spoken among the white people of Limpopo.

20

Table 1.7: Most often spoken language within each population group, Limpopo, 2001

Home language

Black African Coloured

Indian/Asian White

Total

Afrikaans 6 732 5 641 130 110 028 122 531 English 5 759 1 761 6 745 14 674 28 939 IsiNdebele 78 522 33 26 36 78 617 IsiXhosa 14 104 17 7 98 14 226 IsiZulu 34 208 116 3 30 34 357 Sepedi 2 748 223 1 465 91 396 2 750 175 Sesotho 69 249 71 10 40 69 370 Setswana 82 987 170 3 60 83 220 Siswati 57 587 95 3 19 57 704 Tshivenda 839 275 259 4 129 839 667 Xitsonga 1 179 873 501 57 180 1 180 611 Other 12 186 35 1 471 585 14 277 Total 5 128 705 10 164 8 550 126 275 5 273 694


1.5 Religion Table 1.8 shows the population of Limpopo and South Africa by religion. The following observations are made:

• In Limpopo 25,5% of the population belonged to the Zion Christian Church as compared to 11,1% nationally.

• Nationally, 15,1% of the population did not belong to any religion, whereas 28,5% of the population in Limpopo did not belong to any religion.

21

Table 1.8: Religion in Limpopo and South Africa, 2001

Limpopo South Africa Religion N % N % Dutch Reformed Church 161 227 3,1 3 005 698 6,7 Zion Christian Church 1 346 626 25,5 4 971 932 11,1 Roman Catholic Church 172 818 3,3 3 181 336 7,1 Methodist Church 52 037 1,0 3 305 404 7,4 Pentecostal/Charismatic churches 497 672 9,4 3 422 749 7,6 Anglican Church 37 921 0,7 1 722 076 3,8 Apostolic Faith Mission 30 544 0,6 246 190 0,5 Lutheran churches 152 526 2,9 1 130 987 2,5 Presbyterian churches 69 373 1,3 832 495 1,9 Bandla Lama Nazaretha 37 946 0,7 248 824 0,6 Baptist churches 32 014 0,6 691 237 1,5 Congregational churches 4 902 0,1 508 825 1,1 Orthodox churches 448 0,0 42 251 0,1 Other Apostolic churches 640 002 12,1 5 609 070 12,5 Other Zionist churches 137 417 2,6 1 887 147 4,2 Ethiopian type churches 20 568 0,4 880 414 2,0 Other Reformed churches 18 889 0,4 226 495 0,5 Other African independent churches 45 831 0,9 656 644 1,5 Other Christian churches 160 436 3,0 3 195 477 7,1 African traditional belief 72 602 1,4 125 903 0,3 Judaism 355 0,0 75 555 0,2 Hinduism 1 690 0,0 551 669 1,2 Islam 10 287 0,2 654 064 1,5 Other beliefs 18 236 0,3 269 200 0,6 No religion 1 505 097 28,5 6 767 165 15,1 Undetermined 46 177 0,9 610 971 1,4 Total 5 273 645 100,0 44 819 778 100,0

Source: Statistics South Africa, Population Census 2001 Table 1.9 shows the Limpopo population by religion and district council.

• In Sekhukhune, 5% of the population attended the Zion Christian Church followed by 0,7% attending Pentecostal/Charismatic churches.

• Of the people in Bohlabela, 3,0% attended the Zion Christian Church followed by 1,7% attending Pentecostal churches.

• In Mopani, 4,0% of the population attended the Zion Christian Church followed by 2,5% attending Pentecostal Churches, and 1,7% belonged to other Apostolic churches.

• In Vhembe, 4,27% were attending the Zion Christian Church followed by 2,8% attending Pentecostal churches and 2,8% attending other Apostolic churches.

• Of the population in Capricorn, 6,4% attended the Zion Christian Church, followed by 2,5% attending other Apostolic churches and 1,4% attending the Roman Catholic Church.

22

• In Waterberg, 3% of the population were attending the Zion Christian Church followed by 2% attending other Apostolic churches and 1% attending the Dutch Reformed Church.

• A total of 28,5% of the residents in Limpopo did not belong to any religion.

Table 1.9: Religion by district council, Limpopo, 2001

Religion Sekhukhune Bohlabela Mopani Vhembe Capricorn Waterberg Total Dutch Reformed Church 0,2 0,1 0,3 0,5 0,8 1,0 3,1 Zion Christian Church 5,0 2,9 4,0 4,2 6,4 3,1 25,5 Roman Catholic Church 0,5 0,3 0,3 0,3 1,4 0,4 3,3 Methodist Church 0,1 0,1 0,0 0,1 0,3 0,2 0,8 Pentecostal/Charismatic churches 0,7 1,7 2,5 2,8 1,3 0,8 9,7 Anglican Church 0,1 0,0 0,0 0,1 0,3 0,2 0,7 Apostolic Faith Mission 0,1 0,1 0,1 0,1 0,1 0,2 0,6 Lutheran churches 0,5 0,1 0,4 0,6 1,0 0,3 2,9 Presbyterian churches 0,0 0,2 0,3 0,5 0,3 0,0 1,3 Bandla Lama Nazaretha 0,0 0,4 0,1 0,1 0,1 0,0 0,7 Baptist churches 0,1 0,1 0,1 0,2 0,1 0,1 0,6 Congregational churches 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,1 Orthodox churches 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 Other Apostolic churches 2,1 1,1 1,7 2,8 2,5 2,1 12,1 Other Zionist churches 0,1 0,7 0,3 0,1 0,3 0,2 2,7 Ethiopian type churches 0,1 0,1 0,1 0,1 0,2 0,1 0,6 Other Reformed churches 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,1 0,2 0,4 Other African independent churches 0,1 0,2 0,1 0,3 0,1 0,1 0,9 Other Christian churches 0,2 0,4 0,4 1,0 0,5 0,3 2,8 African traditional belief 0,1 0,1 0,7 0,4 0,2 0,0 1,4 Judaism 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 Hinduism 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 Islam 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,1 0,1 0,0 0,2 Other beliefs 0,1 0,1 0,1 0,0 0,1 0,1 0,4 No religion 4,0 2,5 6,7 7,7 5,7 2,2 28,5 Undetermined 0,1 0,1 0,2 0,2 0,2 0,1 0,9 Total 14,1 11,3 18,3 22,8 21,9 11,7 100,0

Source: Statistics South Africa, Population Census 2001 Table 1.10 shows the population of Limpopo by population group and religion.

• Of the black African population, 25,5% attended the Zion Christian Church in Limpopo, followed by 12,0% attending other Apostolic churches and 9,5% attending Pentecostal churches, while 28,4% did not belong to any religion.

• In Limpopo, 0,03% of the coloured population group attended the Dutch Reformed Church and 0,03% attended the Roman Catholic Church followed by 0,02% each attending the Zion Christian Church and Pentecostal churches.

• As far as the Indian/Asian population in Limpopo was concerned, 0,12% belonged to the Islamic faith followed by 0,01% attending the Roman Catholic Church.

23

• Of the white population group in Limpopo, 0,1% attended the Dutch Reformed Church followed by 0,3% attending other Reformed churches and 0,2% attending Pentecostal churches.

Table 1.10: Religion within each population group, Limpopo, 2001

Religion Black

African Coloured Indian/

Asian

White Total Dutch Reformed Church 2,1 15,7 0,3 41,0 3,1 Zion Christian Church 26,2 8,8 0,8 0,2 25,5 Roman Catholic Church 3,3 15,8 3,4 2,1 3,3 Methodist Church 0,9 2,9 0,2 3,2 1,0 Pentecostal/Charismatic churches 9,5 9,8 0,8 7,9 9,4 Anglican Church 0,7 3,4 1,2 1,6 0,7 Apostolic Faith Mission 0,5 0,6 0,1 2,7 0,6 Lutheran churches 3,0 4,4 0,2 0,4 2,9 Presbyterian churches 1,3 0,9 0,1 1,0 1,3 Bandla Lama Nazaretha 0,7 0,2 0,0 0,0 0,7 Baptist churches 0,6 0,5 0,1 1,1 0,6 Congregational churches 0,1 0,7 0,0 0,1 0,1 Orthodox churches 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,1 0,0 Other Apostolic churches 12,3 8,2 1,2 6,5 12,1 Other Zionist churches 2,7 2,2 0,3 0,6 2,6 Ethiopian type churches 0,4 0,2 0,2 0,2 0,4 Other Reformed churches 0,1 0,7 0,0 12,7 0,4 Other African independent churches 0,8 0,0 0,0 2,0 0,9 Other Christian churches 2,9 2,1 2,1 7,4 3,0 African traditional belief 1,4 0,3 0,0 0,0 1,4 Judaism 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,1 0,0 Hinduism 0,0 0,1 12,1 0,1 0,0 Islam 0,1 1,9 72,7 0,1 0,2 Other beliefs 0,3 0,9 0,3 0,7 0,3 No religion 29,2 11,6 2,9 6,2 28,5 Undetermined 0,8 1,2 0,8 2,0 0,9 Total 100,0 100,0 100,0 100,0 100,00


1.6 Country of birth Table 1.11 shows the population of Limpopo by county of birth.

• In Limpopo, 98,5% of the population was born in South Africa compared to 97,7% nationally.

• Only 1,4% of the population in Limpopo was born in SADC countries.

24

Table 1.11: Population by country of birth, Limpopo and South Africa, 2001

Limpopo South Africa Country of birth N % N % South Africa 5 193 803 98,5 43 794 702 97,7 SADC countries 73 583 1,4 687 679 1,5 Rest of Africa 1 055 0,0 41 819 0,1 Europe 2 137 0,0 228 314 0,5 Asia 2 526 0,0 40 886 0,1 North America 258 0,0 9 152 0,0 Central and South America 227 0,0 12 798 0,0 Australia and New Zealand 54 0,0 4 429 0,0 Total 5 273 643 100,00 44 819 778 100,00


Table 1.12 shows the population not born in Limpopo by population group and district council. It is observed that:

• In Mopani, 27,4% of the black African population were not born in South Africa, followed by 21,7% in Bohlabela.

• Only 0,3% of the total coloured population in the whole of Limpopo was not born in South Africa.

• In Vhembe, 1,7% of the Indian/Asian people were not born in South Africa, followed by 0,9% in Capricorn.

• In Waterberg and Capricorn respectively, 2,7% and 2,6% of the white population were not born in South Africa followed by 2,0% in Mopani.

Table 1.12: Population not born in South Africa by population group and district council, Limpopo, 2001

Black African Coloured Indian/Asian White Total District council N % N % N % N % N % Sekhukhune 1 058 1,3 0 0,0 63 0,1 41 0,1 1 163 1,5 Bohlabela 17 334 21,7 17 0,0 46 0,1 344 0,4 17 741 22,2 Mopani 21 871 27,4 18 0,0 201 0,3 1 578 2,0 23 668 29,7 Vhembe 17 101 21,4 85 0,1 1 373 1,7 794 1,0 19 353 24,2 Capricorn 3 315 4,2 80 0,1 695 0,9 2 111 2,6 6 200 7,8 Waterberg 9 333 1,2 45 0,1 216 0,3 2 120 2,7 11 714 14,7 Total 70 012 77,2 245 0,3 2 594 3,4 6 988 8,80 79 839 100,0


1.7 Citizenship Citizenship and country of birth are separate variables, as immigrants to South Africa may have become South African citizens. This section looks at citizenship. Figure 1.17 shows that:

• In Limpopo, 5 232 547 of the total population were South African citizens compared to 44 356 776 nationally.

25

• Only 41 095 of the total population in Limpopo were non-South African citizens compared to 463 001 nationally.

Figure 1.17: Citizenship in Limpopo and South Africa, 2001

South African Non-South African Total0

10 000 000

20 000 000

30 000 000

40 000 000

50 000 000

Limpopo 5 232 547 41 095 5 273 642South Africa 44 356 776 463 001 44 819 778 Source: Statistics South Africa, Population Census 2001

1.8 Disability Figure 1.18 shows the number of people that were classified as disabled in 2001 in Limpopo and South Africa, and the proportions suffering from each type of disability.

• In Limpopo, 25,9% of the population suffered from visual disability compared to 25,6% nationally.

• Nationally, 24,7% of the population suffered from physical disabilities, whereas 20,0% of the population in Limpopo suffered from a physical disability.

• A hearing disability was experienced by 16,6% of the population in the province compared to 13,9% nationally.

• Communication disability accounted for 3,6% in the province compared to 3,3% nationally.

26

Figure 1.18: Disability, Limpopo and South Africa, 2001

Sight Hearing Communication Physical Intellectual Emotional Multiple0,0

5,0

10,0

15,0

20,0

25,0

30,0Percentage

Limpopo 25,9 16,6 3,6 20,0 9,8 13,0 11,1South Africa 25,6 13,9 3,3 24,7 9,2 11,9 11,4 Source: Statistics South Africa, Population Census 2001 Figure 1.19 shows the disabled population by district council and type of disability in Limpopo. It is observed that:

• In Capricorn, 6,1% of the population suffered from a sight disability, followed by 5,1% in Vhembe.

• Vhembe had the highest percentage (3,6%) of people suffering from a hearing disability followed by 3,4% in Capricorn.

• In Capricorn, 4,5% of the population suffered from a physical disability followed by 4,0% in Vhembe.

• There was a small proportion of people with a communication disability in all the district councils.

Figure 1.19: Disability by district council and type of disability, Limpopo, 2001

Sekhukhune Bohlabela Mopani Vhembe Capricorn Waterberg Total0,0

5,0

10,0

15,0

20,0

25,0

30,0%

Sight 3,7 2,7 5,0 5,1 6,1 3,3 25,9Hearing 2,4 1,7 3,4 3,6 3,4 2,1 16,7

Communication 0,6 0,4 0,6 0,8 0,8 0,4 3,6Physical 3,1 2,2 3,6 4,0 4,5 2,7 20,0

Intellectual 1,5 1,0 1,7 2,1 2,4 1,1 9,8Emotional 1,9 1,3 2,5 2,7 3,1 1,4 13,0

Multiple 1,6 1,0 1,9 2,0 3,0 1,6 11,1 Source: Statistics South Africa, Population Census 2001

27

1.9 Urbanisation Definition: Urban area: An urban area is one that has been legally proclaimed as being urban. This includes towns, cities and metropolitan areas. Non-urban area: This consists of commercial farms, small settlements, rural villages and other areas that are further away from towns and cities. Figure 1.20 shows that:

• In Limpopo, 11,0% of the population lived in urban areas in 1996 compared to 10,7% in 2001.

• Nationally, 53,7% of the population in South Africa lived in urban areas in 1996 compared to 57,2% in 2001.

• In 1996, 88,6% of the Limpopo population lived in non-urban areas compared to 89,3% in 2001.

• Nationally, 46,2% of the population in South Africa lived in non-urban areas in 1996 compared to 42,8% in 2001.

Figure 1.20: Population by urban and non-urban area, Limpopo and South Africa, 2001

Limpopo (1996) Limpopo (2001) South Africa (1996) South Africa (2001)0,0

20,0

40,0

60,0

80,0

100,0%

Urban 11,0 10,7 53,7 57,2Non-urban 88,6 89,3 46,2 42,8 Source: Statistics South Africa, Population Census 1996 and 2001 Figure 1.21 compares the number of people living in urban and non-urban areas by district council according to Census 1996 and 2001.

• In Waterberg, 4,4% of the population lived in urban areas in 2001 compared to 2,8% in 1996, followed by 3,6% in Capricorn compared to 2,9% in 1996.

• Bohlabela had the smallest proportion (0,1%) of people living in urban areas in 2001 compared to 0,4% in Sekhukhune in 1996.

28

• Vhembe had a large proportion of people living in non-urban areas in 2001 (21,5%) compared to 20,4% in 1996, followed by 17,2% in Mopani compared to 15,0% in 1996.

• Waterberg had the smallest proportion of people living in non-urban areas in both 1996 and 2001.

Figure 1.21: Population by urban/non-urban area and district council, Limpopo, 1996 and 2001

0

5

10

15

20

25

Per

cent

age

Urban 0,4 0,3 0,5 0,1 2,6 1,1 1,8 1,3 2,9 3,6 2,8 4,4

Non-urban 14,1 13,8 12,1 11,2 15 17,2 20,4 21,5 18,7 18,3 8,4 7,3

1996 2001 1996 2001 1996 2001 1996 2001 1996 2001 1996 2001

Sekhukhune Bohlabela Mopani Vhembe Capricorn Waterberg

Source: Statistics South Africa, Population Census 1996 and 2001

29

Chapter 2: Vital statistics Vital statistics cover births, deaths, marriages and divorces.

2.1 Births The total number of live birth registrations for any given year comprises both current registrations (for births registered in the year of birth) and late registrations (for births registered later than the year of birth). According to Table 2.1 and Figure 2.1 below, the total number of births registered in South Africa in 2004 was 1 475 809. Of this number, 191 124 occurred in Limpopo. In terms of birth registration numbers it is further observed that:

• The largest total number of births was recorded in KwaZulu-Natal with 22,3% followed by 20,6% in Eastern Cape, 14,8% in Gauteng and 13,0% in Limpopo.

• Northern Cape had the lowest number of birth registrations (1,5%) • The largest number of current birth registrations occurred in Gauteng followed by

KwaZulu-Natal, Eastern Cape and Limpopo. • The largest number of late registrations occurred in Eastern Cape followed by

KwaZulu-Natal, Limpopo and Gauteng.

Table 2.1: Registration of annual live births by province, South Africa, 2004

Province N % Western Cape 107 903 7,3 Eastern Cape 304 274 20,6 Northern Cape 22 203 1,5 Free State 73 880 5,0 KwaZulu-Natal 328 650 22,3 North West 104 469 7,1 Gauteng 218 919 14,8 Mpumalanga 118 312 8,0 Limpopo 191 124 13,0 South Africa 1 475 809 100,0

Source: Statistics South Africa, Recorded live births 2004

30

Figure 2.1: Total recorded live births by province, South Africa, 2004

Source: Statistics South Africa, Recorded live births 2004 Table 2.2 shows registration of birth by municipality in Limpopo in 2004. The following is observed from this table:

• A total of 191 124 live births was registered in Limpopo. • Bushbuckridge recorded the highest number of registered births (33 542), followed

by Thulamela with 31 461. • Kruger National Park recorded the lowest number of births in the province (558). • Many of the municipalities in Limpopo recorded a higher proportion of late

registrations than current registrations. • Thohoyandou recorded the highest number of current registrations (10 362), whereas

Bushbuckridge was the municipality that recorded the highest number of late registrations (24 305).

WesternCape Eastern

Cape Northern Cape

FreeState

KwaZulu- Natal North

WestGauteng Mpuma-

langaLimpopo South

Africa

0 200 400 600 800

1 000 1 200 1 400 1 600 Thousands

Current 80 969 99 672 15 741 44 248 135 469 55 640 149 792 53 715 91 314 728 283Late 26 934 204 602 6 462 29 632 193 181 48 829 69 127 64 597 99 810 747 526Total 107 903 304 274 22 203 73 880 328 650 104 469 218 919 118 312 191 124 1 475 809

31

Table 2.2: Annual registration of births by municipality, Limpopo, 2004

Municipality Total birth

registrations Current birth

registrations Late birth

registrations Aganang 9 844 6 490 3 354 Ba-Phalaborwa 3 908 2 058 1 850 Bela-Bela 2 333 1 247 1 086 Blouberg 5 849 3 177 2 672 Bushbuckridge 33 542 9 237 24 305 Greater Giyani 8 173 3 921 4 252 Greater Letaba 6 992 2 909 4 083 Greater Tubatse 6 852 3 525 3 327 Greater Tzaneen 9 569 4 607 4 962 Kruger National Park 558 346 212 Lepelle-Nkumpi 12 033 7 606 4 427 Lephalale 11 957 7 554 4 403 Makhado 18 612 8 596 10 016 Makhuduthamaga 11 030 5 872 5 158 Mauleng 6 026 2 835 3 191 Modimolle 2 393 1 189 1 204 Mogalakwena 2 368 730 1 638 Molemole 11 071 6 514 4 557 Musina 1 965 892 1 073 Mutale 1 800 786 1 014 Thabazimbi 1 394 861 533 Thohoyandou 22 855 10 362 12 493 Limpopo 191 124 91 314 99 810

Totals exclude foreign and unspecified births Source: Statistics South Africa, Recorded live births 2004

2.2 Deaths The recorded deaths are for a given reference year during which the deaths occurred (occurrence-based perspective), irrespective of when the deaths were registered. Table 2.3 shows the distribution of recorded deaths by province in South Africa for the period 1997 to 2002.

• The number of deaths recorded showed an increasing trend from 1997 to 2002 in all the provinces except in Northern Cape and Gauteng where the number of recorded deaths decreased from 1998 to 1999.

• In 1997 a total of 318 214 deaths were recorded in South Africa, with KwaZulu-Natal having the highest proportion of 22,2% followed by Gauteng with 21,3%.

• Limpopo recorded 7,0% of the total number of deaths. Northern Cape had the smallest percentage of recorded deaths (2,7%).

• The total number of deaths in Limpopo had increased from 7,0% in 1997 to 7,7% in 2002.

32

Table 2.3: Recorded deaths by province, South Africa 1997 to 2002

1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 Province N % N % N % N % N % N % Western Cape 33 292 10,5 36 347 9,9 38 088 10 38 540 9,3 41 042 9,1 43 667 8,7 Eastern Cape 45 345 14,2 50 918 13,9 53 851 14,1 60 602 14,6 65 719 14,5 73 072 14,6 Northern Cape 8 495 2,7 9 441 2,6 9 187 2,4 9 847 2,4 10 421 2,3 11 267 2,3 Free State 25 375 8,0 30 142 8,2 31 625 8,3 34 101 8,2 36 877 8,2 40 715 8,2 KwaZulu-Natal

70 487

22,2

83 048

22,6

86 156

22,6

95 353

23,0

105 256

23,3

116 982

23,4

North West 25 026 7,9 29 458 8 32 395 8,5 35 437 8,6 39 723 8,8 44 269 8,9 Gauteng 67 734 21,3 75 993 20,7 75 445 19,8 80 425 19,4 86 213 19,1 95 186 19,1 Mpumalanga 20 122 6,3 23 926 6,5 25 899 6,8 28 273 6,8 31 548 7 35 277 7,1 Limpopo 22 338 7,0 28 302 7,7 29 135 7,6 31 263 7,6 34 901 7,7 38 639 7,7 Outside RSA 73 0,0 112 0,0 120 0,0 128 0,0 234 0,1 193 0,0 Unspecified - - 2 0,0 1 0,0 - - 2 0,0 1 0,0 Total 318 287 100,0 367 689 100,0 381 902 100,0 413 969 100,0 451 936 100,0 499 268 100,0

Note: The completeness of the death register varies by year and province of death. The death register is more complete for 2002 than for 1997. Numbers for 2003 are excluded, as Stats SA has not yet received all the death notification forms for 2003 from the Department of Home Affairs Source: Statistics South Africa, Mortality and causes of death in South Africa 1997–2003 Table 2.4 shows the number of recorded deaths due to the ten leading underlying causes in Limpopo and South Africa in 2001.

• The main cause of death in Limpopo was influenza and pneumonia, whereas in South Africa tuberculosis was ranked as the major cause of death.

• The figures indicate that the number of deaths due to cerebrovascular diseases, diabetes mellitus, and certain disorders involving the immune mechanism had the same rankings for both Limpopo and South Africa.

• The lowest number of deaths in Limpopo was caused by respiratory and cardiovascular disorders specific to the perinatal period, while in South Africa it was caused by hypertensive disease.

33

Table 2.4: Deaths due to the ten leading underlying natural causes in Limpopo and South Africa, 2001

Limpopo South Africa Causes of death Rank N % Rank N % Tuberculosis (A15-A19) 2 2 675 7,7 1 50 872 11,3 Influenza and pneumonia (J10-J18) 1 2 509 8,0 2 31 495 7,0 Other forms of heart disease (I30-I52) 5 1 563 4,5 3 22 602 5,0 Cerebrovascular diseases (I60-I69) 4 1 720 4,9 4 22 577 5,0 Intestinal infectious diseases (A00-A09) 3 1 927 5,5 5 16 060 3,6

Chronic lower respiratory diseases (J40-J47) 8 984 2,8 6 14 681 3,2 Diabetes mellitus (E10-E14) 7 1 009 2,9 7 14 557 3,2 Ischaemic heart diseases (I20-I25) *** *** *** 8 11 777 2,6 Certain disorders involving the immune mechanism (D80-D89) 9 773 2,2 9 11 670 2,6 Hypertensive diseases (I10-I15) 6 1 237 3,5 10 10 748 2,4

Respiratory and cardiovascular disorders specific to the perinatal period (P20-P29) 10 654 1,9 *** *** *** Other causes *** 19 427 55,7 *** 244 897 54,2 All causes *** 34 901 100,0 *** 451 936 100,0

Source: Statistics South Africa, Mortality and causes of death in South Africa 1997–2003 Table 2.5 shows the number of recorded deaths by leading magisterial district in Limpopo from 1997 to 2000.

• Among the leading districts, Pietersburg had the highest number of recorded deaths in 1997 and 1998, and Potgietersrus had the highest number of deaths in both 1999 and 2000.

Table 2.5: Recorded deaths by leading district, Limpopo, 1997 to 2000

1997 1998 1999 2000 Leading district N % N % N % N % Pietersburg 1 862 10,2 2 205 9,8 1 776 8,0 1 853 7,5 Potgietersrus 1 841 10,0 2 059 9,2 1 999 9,0 1 934 7,8 Letaba 1 608 8,8 2 139 9,5 Nebo 1 306 7,1 1 581 7,0 1 652 7,4 1 784 7,2 Thohoyandou 1 343 6,0 1 605 7,2 1 767 7,1 Thabamoopo 973 5,3 1 216 5,4 1 192 5,4 1 268 5,1 Mapulaneng 1 212 5,5 1 376 5,5 Subtotal 7 590 41,4 10 543 46,9 9 436 42,4 9 982 40,2 Other districts 10 737 58,6 11 955 53,1 12 796 57,6 14 821 59,8 Total 18 327 100,0 22 498 100,0 22 232 100,0 24 803 100,0

Source: Statistics South Africa, Advance release of recorded deaths 1997–2000

34

Figure 2.2 shows the number of recorded deaths by age at death and gender for Limpopo in 2001. The following is observed:

• The lowest number of recorded deaths was in the age group 15–19 for both males and females, followed by the age group 20–24 for males and <15 for females.

• The highest number of recorded deaths was in the age group 80+ for both males and females.

• With the exception of the age groups 20–24, 25–29, 65–69, 70–74, and 80+ years, female-recorded deaths were lower than male-recorded deaths.

Figure 2.2: Recorded deaths by age at death and gender, Limpopo, 2000

<15 15-19 20-24 25-29 30-34 35-39 40-44 45-49 50-54 55-59 60-64 65-69 70-74 75-79 80+0

1 000

2 000

3 000

4 000

5 000Number

Male 481 164 371 655 926 1 021 974 999 1 052 1 005 1 048 778 1 043 881 1 533Female 394 106 459 821 856 762 652 585 522 438 776 853 1 132 865 2 623

Total 875 270 830 1 476 1 782 1 783 1 626 1 584 1 574 1 443 1 824 1 631 2 175 1 746 4 156 Source: Statistics South Africa, Advance release of recorded deaths 1997–2000

2.3 Marriages Marriages are registered and recorded by the Department of Home Affairs. Table 2.6 and Figure 2.3 show the number of marriages by province and way of solemnisation in 2003.

• Gauteng had the highest total number of recorded marriages (45 787) in 2003, followed by KwaZulu-Natal with 26 683 marriages.

• Limpopo recorded a total of 12 649 marriages in 2003. • Northern Cape had the lowest number of recorded marriages (4 004). • Western Cape had the highest number of religious marriages (12 319) followed by

KwaZulu-Natal with 12 167. • Limpopo recorded the lowest number of religious marriages (605). • Gauteng had the highest number of civil marriages (27 448) followed by Western

Cape with 11 946 marriages. • Limpopo recorded 8 584 civil marriages. • Northern Cape had the lowest number of civil marriages.

35

Table 2.6: Marriage by way of solemnisation, 2003

Way of solemnisation Province Religious Civil Unspecified Total Western Cape 12 319 11 946 1 439 25 704 Eastern Cape 5 476 10 585 3 919 19 980 Northern Cape 1 306 1 663 1 035 4 004 Free State 2 915 9 718 517 13 150 KwaZulu-Natal 12 167 10 078 4 438 26 683 North West 2 929 9 822 1 644 14 395 Gauteng 11 395 27 448 6 944 45 787 Mpumalanga 1 650 4 436 4 422 10 508 Limpopo 605 8 584 3 460 12 649 Unspecified 462 4 712 304 5 478 Marriage not solemnised in South Africa 18 294 39 351

Source: Statistics South Africa, Marriages and divorces 2003

Figure 2.3: Total marriages by province, South Africa, 2003

Source: Statistics South Africa, Marriages and divorces 2003 Table 2.7 and Figure 2.4 show the distribution of the population of Limpopo by marital status. The table and figure depict the following:

• In Limpopo, 13,9% of the population was married in accordance with religious/civil customs, whereas 21,0% was married in accordance with the traditional/customary way.

• Only 0,2% of the population in Limpopo was in a polygamous marriage, and 4,8% was living together like married partners.

WesternCape

EasternCape

Northern Cape

Free State

KwaZulu-Natal

NorthWest

Gauteng Mpuma-langa

Limpopo Unspecified 0

10 000

20 000

30 000

40 000

50 000 Number

Religious 12 319 5 476 1 306 2 915 12 167 2 929 11 395 1 650 605 462 Civil 11 946 10 585 1 663 9 718 10 078 9 822 27 448 4 436 8 584 4 712

Unspecified 1 439 3 919 1 035 517 4 438 1 644 6 944 4 422 3 460 304 Total 25 704 19 980 4 004 13 150 26 683 14 395 45 787 10 508 12 649 5 478

36

• The largest proportion (49,7%) of the population in Limpopo never married, while 7,6% was widowed.

• In Limpopo, 1,3% of the population was separated, and 1,6% was divorced.

Table 2.7: Marital status of people aged 15 years and above, Limpopo, 2001

Marital Status N % Married civil/religious 445 143 13,9 Married traditional/customary 672 586 21,0 Polygamous marriage 5 034 0,2 Living together like married partners 152 143 4,8 Never married 1 588 093 49,7 Widower/widow 242 076 7,6 Separated 41 905 1,3 Divorced 49 920 1,6 Total 3 196 900 100,0


Figure 2.4: Marital status of people aged 15 years and above, Limpopo 2001

13,9

21,0

0,2

4,8

49,7

7,6

1,3 1,6

Civil/Religious

Traditional/customary

Polygamous Living together Never married Widow er/Widow

Separated Divorced0,0

10,0

20,0

30,0

40,0

50,0

60,0%

Source: Statistics South Africa, Population Census 2001 Table 2.8 shows the marital status among those aged 15 years and older within each population group in Limpopo.

• 12,2% of the black African population were in religious or civil marriages, whereas 21,7% were in traditional marriages compared to 8,9% of the Indian/Asian population, and 8,7% of the coloured population.

• Only 1,7% of white people were in traditional marriages, compared to 63,3% who were in religious or civil marriages.

• A small percentage (0,2% of the black African population and 0,1% coloured people) were in polygamous marriages as compared to 0,0% in the other population groups.

• The largest proportions of the black African and coloured population groups in Limpopo had never been married. Among the Indian/Asian and white population groups, most of them were married in accordance with civil or religious custom.

37

• Polygamous marriages formed the smallest proportion among all population groups. The same applied to the ‘separated’ and ‘divorced’ categories in the case of the Indian/Asian population group.

Table 2.8: Marital status by population group, Limpopo, 2001

Black African Coloured Indian/ Asian White Total

Status N % N % N % N % N % Married civil/religious 377 423 12,2 2 013 29,4 3 382 53,8 62 325 63,3 445 143 13,9 Married traditional/customary 669 714 21,7 595 8,7 558 8,9 1 718 1,7 672 586 21,0 Polygamous marriage 4 993 0,2 6 0,1 3 0,0 32 0,0 5 034 0,2

Living together like married partners 147 978 4,8 579 8,5 97 1,5 3 490 3,5 152 143 4,8 Never married 1 562 667 50,6 3 003 43,9 1 957 31,1 20 465 20,8 1 588 093 49,74 Widower/widow 235 230 7,6 377 5,5 224 3,6 6 244 6,3 242 076 7,6 Separated 41 392 1,3 80 1,2 23 0,4 410 0,4 41 905 1,3 Divorced 45 961 1,5 184 2,7 44 0,7 3 731 3,8 49 920 1,6 Total 3 085 358 100,0 6 838 100,0 6 287 100,0 98 416 100,0 3 196 900 100,0


2.4 Divorces Figure 2.5 shows the number of divorces recorded by province and way of solemnisation of the marriage in South Africa in 2003. From this figure it can be observed that:

• The total number of divorces recorded in South Africa in 2003 was 31 566. From this total, civil divorces were the highest (23 644).

• Gauteng recorded the highest number of civil divorces (7 534), followed by Western Cape with 4 678.

• Limpopo accounted for 1 031 divorce cases in 2003. • Northern Cape had the lowest number of divorce cases (622). • There was a total of 13 foreign divorce cases across the country.

38

Figure 2.5: Divorce by province and way of solemnisation, South Africa, 2003

WesternCape

EasternCape

NorthernCape

FreeState

KwaZulu-Natal

NorthWest

Gauteng Mpuma-langa

Limpopo Foreign Unspecified SouthAfrica

0

5 000

10 000

15 000

20 000

25 000

30 000

35 000

Religious 766 473 76 528 776 285 2 760 226 144 4 286 6 324Civil 4 678 1 872 511 1 183 3 161 1 471 7 534 857 832 8 1 537 23 644

Unspecified 105 210 35 97 153 84 591 25 55 1 242 1 598Total 5 549 2 555 622 1 808 4 090 1 840 885 1 108 1 031 13 2 065 31 566

Source: Statistics South Africa, Marriages and divorces 2003 Figure 2.6 shows divorces by population group and way of solemnisation in Limpopo in 2003. The following is shown in this figure:

• The highest number of divorces was registered among the black African population group, followed by the white, coloured and Indian/Asian population groups.

• Among all population groups, the most registered divorces were civil divorces. • The black African group registered the highest number of civil divorces among all

population groups, followed by the white and coloured group. • The white population group accounted for a high number (94) of divorce cases in

religious divorces. • The Indian/Asian population group accounted for the smallest number of divorce

cases (4) in the province.

Figure 2.6: Divorce by population group and way of solemnisation, Limpopo, 2003

Religious Civil Unspecif ied Total0

100

200

300

400

500

600Number

Black African 38 513 30 581Coloured 0 54 2 56

Indian/Asian 2 2 0 4White 94 182 8 284

Source: Statistics South Africa, Marriages and divorces 2003

39

Chapter 3: Migration Migration describes the movement of people into and out of countries, and within countries, from non-urban to urban areas or vice versa, or from one province to another.

3.1 Internal migration This refers to the movement of people into a specific part of the country from another part of the same country. Tables 3.1 and 3.2 show the number of people who migrated between provinces in South Africa for the five years from October 1996 to October 2001 respectively. In the case of more than one move by the same individual in the period only the last move is recorded.

Table 3.1: Internal migration by province, South Africa, 1996

Moved out of

Moved into

Western

Cape

Eastern

Cape Northern

Cape Free State

KwaZulu –Natal

North West

Gauteng

Mpuma-

langa Limpopo Total Western Cape - 200 760 27 346 10 827 18 500 3 810 58 842 3 312 1 774 325 171 Eastern Cape 21 219 - 4 162 6 729 10 955 1 388 22 330 1 617 928 69 328 Northern Cape 10 161 3 267 - 8 288 1 265 15 186 6 465 833 548 46 013 Free State 6 887 38 626 9 583 - 13 459 15 684 47 589 6 560 4 009 142 397 KwaZulu-Natal 8 102 64 915 1 719 8 641 - 2 549 49 954 11 964 2 974 150 818 North West 2 704 22 618 18 083 34 372 5 059 - 124 094 15 157 41 097 263 184 Gauteng 26 086 106 542 11 809 67 057 137 439 173 057 - 101 174 196 093 819 257 Mpumalanga 4 470 14 433 2 138 11 174 23 139 11 853 119 102 - 65 692 252 001 Limpopo 1 310 3 059 357 1 571 1 717 9 127 39 391 33 344 - 89 876 Total 80 939 454 220 75 197 148 659 211 533 232 654 467 767 173 961 313 115 2 158 045

Excluding undetermined Source: Statistics South Africa, Population Census 2001

40

Table 3.2: Internal migration by province, South Africa, 2001

Moved out of

Moved into Western

Cape Eastern

Cape Northern

Cape Free State

KwaZulu- Natal

North West Gauteng

Mpuma- langa Limpopo Total

Western Cape - 142 366 21 430 13 017 24 631 7 057 58 169 6 003 5 207 277 880 Eastern Cape 26 688 - 2 954 8 761 18 233 4 302 29 166 3 187 2 679 95 970 Northern Cape 9 649 4 142 - 6 417 1 893 16 360 6 829 1 486 1 385 48 161 Free State 5 235 16 810 7 635 - 8 948 10 327 25 205 5 720 4 133 84 013 KwaZulu-Natal 9 318 59 708 1 847 8 578 - 4 362 44 909 11 282 5 072 145 078 North West 3 769 21 227 7 529 20 119 7 910 - 53 413 11 560 21 374 146 901 Gauteng 32 602 90 032 11 060 60 031 132 948 108 719 - 88 950 171 142 695 484 Mpumalanga 3 133 10 087 1 429 6 991 18 852 6 354 34 721 - 37 739 119 306 Limpopo 2 491 6 368 1 719 4 380 7 065 11 602 39 652 18 143 - 91 420 Total 92 881 350 761 55 606 128 272 220 480 169 073 292 158 146 298 248 753 1 704 282

Excluding undetermined Source: Statistics South Africa, Population Census 2001

Figure 3.1 shows gains or losses for each province in each five-year period. From this figure it can be observed that:

• Losses in internal migration for Limpopo up to 1996 and up to 2001 were 313 115 and 248 753 respectively.

• Gauteng and Western Cape were the only provinces that gained substantial numbers of people for both periods.

Figure 3.1: Net loss or gain of people in each province through inter-provincial migration, South Africa, 1996–2001

WesternCape

EasternCape

NorthernCape

FreeState

Kw aZulu-Natal

NorthWest

Gauteng Mpuma-langa

Limpopo

0

100 000

200 000

300 000

400 000

-100 000

-200 000

-300 000

-400 000

1996 244 232 -384 892 -29 184 -6 262 -60 715 30 530 351 490 78 040 -223 2392001 184 999 -254 791 -7 445 -44 259 -75 333 -22 172 403 326 -26 992 -157 333

Source: Statistics South Africa, Population Census 1996 and 2001 Figure 3.2 shows the number of people who moved from other provinces into Limpopo in the five-year period up to 2001. The largest number came from Gauteng (39 652) whilst the smallest number came from Northern Cape (1 719).

41

Figure 3.2: Number of migrants to Limpopo from other provinces, 1996–2001

WesternCape

EasternCape

NorthernCape

FreeState

Kw aZulu-Natal

NorthWest

Gauteng Mpuma-langa

Total0

10 000

20 000

30 000

40 000

50 000

60 000

70 000

80 000

90 000

100 000

Net gain 2 491 6 368 1 719 4 380 7 065 11 602 39 652 18 143 91 420 Source: Statistics South Africa, Population Census 2001

3.2 International migration International migration is defined as the movement of people between South Africa and other countries. Table 3.3 below shows the region of birth of the population of South Africa in 2001.

Table 3.3: Population by region of birth, 2001

Country of birth

Eastern Cape

Free State Gauteng

KwaZulu- Natal Limpopo

Mpuma- langa

Northern Cape

North West

Western Cape

South Africa

South Africa 6 401 924 2 657 848 8 364 104 9 329 255 5 193 803 3 040 291 810 409 3 581 639 4 415 428 43 794 702 SADC countries* 15 425 43 424 305 460 44 692 73 583 75 435 10 891 79 970 38 799 687 683 Rest of Africa 3 527 673 21 639 5 876 1 055 1 042 252 1 154 6 602 41 819 Europe 11 948 3 121 113 451 37 223 2 137 4 794 821 3 958 50 860 228 314 Asia 2 511 1 238 20 439 5 241 2 526 869 165 1 937 5 959 40 886 North America 455 125 4 155 1 319 258 204 44 200 2 393 9 152 Central and South America 746 293 5 926 1 631 226 283 122 416 3 154 12 798 Australia and New Zealand 227 53 2 005 781 53 72 24 74 1 141 4 429 Total 6 436 763 2 706 775 8 837 178 9 426 017 5 273 642 3 122 990 822 727 3 669 349 4 524 335 44 819 778

* Southern African Development Community countries other than South Africa Source: Statistics South Africa, Population Census 2001 Figure 3.3 shows the distribution of non-South Africans born in each province by region of birth, using the data from the above table excluding the first row. Immigrants were primarily from other SADC countries (92,2%). The second largest number of migrants came from Asia (3,2%) and Europe (2,7%).

42

Figure 3.3: Distribution of persons in each province not born in South Africa by region of birth, 2001

WesternCape

EasternCape

NorthernCape

FreeState

Kw aZulu-Natal

NorthWest

Gauteng Mpuma-langa


0,0

20,0

40,0

60,0

80,0

100,0%

SADC countries 35,6 44,3 88,4 88,8 46,2 91,2 64,6 91,2 92,2 67,1Rest of Africa 6,1 10,1 2,0 1,4 6,1 1,3 4,6 1,3 1,3 4,1

Europe 46,7 34,3 6,7 6,4 38,5 4,5 24,0 5,8 2,7 22,3Asia 5,5 7,2 1,3 2,5 5,4 2,2 4,3 1,1 3,2 4,0

North America 2,2 1,3 0,4 0,3 1,4 0,2 0,9 0,2 0,3 0,9Central and South America 2,9 2,1 1,0 0,6 1,7 0,5 1,3 0,3 0,3 1,2Australia and New Zealand 1,0 0,7 0,2 0,1 0,8 0,1 0,4 0,1 0,1 0,4


43

Chapter 4: Health 4.1 Public hospitals Figure 4.1 shows the regional distribution of public hospitals in Limpopo. The following is depicted:

• Capricorn had 10 hospitals, followed by Mopani, Waterberg and Vhembe with 8 hospitals each.

• Sekhukhune had 5 hospitals and Bohlabela 4, which was the smallest number of hospitals in all the districts.

• Limpopo had a total number of 43 public hospitals.

Figure 4.1: Number of public hospitals by district council, Limpopo, 2004

Bohlabela Capricorn Mopani Sekhukhune Waterberg Vhembe Total0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45Number

No. of hospitals 4 10 8 5 8 8 43 Source: Department of Health, Limpopo 2004

4.2 Hospital beds Figure 4.2 shows that:

• Vhembe had 1 833 hospital beds, followed by Capricorn with 1 717 beds. • Waterberg had the least number of hospital beds (834) in the province. • In total, Limpopo had 7 630 hospital beds.

44

Figure 4.2: Number of hospital beds by district council, Limpopo, 2004

Bohlabela Capricorn Mopani Sekhukhune Vhembe Waterberg Total0

1 000

2 000

3 000

4 000

5 000

6 000

7 000

8 000

No. of beds 837 1 717 1 496 913 1 833 834 7 630 Source: Department of Health, Limpopo 2004

4.3 HIV/AIDS and malaria Figure 4.3 shows the HIV prevalence by province in South Africa from 2000 to 2002. It can be observed from this figure that:

• KwaZulu-Natal had the highest HIV infections in all three years, with 36,2% in 2000, 33,5% in 2001 and 36,5% in 2002, followed by Gauteng with 31,6% in 2002.

• Limpopo had 13,2% infected cases in 2000, 14,5% in 2001 and 15,6% in 2002. • Western Cape had the least number of cases in all three years, with 8,7% in 2000,

8,6% in 2001 and 12,4% in 2002.

Figure 4.3: HIV prevalence by province, South Africa, 2000–2002

WesternCape

EasternCape

NorthernCape

FreeState

Kw aZulu-Natal

NorthWest

Gauteng Mpuma-langa

Lim popo0,0

5,0

10,0

15,0

20,0

25,0

30,0

35,0

40,0%

2000 8,7 20,2 11,2 27,9 36,2 22,9 29,4 29,7 13,22001 8,6 21,7 15,8 30,1 33,5 25,2 29,4 29,4 14,52002 12,4 21,7 15,1 28,8 36,5 26,2 31,6 28,6 15,6

Source: Department of Health and Welfare, Limpopo 2002

45

Figure 4.4 below shows the percentage of people infected with HIV based on a sample of women attending public antenatal clinics in Limpopo in 2002. This figure shows that:

• In Mopani, 23% of the women who attended antenatal clinics were infected with HIV, followed by 19,9% in Waterberg.

• Vhembe had the lowest number of infected people (11,2% cases).

Figure 4.4: Percentage HIV prevalence by district council, Limpopo, 2002

Bohlabela Capricorn Mopani Sekhukhune Vhembe Waterberg Limpopo0,0

5,0

10,0

15,0

20,0

25,0%

% 12,7 13,9 23,0 15,0 11,2 19,9 15,6 Source: Department of Health, Limpopo 2002 Figure 4.5 shows malaria prevalence by month in Limpopo during the period 2000 to 2002. It is observed from this figure that:

• In November 2000, Limpopo had the highest number of reported cases of malaria (2 241), followed by 1 786 reported cases in October.

• In 2001, the highest number of reported cases were in January (1 144 cases) followed by 1 019 cases in May.

• In 2002, there were 852 reported cases in January, followed by 745 reported cases in March.

• In all the three years, the months of July and August had the lowest number of reported cases.

46

Figure 4.5: Malaria prevalence by month, Limpopo 2000–2002

Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec0

500

1 000

1 500

2 000

2 500

2000 818 888 455 1 085 386 147 96 120 207 1 786 2 241 1 2582001 1 144 888 455 622 1 019 168 59 33 549 706 948 6062002 852 676 745 546 273 75 26 26 493 290 254 325

Source: Department of Health and Welfare 2000–2002

47

Chapter 5: Education 5.1 Educational attainment Figure 5.1 looks at the proportions of people aged 20 and above in each province in each level of education category.

• In all provinces except Mpumalanga and Limpopo, the largest proportion of persons aged 20 and above had some secondary education, as opposed to one of the other levels listed. In Limpopo, the largest proportion had some secondary education, whilst in Mpumalanga, the largest proportion had no education.

• Gauteng had the highest proportion of persons with Grade 12 or higher (40,6%), followed by Western Cape (34,6%), while Eastern Cape had the lowest (20,4%), followed by Limpopo (20,8%). The national average was 28,8%.

Figure 5.1: Percentage distribution of persons aged 20+ within each province by level of education, 2001

WesternCape

EasternCape

NorthernCape

FreeState

Kw aZulu-Natal

NorthWest

Gauteng Mpuma-langa

Lim popo SouthAfr ic a

0,0%

20,0%

40,0%

60,0%

80,0%

100,0%%

Tertiary 11,2 6,3 6,1 6,3 6,9 5,9 12,6 5,9 6,8 8,4Std 10/Grade 12 23,4 14,1 16,5 17,5 19,8 18,5 28,0 18,2 14,0 20,4Some secondary 36,5 29,6 29,9 30,7 28,8 29,0 34,3 26,6 26,1 30,8

Complete primary 7,9 7,4 8,3 7,8 5,7 6,8 5,5 5,9 5,5 6,4Some primary 15,2 19,8 21,0 21,7 16,9 20,0 11,2 15,9 14,1 16,0No schooling 5,7 22,8 18,2 16,0 21,9 19,9 8,4 27,5 33,4 17,9

Source: Statistics South Africa, Population Census 2001 Table 5.1 looks at the level of education of each population group for Limpopo and the country as a whole.

• Approximately 70% of the white population aged 20 and above in both Limpopo and South Africa as a whole had at least Grade 12 (the categories of Grade 12 and tertiary taken together).

• Among the black African people of this age group, 6,2% in Limpopo had tertiary education, compared with 5,2% nationally.

48

Table 5.1: Percentage population aged 20 years and above in each population group by educational level, Limpopo and South Africa, 2001

Black African

Coloured

Indian/Asian

White

Total

Level of education Limpopo SA Limpopo SA Limpopo SA Limpopo SA Limpopo SA No schooling 34,7 22,3 12,8 8,3 4,8 5,3 2,1 1,4 33,4 17,9 Some primary 14,6 18,5 10,4 18,4 5,6 7,7 1,5 1,2 14,1 16,0 Complete primary 5,7 6,9 5,2 9,8 3,2 4,2 0,9 0,8 5,5 6,4 Some secondary 26,0 30,4 35,3 40,1 27,6 33,0 28,0 25,9 26,1 30,8 Std 10/Grade 12 12,9 16,8 25,7 18,5 36,9 34,9 43,3 40,9 14,0 20,4 Tertiary 6,2 5,2 10,7 4,9 21,8 14,9 24,1 29,8 6,8 8,4 Total 100,0 100,0 100,0 100,0 100,0 100,0 100,0 100,0 100,0 100,0

Source: Statistics South Africa, Population Census 2001 Figure 5.2 looks at the same variable by gender.

• Considerably more females than males in Limpopo aged 20 and above had no formal schooling (38,1% as against 26,6%). The proportion of males with some primary education (15,8%) is correspondingly larger than that of females (12,9%).

• Slightly more males than females had Grade 12 or above.

Figure 5.2: Percentage population aged 20 years and above by level of education and gender, Limpopo, 2001

No schooling Some primary Completeprimary

Somesecondary

Standard 10/Grade 12

Tertiary0,0

5,0

10,0

15,0

20,0

25,0

30,0

35,0

40,0%

Male 26,6 15,8 6,1 28,5 15,5 7,6Female 38,1 12,9 5,1 24,5 13,1 6,3 Source: Statistics South Africa, Population Census 2001

5.2 Literacy In what follows, a person who is 15 years or older with seven years of schooling is defined as functionally literate. The main difference between the data shown here and the data shown above is that all educational levels from complete primary upwards are grouped for a purpose, as we are only interested in the attainment of Grade 7; and the population is larger, including all those who could have completed primary school, namely those aged 15 and above. Figure 5.3 looks at the proportions in each province in 2001 with no schooling, some primary schooling and at least complete primary schooling, the latter group being defined as functionally literate.

• In South Africa, 68,5% of persons aged 15 years or older were functionally literate, while 15,5% had no schooling and 16,0% had some primary education.

49

• Limpopo had a literacy rate of 58,7%, which is lowest of all provinces. Gauteng had the highest literacy rate (81,4%), followed by Western Cape (80,4%).

Figure 5.3: Proportion of persons aged 15 years and older in each province that were functionally literate, 2001

WesternCape

EasternCape

NorthernCape

FreeState

Kw aZulu-Natal

NorthWest

Gauteng Mpuma-langa

Lim popo SouthAfr ic a

0,0

20,0

40,0

60,0

80,0

100,0%

Literate 80,4 60,1 63,7 65,3 64,8 62,9 81,4 60,7 58,7 68,5Grade 1-6 14,5 20,8 20,4 21,0 16,5 19,7 11,0 16,2 14,4 16,0

No schooling 5,1 19,1 16,0 13,7 18,6 17,4 7,6 23,1 26,9 15,5 Source: Statistics South Africa, Population Census 2001 Table 5.2 below shows the number of people aged 20 or older with no formal schooling by province and population group in South Africa in 2001. Among black Africans, Limpopo had the second highest number of those with no formal schooling.

Table 5.2: Number of people aged 20+ with no formal schooling by province and population group, South Africa, 2001

Province Black African Coloured Indian/Asian White Total Western Cape 68 192 90 476 643 3 471 162 781 Eastern Cape 715 922 25 300 313 2 165 743 700 Northern Cape 40 985 46 534 105 1 055 88 680 Free State 240 686 7 859 85 2 778 251 408 KwaZulu-Natal 1 059 131 3 503 32 076 5 581 1 100 291 North West 414 394 6 072 226 3 095 423 787 Gauteng 468 467 11 352 5 299 19 501 504 619 Mpumalanga 451 825 1 551 355 3 016 456 747 Limpopo 832 633 728 274 1 850 835 485 South Africa 4 292 235 193 375 39 375 42 513 4 567 497


5.3 Schools and school data Table 5.3 shows that in 2001:

• Eastern Cape had the highest number of schools in South Africa (6 087), followed by KwaZulu-Natal (5 751) and Limpopo (4 631).

• Northern Cape had the lowest number of schools in South Africa (478).

50

These numbers reflect the provincial populations.

Table 5.3: Number of schools in each province, 2001

Province N % Western Cape 1 602 5,8 Eastern Cape 6 087 22,2 Northern Cape 478 1,7 Free State 2 459 9,0 KwaZulu-Natal 5 751 20,9 North West 2 311 8,4 Gauteng 2 213 8,1 Mpumalanga 1 926 7,0 Limpopo 4 631 16,9 South Africa 27 458 100,0

Source: National Department of Education 2001 The next table gives the breakdown of Limpopo schools by district municipality. Vhembe had the highest proportion of schools in Limpopo (23,4%), while Bohlabela had the lowest proportion (7,8%).

Table 5.4: Distribution of schools by district municipality, Limpopo, 2002

District municipality N % Bohlabela 336 7,8 Capricorn 914 21,2 Mopani 737 17,1 Sekhukhune 758 17,6 Vhembe 1 011 23,4 Waterberg 563 13,0 Limpopo 4 319 100,0

Source: Department of Education 2004

5.4 Teaching personnel Limpopo had a total of 40 917 educators, 15 916 being male educators and 25 001 female educators in 2004. Figure 5.4 below shows the regional distribution of teaching personnel in Limpopo:

• Capricorn had the highest total number of educators (9 674), followed by Sekhukhune (8 055), Vhembe (6 907), and Mopani (6 793). Waterberg had the lowest total number of educators (4 519), followed by Bohlabela (4 969).

• Capricorn had the highest number of both male and female personnel, followed by Sekhukhune in the case of male personnel and Vhembe in the case of female personnel.

51

Figure 5.4: Distribution of teaching personnel by gender and district council, Limpopo, 2004

Bohlabela Capricorn Mopani Sekhukhune Vhembe Waterberg0

2 000

4 000

6 000

8 000

10 000

Male 2 025 3 894 3 173 3 579 1 379 1 866Female 2 944 5 780 3 620 4 476 5 528 2 653

Total 4 969 9 674 6 793 8 055 6 907 4 519 Source: Department of Education 2004

5.5 School attendance Figure 5.5 below shows the number of learners by district council in Limpopo. The following is observed:

• Limpopo had a total of 1 935 918 learners who attended school in 2004, of which 962 723 were female learners and 973 195 male learners. Vhembe had the highest total number of learners in the province, followed by Capricorn, Mopani, and Sekhukhune.

• Waterberg had the smallest total number of learners, followed by Bohlabela. • Vhembe had the highest number of both male and female learners, followed by

Capricorn, Mopani, Sekhukhune, Bohlabela, and Waterberg.

Figure 5.5: Number of learners by district council, Limpopo, 2004

Bohlabela Capricorn Mopani Vhembe Sekhukhune Waterberg0

50 000

100 000

150 000

200 000

250 000

300 000

350 000

400 000

450 000

500 000

Female 97 443 197 491 196 826 228 543 153 856 88 564 Male 97 355 201 793 197 102 233 038 153 470 90 437Total 194 798 399 284 393 928 461 581 307 326 179 001

Source: Department of Education 2004

52

5.6 Grade 12 pass rate Table 5.5 shows that in 2003:

• In South Africa as a whole 440 267 candidates wrote the senior certificate examination and about 73,3% passed, 18,6% with endorsement (university entrance).

• Northern Cape had the best pass rate (90,7%), followed by Western Cape (87,1%) and then Gauteng (81,5%).

• Limpopo's pass rate was in the lower ranks (70,0%) followed by Eastern Cape (60,0%) and Mpumalanga (58,2%).

• Generally, within provinces, males had higher pass rates than females. Only in Gauteng and KwaZulu-Natal did females have higher pass rates with endorsement than males.

53

Table 5.5: Senior certificate results by province, South Africa, 2003

Candidates passed Gender Total who wrote Failed Passed With endorsement Province N %* N %** N %** N %** Western Cape Male 17 095 44,1 1 941 11,4 15 154 88,6 4 611 27,0 Female 21 655 55,9 3 040 14,0 18 615 86,0 5 712 26,4 Total 38 750 4 981 12,9 33 769 87,1 10 323 26,6 Eastern Cape Male 27 390 43,9 10 501 38,3 16 887 61,7 2 768 10,1 Female 35 067 56,1 14 484 41,3 20 581 58,7 3 185 9,1 Total 62 457 24 985 40,0 37 468 60,0 5 953 9,5 Northern Male 2 912 46,6 234 8,0 2 677 92,0 582 20,0 Cape Female 3 338 53,4 348 10,4 2 990 89,6 645 19,3 Total 6 250 582 9,3 5 667 90,7 1 227 19,6 Free State Male 11 400 48,2 2 043 17,9 9 357 82,1 2 779 24,4 Female 12 256 51,8 2 697 22,0 9 559 78,0 2 619 21,4 Total 23 656 4 740 20,0 18 916 80,0 5 398 22,8 KwaZulu- Male 45 457 46,7 10 332 22,8 35 060 77,2 8 951 19,7 Natal Female 51 910 53,3 11 801 22,8 40 017 77,2 10 936 21,1 Total 97 367 22 133 22,8 75 077 77,2 19 887 20,5 North West Male 16 538 46,5 4 531 27,4 12 004 72,6 2 676 16,2 Female 19 029 53,5 5 974 31,4 13 051 68,6 2 763 14,5 Total 35 569 10 505 29,5 25 055 70,5 5 439 15,3 Gauteng Male 31 365 45,9 5 676 18,1 25 689 81,9 7 127 22,7 Female 36 920 54,1 6 988 18,9 29 932 81,1 8 795 23,8 Total 68 285 12 664 18,5 55 621 81,5 15 922 23,3 Mpumalanga Male 17 931 45,9 6 943 38,7 10 986 61,3 2 491 13,9 Female 21 101 54,1 9 387 44,5 11 714 55,5 2 349 11,1 Total 39 032 16 330 41,8 22 700 58,2 4 840 12,4 Limpopo Male 31 320 45,5 8 007 25,6 23 313 74,4 7 139 22,8 Female 37 583 54,5 12 677 33,7 24 906 66,3 5 882 15,7 Total 68 903 20 684 30,0 48 219 70,0 13 021 18,9 South Africa Male 201 408 45,7 50 208 42,7 151 127 75,1 39 124 19,4 Female 238 859 54,3 67 396 57,3 171 365 71,8 42 886 18,0 Total 440 267 100,0 117 604 100,0 322 492 73,3 82 010 18,6 * These percentages show the male:female proportions ** These percentages show the proportion out of the total that wrote Source: Department of Education 2003

54

5.7 Drop-out Figure 5.6 shows that:

• A high number of males dropped out of school from grade 1 to grade 7. • A high number of females dropped out of school from grade 8 to grade 12. There

was also a high female drop-out in Grade R learners. • The highest total number of drop-outs were in Grade 10, followed by Grade 11,

Grade 9, and Grade 8.

Figure 5.6: Drop-out by grade and sex, Limpopo, 2003

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 140

1 000

2 000

3 000

4 000

5 000

6 000

Female 297 530 378 503 673 685 742 720 2 063 2 284 2 954 2 495 1 022 24Male 269 720 510 740 922 990 904 779 1 752 1 864 2 234 1 807 612 14Total 566 1 250 888 1 243 1 595 1 675 1 646 1 499 3 815 4 148 5 188 4 302 1 634 38

Grade 0 – Grade R Grade 14 – Learners with Special Educational Needs (LSEN) Source: Department of Education 2003

55

Chapter 6: Safety and security 6.1 Number of police stations Limpopo had 99 police stations in 2004. Figure 6.1 shows the regional distribution of police stations in Limpopo. This comparison shows that:

• Waterberg had the highest number of police stations (27), followed by Vhembe district with 22 stations, Sekhukhune (17), and Capricorn (13).

• Bohlabela had the smallest number of police stations (8) in the province.

Figure 6.1: Distribution of police stations by district council, Limpopo, 2004

Bohlabela Capricorn Mopani Vhembe Sekhukhune Waterberg Total0

20

40

60

80

100

Number 8 13 12 22 17 27 99 Source: South African Police Service 2004

6.2 Reported crimes

6.2.1 Murder and attempted murder Table 6.1 and Figure 6.2 show that:

• Murder and attempted murder cases had dropped since 1994. • 1994 was the year that recorded the highest rate of murder and attempted murder

cases. • There were 1 078 reported murder cases in 1994 compared to 741 in 2002. • 2 359 attempted murder cases were reported in 1994 compared to 1 052 in 2002.

56

Table 6.1: Murder and attempted murder, 1994–2002

Crime Category

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

Murder 1 078 916 920 981 933 911 799 814 741 Attempted murder 2 359 1 636 1 748 1 728 1 544 1 475 1 601 1 618 1 052

Source: South African Police Service 2002

Figure 6.2: Murder and attempted murder, 1994–2002


6.2.2 Robbery Figure 6.3 shows that:

• There were upward and downward movements of all robbery cases since 1994. • About 3 985 cases of robbery with aggravating circumstances were reported in 1994,

compared to 3 292 in 2002. • The highest numbers of bank robbery and robbery of cash in transit cases were

reported in 1996, with a total of 44 in the province. • The highest number of robbery of cash in transit cases was recorded in 1996, with

127 reported cases, compared to 19 cases in 2002. • The highest number of other robbery cases was reported in 2002, with 5 077 cases. • The highest number of robbery with aggravating circumstances occurred in 1994,

followed by 2001 and 2002.

%

%

%% %

% %% %

!

!! ! ! ! !

! !

1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 20020

500

1 000

1 500

2 000

2 500

Murder Attempted murder! %

57

Figure 6.3: Robbery by year, Limpopo 1994–2002

1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 20020

1 000

2 000

3 000

4 000

5 000

6 000

7 000

8 000

9 000

Other robbery 1 736 1 861 2 445 2 562 2 082 3 184 4 199 4 678 5 077Bank robbery 0 0 44 20 19 31 37 18 6

Robbery of cash in transit 0 0 127 22 22 13 26 15 19

Robbery w ith aggravating circumstances 3 985 3 104 2 866 2 428 2 657 2 606 3 164 3 315 3 292


6.2.3 Rape and related crime in Limpopo Figure 6.4 shows rape and related crime cases from 1994 to 2002. It is shown that:

• In general, all rape and related cases increased since 1994, with assault cases leading.

• Child abuse cases also increased since 1994, with 301 reported cases in 2002. • There were 4 433 reported rape cases in 2002, compared to 2 643 in 1994. • Crimen injuria cases increased since 1994, with 5 242 reported cases in 2002

compared to 2 199 in 1994.

Figure 6.4: Rape and related crime, Limpopo 1994–2002

1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 20020

5 000

10 000

15 000

20 000

25 000

Common assault 13 382 13 812 14 156 15 003 15 139 16 337 19 026 21 149 21 466Assault w ith the intent to inflict

grievous bodily harm 17 056 18 329 19 027 19 625 20 325 22 073 24 026 24 263 22 386

Abduction 345 248 121 194 231 211 318 260 276Kidnapping 174 213 258 213 356 258 297 316 157

Child abuse 265 300 187 260 251 248 261 270 301Crimen injuria 2 199 2 554 2 683 3 023 3 319 3 828 4 919 6 205 5 242

Indecent assault 108 159 168 208 145 167 200 218 278Rape 2 643 3 051 3 262 3 711 3 831 3 932 4 195 4 802 4 433


58

6.2.4 Burglary Table 6.2 shows burglaries by year for Limpopo from 1995 to 2004. It is evident that:

• Burglaries at residential premises increased from 1994 to 2002. • Theft of motor vehicles and motorcycles decreased with 1 699 reported cases in

2002. • The rate of shoplifting remained fairly constant, except for 2001 and 2002 where a

noticeable increase could be detected.

Table 6.2: Burglary by year, Limpopo 1994–2002

Crime Category

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

Burglary at non- residential premises 5 308 4 784 5 062 6 456 6 033 6 244 7 017 6 859 6 067 Burglary at residential premises 8 088 10 426 11 553 11 377 12 074 13 048 16 404 16 332 15 921 Stock theft 1 079 2 033 1 877 1 926 1 611 1 566 1 571 1 901 2 154 Shoplifting 3 389 3 211 3 088 3 465 3 217 3 171 3 578 3 852 4 068

Theft of motor vehicle and motorcycle 2 021 2 005 2 351 2 179 2 678 2 658 2 117 1 957 1 699 Theft out of or from motor vehicle 4 045 4 644 6471 5 972 6 445 6 541 7 154 6 943 6 409 All theft not mentioned elsewhere 18 414 18 169 18 639 19 882 22 171 23 015 27 816 28 051 28 023 Arson 889 821 820 1 047 948 838 747 935 905 Malicious damage to property 5 532 6 015 6 514 7 053 6 685 6 921 7 565 8 007 8 451 Fraud 2 279 2 564 2 077 2 652 2 795 2 525 2 448 2 494 2 218


59

Chapter 7: The labour market The data in this chapter are mostly drawn from the September 2004 Labour Force Survey (LFS). The Labour Force Survey is the official source of labour market statistics. The census questionnaire allows for collecting data for small areas of the country and is extensive in coverage, but it does not easily allow for collecting in-depth information and for probing, as required to obtain accurate unemployment data. Moreover the LFS reported here is much more recent than the 2001 census. However, for breakdowns lower than provincial level, 2001 census data have been used, as these breakdowns cannot be obtained from the sample size of the LFS. The official definition of unemployment has been used throughout.

7.1 Labour market status Table 7.1 examines the labour market status of the population of working age in Limpopo and South Africa. Numbers are given to the nearest thousand, again as a result of the sample size. It shows that:

• Of the working age population in Limpopo about 28,2% were employed in 2004, compared to 39,7% in South Africa as a whole.

• The unemployed comprised 10,8% in Limpopo and 14,1% in the country as a whole. • The proportion of the population that was not economically active was 61,0% in

Limpopo in 2004 compared with 46,2% nationally. The comparison with South Africa shows that employment in Limpopo was scarce; the higher proportion of not economically active people probably reflects discouraged workseekers, that is, people who did not qualify to be counted as unemployed as they had not taken active steps to seek work.

Table 7.1: Working-age population by labour market status, Limpopo and South Africa, September 2004

Limpopo South Africa Labour market status N ('000) % N ('000) % Employed 883 28,2 11 643 39,7 Unemployed 339 10,8 4 135 14,1 NEA 1 912 61,0 13 527 46,2 Total 3 134 100,0 29 305 100,0 NEA = Not economically active Source: Statistics South Africa, Labour Force Survey, September 2004 We now examine the labour market status within each population group, again for Limpopo and South Africa. Table 7.2 shows that:

• Of the coloured people of working age in Limpopo, 70,1% was employed, followed by the white (64,1%), Indian/Asian (42,8%) and black African (26,9%) groups.

• 11,0% of black African people were unemployed, as were 10,0% of the coloured and 8,0% of the white population groups.

60

• 62,1% of black African people and 57,2% of the Indian/Asian population in Limpopo were not economically active in 2004, whereas only 27,8% of white people were not economically active.

Table 7.2: Labour market status of the working-age population in each population group, Limpopo, 2004

Black African Coloured Indian/Asian White Total Status N ('000) % N ('000) % N ('000) % N ('000) % N ('000) % Employed 813 26,9 1 70,1 6 42,8 63 64,1 883 28,2 Unemployed 331 11,0 * 10,0 * * 8 8,0 340 10,8 NEA 1 877 62,1 * 20,0 7 57,2 28 27,8 1 912 61,0 Total 3 021 100,0 2 100,0 13 100,0 100 100,0 3 134 100,0 * = 500 or fewer NEA = not economically active Source: Statistics South Africa, Labour Force Survey, September 2004 Figure 7.1 shows the distribution of the population of working age in each district municipality of Limpopo. Note that these data are from Census 2001, for the reason explained above.

• The lowest percentage of unemployed residents was found in Sekhukhune, which also had the largest proportion of not economically active people. Again, this suggests discouraged workseekers.

• Conversely the district municipality with the largest proportion of its working-age population employed showed the lowest proportion of not economically active people.

Figure 7.1: Working-age population (15–65) by employment status in each district council, Limpopo, 2001

10,0

16,5

26,021,2 23,3

38,1

22,4 23,4 21,7 23,920,6

17,0

67,7

60,1

52,254,9 56,1

44,9

Sekhukhune Bohlabela Mopani Vhembe Capricorn Waterberg0,0

10,0

20,0

30,0

40,0

50,0

60,0

70,0

80,0%

Employed Unemployed NEA


61

7.2 Formal and informal sector employment Table 7.3 shows employment in the formal and informal sectors in Limpopo and South Africa. The following is observed:

• Of the employed, a greater percentage in Limpopo worked in the informal sector (33,5%) than in the country as a whole (22,2%). This reflects the relative lack of formal sector employment opportunities in Limpopo.

Table 7.3: Employment in the formal and informal sector, Limpopo and South Africa, September 2004

Limpopo South Africa Sector N ('000) % N ('000) % Formal 543 66,5 8 318 77,8 Informal 273 33,5 2 372 22,2 Total 816 100,0 10 690 100,0

Source: Statistics South Africa, Labour Force Survey, September 2004

7.3 Industry and occupation of the employed Table 7.4 shows industry and income of the employed population in Limpopo. It can be seen that:

• The wholesale and retail trade was the largest employer in Limpopo, with 28,3% of the total number of employed people, followed by community, social and personal services with 21,3%.

• Agriculture, hunting, forestry and fishing accounted for 12,9% of employment in the province.

• Electricity, gas and water supply provided the smallest proportion (0,9%) of the workforce with employment.

Table 7.4: Employment by industry, Limpopo, September 2004

Industry N ('000) % Agriculture, hunting, forestry and fishing 114 12,9 Mining and quarrying 61 7,0 Manufacturing 67 7,6 Electricity, gas and water supply 8 0,9 Construction 58 6,5 Wholesale and retail trade 250 28,3 Transport, storage and communication 29 3,2 Financial intermediation, insurance, real estate and business services 42 4,8 Community, social and personal services 188 21,3 Private households with employed persons 65 7,4 Total 883 100,0


62

Table 7.5 and Figure 7.2 show the distribution of the employed by occupational category in Limpopo.

• Elementary positions accounted for the largest proportion of the working population in Limpopo (32,6%), followed by service workers and shop and market sales workers with 14,6%.

• Legislators, senior officials and managers accounted for about 4,2% of the workforce.

• Skilled agricultural and fishery workers constituted the smallest proportion (1,9%) of employed people.

Table 7.5: Employment by occupational category, Limpopo, 2004

Occupation N ('000) % Legislators, senior officials and managers 37 4,2 Professionals 32 3,6 Technical and associate professionals 84 9,5 Clerks 50 5,6 Service workers and shop and market sales 129 14,6 Skilled agricultural and fishery workers 16 1,9 Craft and related trades workers 112 12,7 Plant and machine operators and assemblers 77 8,7 Elementary occupations 288 32,6 Domestic workers 58 6,6 Total 883 100,0 Excluding unspecified and not adequately defined Source: Statistics South Africa, Labour Force Survey, September 2004

Figure 7.2: Employment by occupational category, Limpopo, 2004

Excluding unspecified and not adequately defined Source: Statistics South Africa, Labour Force Survey, September 2004

Legislators, seniorofficials and managers 4,2%

Professionals3,6%

Technical andassociate professionals

9,5%

Clerks5,6%

Service workers andshop and market sales workers 14,6%

Skilled agricultural and fishery workers

1,9%

Craft and related trades workers 12,7%

Plant and machine operators and assemblers 8,7%

Elementary occupations32,6%

Domestic workers6,6%

63

7.4 Income of the employed Figure 7.3 shows that:

• Of the employed in Limpopo in September 2004, 5,8% had no income, compared to 3,3% in South Africa. This implies they were working for payment in kind or for family gain.

• Of those who had an income, 24,6% earned between R2 501 and R8 000, compared to 27,2% nationally, followed by 22,2% of those earning between R501 and R1 000, compared to 19,1% nationally.

Figure 7.3: Percentage distribution of gross monthly income of the employed, Limpopo and South Africa, September 2004

4,2

8,9

24,6

27,2

16,1

26,7

22,2

19,1

27,1

14,8

5,8

3,3

Limpopo South Africa0,0

5,0

10,0

15,0

20,0

25,0

30,0%

No income R1-R500 R501-R1000 R1001-R2500 R2500-R8000 R8001+ Excluding unspecified and refusals Source: Statistics South Africa, Labour Force Survey, September 2004

7.5 Unemployment Table 7.6 shows that:

• Eastern Cape had the highest unemployment rate (29,6%) in the country, followed by KwaZulu-Natal with 28,7%.

• Limpopo had an unemployment rate of 27,8%. • Western Cape had the lowest unemployment rate (18,6%).

64

Table 7.6: Unemployment rate by province, September 2004

Province Unemployed

N ('000)

Total economically active

N ('000) Unemployment

rate Western Cape 387 2 078 18,6 Eastern Cape 536 1 814 29,6 Northern Cape 74 303 24,5 Free State 311 1 089 28,6 KwaZulu-Natal 841 2 933 28,7 North West 325 1 159 28,0 Gauteng 1 062 4 132 25,7 Mpumalanga 260 1 049 24,8 Limpopo 339 1 222 27,8 Total 4 135 15 778 26,2


65

Chapter 8: Households and household services This chapter deals with households and services provided to those households. Data are from the General Household Survey of 2004, except where information is given at district municipality level, for which Census 2001 data are used.

8.1 Distribution of households by province Table 8.1 and Figure 8.1 show the distribution of total households by province in South Africa in 2004, as background to the analyses that follow. The following observations are made:

• There were approximately 12 194 000 households in South Africa in 2004. • Gauteng had the highest number of households in 2004 (22,5%), followed by

KwaZulu-Natal (19,5%) and Eastern Cape (13,5%). • Limpopo comprised 10,5% of the total households in South Africa. • Even though Northern Cape was the largest province in the country, it had the

smallest number of households (1,9%).

Table 8.1: Distribution of total households by province, South Africa, 2004

Province N ('000) % Western Cape 1 228 10,1 Eastern Cape 1 651 13,5 Northern Cape 236 1,9 Free State 844 6,9 KwaZulu-Natal 2 380 19,5 North West 1 022 8,4 Gauteng 2 747 22,5 Mpumalanga 805 6,6 Limpopo 1 283 10,5 South Africa 12 194 100,0

Source: Statistics South Africa, General Household Survey 2004

66

Figure 8.1: Percentage distribution of total households by province, 2004


8.2 Dwelling type Table 8.2 shows the type of dwelling by population group in Limpopo in 2004.

• Of the black African population, 79,2% lived in houses or brick structures on a separate stand, whereas 11,4% lived in traditional dwellings or huts. followed by 84,5% of the white population.

• The majority of the white population (84,5%) lived in houses or brick structures on a separate stand.

• Only 7,9% of the white population lived in flats or in an apartment in a block of flats, with the black African, coloured and Indian/Asian population accounting for 0,0%.

WesternCape10,1%

EasternCape13,5%

NorthernCape1,9%

FreeState6,9%

KwaZulu-Natal19,5%

NorthWest8,4%

Gauteng22,5%

Mpuma-langa6,6%

Limpopo10,5%

67

Table 8.2: Households by type of dwelling and population group, Limpopo, 2004

Black African Coloured Indian/Asian White Total

Type of dwelling N

('000) % N

('000) % N

('000) % N

('000) % N

('000) % Dwelling/house/brick structure on a separate stand or yard on a farm 983 79,2 1 100,0 1 100,0 33 84,5 1 019 79,4 Traditional dwelling/hut/structure made of traditional materials 142 11,4 0,0 0,0 0,0 142 11,1 Flat/apartment in a block of flats 1 0,0 0,0 0,0 3 7,9 4 0,3 Town/ cluster/ semi- detached house (simplex/duplex/ triplex) 0,0 0,0 0,0 0 0,3 0 0,0 Unit in retirement village 0,0 0,0 0,0 2 3,9 2 0,1 Dwelling/house/flat/room in backyard 3 0,2 0,0 0,0 0,0 3 0,2 Informal dwelling/ shack in backyard 24 1,9 0,0 0,0 0 0,7 24 1,9 Informal dwelling/ shack not in backyard 26 2,1 0,0 0,0 0,0 26 2,1 Room/flatlet 60 4,9 0,0 0,0 0 1,2 61 4,7 Caravan/tent 1 0,1 0,0 0,0 0,0 1 0,1 Other 1 0,1 0,0 0,0 1 1,6 1 0,1 Unspecified 0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0 0,0 Total 1 241 100,0 1 100,0 1 100,0 39 100,0 1 283 100,0


8.3 Female-headed households Figure 8.2 shows the number of female-headed households by age and district council in Limpopo. The figure indicates that:

• In Limpopo, females in the age group 15–49 years headed the highest number of households, followed by those in the age group 50–64 years, and then 65+ years. The lowest proportion of female-headed households was in the age group 0–14 years.

• Mopani and Bohlabela had the highest number of households headed by females in the age group 0–14 years, followed by Capricorn and Vhembe. Waterberg had the lowest number of households headed by females.

• Mopani had the highest number of households headed by females in the age group 15–49 years, followed by Bohlabela and Waterberg. Sekhukhune had the lowest number of female-headed households in this age group.

• Sekhukhune had the highest number of households headed by females in the age group 50–64 years, followed by Capricorn and Waterberg. Vhembe had the lowest number of households headed by females in the same age group.

• Sekhukhune had the highest number of households headed by females in the age group 65+ years, followed by Capricorn and Vhembe. Mopani had the lowest number of households headed by females in this age group.

68

Figure 8.2: Female-headed households by age and district council, Limpopo, 2001

Sekhukune Bohlabela Mopani Vhembe Capricorn Waterberg0,0

10,0

20,0

30,0

40,0

50,0

60,0

70,0

80,0%

0-14 0,3 0,6 0,6 0,4 0,4 0,315-49 52,6 65,1 68,0 63,1 59,2 63,950-64 25,0 17,9 18,0 17,5 20,6 19,4

65+ 22,1 16,4 13,4 19,0 19,8 16,4 Source: Statistics South Africa, Population Census 2001

8.4 Child-headed households Figure 8.3 shows that:

• Children between the ages of 0–18 headed 894 976 households in Limpopo. • Children headed 214 283 households in Vhembe, followed by Capricorn

(91 971 180), Mopani (165 716) and Sekhukhune (124 131). • Waterberg had the lowest number of households headed by children (92 351),

followed by Bohlabela (101 376).

Figure 8.3: Child-headed households (0–18 years) by district council, Limpopo, 2001

Sekhukhune Bohlabela Mopani Vhembe Capricorn Waterberg0

50 000

100 000

150 000

200 000

250 000

Number 124 131 101 376 165 716 214 283 197 118 92 351 Source: Statistics South Africa, Population Census 2001

69

8.5 Energy Table 8.3 and Figure 8.4 show that:

• Of the households in Limpopo, 64,0% used electricity for lighting, which is a lower percentage when compared with the national percentage of 70,2%.

• Candles for lighting were used by 27,6% of households in Limpopo compared to 22,4% nationally.

• Paraffin was used by 7,4% of households for lighting, which is higher than the national percentage (6,6%).

Table 8.3: Households by source of energy for lighting, Limpopo and South Africa, 2001

Limpopo South Africa Source N % N % Electricity 800 902 64,0 8 274 455 70,2 Gas 2 532 0,2 34 935 0,3 Paraffin 92 781 7,4 773 370 6,6 Candles 345 311 27,6 2 638 013 22,4 Solar 3 340 0,3 25 137 0,2 Other 6 332 0,5 35 714 0,3 NA 33 0,0 1 011 0,0 Total 1 251 229 100,0 11 782 635 100,0


Figure 8.4: Households by source of energy for lighting, Limpopo and South Africa, 2001

Electricity Gas Paraff in Candles Solar Other0,0

20,0

40,0

60,0

80,0%

Limpopo 64,0 0,2 7,4 27,6 0,3 0,5South Africa 70,2 0,3 6,6 22,4 0,2 0,3


70

Table 8.4 and Figure 8.5 show households by source of energy for lighting by district council in Limpopo.

• In Capricorn, 13,5% of households used electricity for lighting followed by 13,4% in Vhembe.

• In all the district councils, gas was not used by many households as a source of lighting.

• In Vhembe, 3,1% of households used paraffin for lighting, followed by 1,5% in Capricorn.

• Candles for lighting were used by 7,6% of households in Capricorn, followed by 5,11% in Vhembe.

• Solar power was not used by many households as a source of lighting.

Table 8.4: Households by source of energy for lighting by district council, Limpopo, 2001

Electricity Gas Paraffin Candles Solar Other District N % N % N % N % N % N % Sekhukhune 89 920 7,2 297 0,0 8 029 0,6 52 641 4,2 328 0,0 987 0,1 Bohlabela 100 535 8,0 297 0,0 7 697 0,6 23 928 1,9 233 0,0 649 0,1 Mopani 163 866 13,1 538 0,0 15 332 1,2 56 094 4,5 374 0,0 1 299 0,1 Vhembe 167 662 13,4 677 0,1 38 959 3,1 63 944 5,1 1 500 0,1 1 543 0,1 Capricorn 168 730 13,5 555 0,0 19 277 1,5 94 660 7,6 619 0,1 1 127 0,1 Waterberg 109 332 8,7 241 0,0 3 535 0,3 53 784 4,3 420 0,0 759 0,1


Figure 8.5: Households by source of energy for lighting by district council, Limpopo, 2001

Electricity Gas Paraff in Candles Solar Other0,0

2,0

4,0

6,0

8,0

10,0

12,0

14,0%

Sekhukhune 7,2 0,0 0,6 4,2 0,0 0,1Bohlabela 8,0 0,0 0,6 1,9 0,0 0,1

Mopani 13,1 0,0 1,2 4,5 0,0 0,1Vhembe 13,4 0,1 3,1 5,1 0,1 0,1

Capricorn 13,5 0,0 1,5 7,6 0,1 0,1Waterberg 8,7 0,0 0,3 4,3 0,0 0,1

Source: Statistics South Africa, Population Census 2001 Table 8.5 and Figure 8.6 show households by source of energy for cooking in Limpopo and South Africa.

• The majority of households in Limpopo (58,4%) used wood for cooking compared to 20,1% nationally.

71

• In Limpopo, 26,1% of households used electricity for cooking whereas in South Africa 52,2% of households used electricity for cooking.

• Paraffin for cooking was used by 11,3% of households in Limpopo compared to 21% nationally.

• In both South Africa and in Limpopo the sources of energy least used for cooking were solar heating (0,2% and 0,3% respectively) and animal dung (1,0% and 0,4% respectively).

Table 8.5: Households by source of energy for cooking, Limpopo and South Africa, 2001

Limpopo South Africa Source N % N % Electricity 326 275 26,1 6 149 535 52,2 Gas 21 477 1,7 309 729 2,6 Paraffin 141 151 11,3 2 472 002 21,0 Wood 730 485 58,4 2 368 030 20,1 Coal 19 038 1,5 314 712 2,7 Animal dung 5 471 0,4 113 187 1,0 Solar 3 218 0,3 25 706 0,2 Other 4 083 0,3 28 722 0,2 NA 33 0,0 1 011 0,0 Total 1 251 229 100,0 11 782 635 100,0


Figure 8.6: Households by source of energy for cooking, Limpopo and South Africa, 2001

Electricity Gas Paraff in Wood Coal Animaldung

Solar Other0,0

10,0

20,0

30,0

40,0

50,0

60,0%

Limpopo 26,1 1,7 11,3 58,4 1,5 0,4 0,3 0,3South Africa 52,2 2,6 21,0 20,1 2,7 1,0 0,2 0,2 Source: Statistics South Africa, Population Census 2001

72

Table 8.6 and Figure 8.7 show that: • In all district councils, wood was the source of energy used most for cooking. • Electricity was used most next to wood, whereas animal dung and solar heating were

the sources of energy least used for cooking. • Vhembe was the largest consumer of wood for cooking (15,8%) followed by

Mopani (13,2%). • Sekhukhune used the least electricity as a source of energy for cooking (2,2%)

followed by Bohlabela (2,5%).

Table 8.6: Households by source of energy for cooking by district council, Limpopo, 2001

Sekhukhune Bohlabela Mopani Vhembe Capricorn Waterberg Total Source N % N % N % N % N % N % N % Electricity 27 079 2,2 30 642 2,5 56 347 4,5 55 297 4,4 94 198 7,5 62 712 5,0 326 275 26,1 Gas 2 240 0,2 1 880 0,2 2 073 0,2 4 017 0,3 7 057 0,6 4 209 0,3 21 476 1,7 Paraffin 17 619 1,4 9 809 0,8 12 432 1,0 14 582 1,2 54 187 4,3 32 523 2,6 141 152 11,3 Wood 87 318 7,0 89 690 7,2 164 994 13,2 198 054 15,8 123 842 9,9 66 586 5,3 730 484 58,4 Coal 15 104 1,2 315 0,0 407 0,0 653 0,1 1 815 0,2 743 0,1 1 9037 1,5 Animal dung 1 726 0,1 267 0,0 292 0,0 469 0,0 2 212 0,2 507 0,0 5 473 0,4 Solar 536 0,0 338 0,0 491 0,0 571 0,1 812 0,1 469 0,0 3 217 0,3 Other 628 0,1 451 0,0 609 0,1 835 0,1 1 090 0,1 470 0,0 4 083 0,3 Not applicable 2 0,0 1 0,0 5 0,0 3 0,0 7 0,0 15 0,0 33 0,0 Total 152 252 12,2 133 393 10,7 237 650 19,0 274 481 21,9 285 220 22,8 168 234 13,5 125 1230 100,0


Figure 8.7: Households by source of energy for cooking by district council, Limpopo, 2001

Electricity Gas Paraffin Wood Coal Animaldung

Solar Other Notapplicable

0,0

2,0

4,0

6,0

8,0

10,0

12,0

14,0

16,0

18,0%

Sekhukhune 2,2 0,2 1,4 7,0 1,2 0,1 0,0 0,1 0,0Bohlabela 2,5 0,2 0,8 7,2 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0

Mopani 4,5 0,2 1,0 13,2 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,1 0,0Vhembe 4,4 0,3 1,2 15,8 0,1 0,0 0,1 0,1 0,0

Capricorn 7,5 0,6 4,3 9,9 0,2 0,2 0,1 0,1 0,0Waterberg 5,0 0,3 2,6 5,3 0,1 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0


73

Table 8.7 and Figure 8.8 show a comparison between Limpopo and South Africa with regard to the source of energy used for heating.

• In Limpopo, 58,7% of households used wood for heating compared to 24,2% nationally.

• Only 28,3% of households in Limpopo used electricity for heating compared to the 49,9% used in South Africa.

• Paraffin and coal (7,0% and 2,2% respectively) were not used for heating as extensively in Limpopo as they were in South Africa (14,3% and 6,3% respectively).

Table 8.7: Households by source of heating, Limpopo and South Africa, 2001

Limpopo South Africa Source N % N % Electricity 354 222 28,3 5 882 634 49,9 Gas 8 205 0,7 135 980 1,2 Paraffin 87 911 7,0 1 688 200 14,3 Wood 734 233 58,7 2 856 358 24,2 Coal 27 328 2,2 745 512 6,3 Animal dung 4 578 0,4 84 838 0,7 Solar 3 092 0,2 24 657 0,2 Other 31 628 2,5 363 444 3,1 NA 33 0,0 1 011 0,0 Total 1 251 229 100,0 11 782 635 100,0


Figure 8.8: Households by source of heating, Limpopo and South Africa, 2001


Solar Other0,0

10,0

20,0

30,0

40,0

50,0

60,0

70,0%

Limpopo 28,3 0,7 7,0 58,7 2,2 0,4 0,2 2,5South Africa 49,9 1,2 14,3 24,2 6,3 0,7 0,2 3,1 Source: Statistics South Africa, Population Census 2001 Table 8.8 and Figure 8.9 show the source of energy used for heating by district council in Limpopo.

• In Capricorn, 7,76% of households used electricity for heating followed by 5,25% in Waterberg.

74

• Paraffin for heating was used by 3,1% of households in Capricorn followed by 1,42% in Waterberg.

• In Vhembe, 15,6% of households used wood for heating followed by 12,67% in Mopani.

• Only 1,56% of households in Sekhukhune used coal for heating followed by 0,12% in Waterberg.

• Animal dung for heating was used by 0,15% of households in Capricorn followed by 0,12% in Sekhukhune.

Table 8.8: Households by source of heating by district council, Limpopo, 2001

Sekhukhune Bohlabela

Mopani

Vhembe Capricorn Waterberg Total Source N % N % N % N % N % N % N % Electricity 28 141 2,35 37 823 3,0 64 704 5,2 60 857 4,9 97 056 7,8 65 642 5,3 354 223 28,3 Gas 802 0,1 646 0,1 846 0,1 1 233 0,1 3 017 0,2 1 660 0,1 8 204 0,7 Paraffin 9 185 0,7 4 725 0,4 6 998 0,6 10 279 0,8 38 895 3,1 17 829 1,4 87 911 7,0 Wood 89 075 7,1 83 443 6,7 158 509 1,7 195 469 1,6 132 555 10,6 75 181 6,0 734 232 58,7 Coal 19 466 1,6 471 0,0 382 0,0 690 0,1 4 839 0,4 1 480 0,1 27 328 2,2 Animal dung 1 555 0,1 214 0,0 337 0,0 302 0,0 1 831 0,2 340 0,0 4 579 0,4 Solar 399 0,0 547 0,0 900 0,1 288 0,0 399 0,0 559 0,0 3 092 0,3 Other 3 628 0,3 5 524 0,4 4 969 0,4 5 359 0,4 6 620 0,5 5528 0,4 31 628 2,5 Not applicable 2 0,0 1 0,0 5 0,0 3 0,0 7 0,0 15 0,0 33 0,0 Total 152 253 12,2 133 394 10,7 237 650 19,0 274 480 22,0 285 219 22,8 168 234 13,5 1 251 230 100,0

Source: Statistics South Africa, population Census 2001

Figure 8.9: Households by source of heating by district council, Limpopo, 2001


Solar Other0,0

10,0

20,0

30,0

40,0

50,0

60,0

70,0%

Limpopo 28,3 0,7 7,0 58,7 2,2 0,4 0,2 2,5South Africa 49,9 1,2 14,3 24,2 6,3 0,7 0,2 3,1 Source: Statistics South Africa, Population Census 2001

75

8.6 Water Table 8.9 shows the percentage of households by main source of water in Limpopo and South Africa. The following comparisons are made:

• Of the households in Limpopo, 30,7% had piped water in the yard, which was higher than the percentage for South Africa (29,9%).

• Approximately 23% of households in Limpopo had piped water on a community stand at a distance greater than 200 m from the dwelling compared to 12,1% nationally.

• 15,4% of households in Limpopo had piped water on a community stand at a distance less than 200 m from the dwelling compared to 10,5% nationally.

• Only 9,9% of households in Limpopo had piped water inside the dwelling, which is much lower than the percentage for South Africa (32,4%).

• 6% of households used water from a river or stream compared to 6,2% nationally.

Table 8.9: Households by main source of water, Limpopo and South Africa, 2001

Limpopo South Africa Source of water N % N % Piped water inside dwelling 124 245 9,9 3 823 412 32,4 Piped water inside yard 383 631 30,7 3 521 751 29,9 Piped water on community stand: distance less than 200 m from dwelling 193 123 15,4 1 239 842 10,5 Piped water on community stand: distance greater than 200 m from dwelling 285 798 22,8 1 429 965 12,1 Borehole 64 875 5,2 276 386 2,3 Spring 26 613 2,1 212 217 1,8 Rain-water tank 3 236 0,3 69 762 0,6 Dam/pool/stagnant water 23 526 1,9 117 407 1,0 River/stream 75 555 6,0 735 119 6,2 Water vendor 21 752 1,7 84 738 0,7 Other 48 843 3,9 271 025 2,3 Not applicable (homeless) 33 0,0 1 011 0,0 Total 1 251 229 100,0 11 782 635 100,0

Source: Statistics South Africa, Population Census 2001 Table 8.10 shows households by main source of water and district council. It can be seen that:

• In Capricorn, 3,0% of households had piped water inside the dwelling followed by 2,3% in Waterberg.

• 7,3% of households in Capricorn and Vhembe had piped water inside the yard, followed by Mopani with 5,9%.

• In Vhembe, 4,0% of households had piped water on a community stand at a distance less than 200 m from the dwelling, followed by 3,2% in Mopani.

• 4,9% of households in Mopani had piped water on a community stand at a distance greater than 200 m from the dwelling, followed by 4,1% in Capricorn.

• Water from a river or stream was used by 3,1% of households in Sekhukhune followed by 0,9% in Mopani.

76

Table 8.10: Households by main source of water by district council, Limpopo, 2001

Sekhukhune Bohlabela Mopani Vhembe Capricorn Waterberg Total Source of water N % N % N % N % N % N % N % Piped water inside dwelling 2 529 0,2 6 989 0,6 26 622 2,1 21 090 1,7 37 666 3,0 28 909 2,3 123 805 9,9 Piped water inside yard 23 261 1,9 39 570 3,2 73 909 5,9 91 570 7,3 91 581 7,3 63 158 5,1 383 049 30,6 Piped water on community stand: distance less than 200 m from dwelling 21 625 1,7 19 438 1,6 40 506 3,2 49 900 4,0 38 752 3,1 22 803 1,8 193 024 15,4 Piped water on community stand: distance greater than 200 m from dwelling 32 973 2,6 35 687 2,9 60 610 4,9 74 917 6,0 51 025 4,1 30 446 2,4 285 658 22,9

Borehole 11 386 0,9 7 841 0,6 4 120 0,3 7 006 0,6 25 655 2,1 8 874 0,7 64 883 5,2

Spring 4 268 0,3 4 976 0,4 7 702 0,6 7 624 0,6 1 840 0,2 316 0,0 26 726 2,1

Rain-water tank 876 0,1 364 0,0 341 0,0 400 0,0 859 0,1 435 0,0 3 274 0,3 Dam/pool/stagnant water 8 903 0,7 3 325 0,3 3 428 0,3 1 997 0,2 4 697 0,4 1 149 0,1 23 499 1,9

River/stream 38 739 3,1 7 898 0,6 11 301 0,9 7 356 0,6 8 373 0,7 2 048 0,2 75 714 6,1

Water vendor 1 648 0,1 532 0,0 797 0,1 754 0,1 12 426 1,0 5 726 0,5 21 884 1,8

Other 5 994 0,5 6 720 0,5 8 168 0,7 11 669 0,9 12 094 1,0 4 206 0,3 48 851 3,9

Total 152 202 12,2 133 338 1,7 237 503 2,0 274 284 2,9 284 968 22,8 168 071 13,4 1 250 366 100,0


8.7 Toilet facilities Table 8.11 and Figure 8.10 show households by type of toilet facility in Limpopo and South Africa. The comparison shows that:

• In Limpopo, 49,0% of households used pit latrine toilets without ventilation, compared to 22,3% nationally.

• 22,8% of households in Limpopo did not have toilets compared to 13,3% nationally. • 16,0% of households in Limpopo had flush toilets in the dwelling compared to

50,0% nationally. • Households in Limpopo that had pit latrine toilets with ventilation accounted for

8,1%, compared to 5,6% nationally.

77

Table 8.11: Households by type of toilet facility, Limpopo and South Africa, 2001

Limpopo South Africa Type of toilet N % N %

Flush toilet in dwelling 200 585 16,0 5 887 550 50,0 Flush toilet (with septic tank) 25 062 2,0 350 939 3,0 Chemical toilet 16 313 1,3 227 331 1,9 Pit latrine with ventilation (VIP) 101 391 8,1 655 989 5,6 Pit latrine without ventilation 613 715 49,0 2 626 008 22,3 Bucket latrine 8 370 0,7 464 581 3,9 None 285 760 22,8 1 569 225 13,3 NA 33 0,0 1 011 0,0 Total 1 251 229 100,0 11 782 635 100,0


Figure 8.10: Percentage households by type of toilet facility, Limpopo and South Africa, 2001

F lush toiletin dw elling

F lush toilet(w ith septic

tank)

Chemicaltoilet

Pit latrinew ith

ventilation(VIP)

Pit latrinew ithout

ventilation

Bucketlatrine

None0,0

10,0

20,0

30,0

40,0

50,0

60,0%

Limpopo 16,0 2,0 1,3 8,1 49,0 0,7 22,8South Africa 50,0 3,0 1,9 5,6 22,3 3,9 13,3 Source: Statistics South Africa, Population Census 2001 Table 8.12 and Figure 8.11 show households by type of toilet facility and district council. The following is observed:

• In Capricorn, 4,5% of households had a flush toilet followed by 4,5% in Waterberg. • Pit latrine toilets without ventilation were used by 11,5% of households in Vhembe,

followed by 11,3% in Capricorn. • Pit latrine toilets with ventilation were used by 2,3% of households in Capricorn,

followed by 1,5% in Vhembe. • 0,2% of households in Waterberg used bucket latrine toilets, followed by 0,1% in

Capricorn and Vhembe. • In Mopani, 6,6% of households did not have any toilet facility, followed by 5,6% in

Vhembe.

78

Table 8.12: Households by type of toilet facility by district council, Limpopo, 2001

Sekhukhune Bohlabela Mopani Vhembe Capricorn Waterberg Total Type of toilet N % N % N % N % N % N % N % Flush toilet 5 676 0,5 10 481 0,8 40 074 3,2 31 309 2,5 56 462 4,5 56 119 4,5 200 120 16,0 Flush toilet (with septic tank) 1 080 0,1 1 756 0,1 5 139 0,4 4 917 0,4 5 698 0,5 6 491 0,5 25 082 2,0 Chemical toilet 3 050 0,2 1 977 0,2 3 540 0,3 2 776 0,2 2 894 0,2 2 074 0,2 16 311 1,3 Pit latrine with ventilation (VIP) 15 131 1,2 13 428 1,1 16 272 1,3 19 042 1,5 28 343 2,3 9 182 0,7 101 398 8,1 Pit latrine without ventilation 97 365 7,8 72 448 5,8 89 287 7,1 144 152 1,5 141 328 11,3 68 772 5,5 613 353 4,1 Bucket latrine 1 106 0,1 679 0,1 990 0,1 1 732 0,1 1 780 0,1 2 261 0,2 8 548 0,7 None 28 793 2,3 32 569 2,6 82 201 6,6 70 357 5,6 48 463 3,9 23 172 1,9 285 554 22,8 Total 152 202 12,2 133 338 10,7 237 503 19,0 274 284 21,9 284 968 22,8 168 071 13,4 1 250 366 100,0


Figure 8.11: Households by type of toilet facility by district council, Limpopo, 2001

F lushtoilet

F lush toilet(w ith septic

tank)

Chemicaltoilet

Pit latrinew ith

ventilation

Pit latrinew ithout

ventilation

Bucketlatrine

None0,0

2,0

4,0

6,0

8,0

10,0

12,0%

Sekhukhune 0,5 0,1 0,2 1,2 7,8 0,1 2,3Bohlabela 0,8 0,1 0,2 1,1 5,8 0,1 2,6

Mopani 3,2 0,4 0,3 1,3 7,1 0,1 6,6Vhembe 2,5 0,4 0,2 1,5 11,5 0,1 5,6

Capricorn 4,5 0,5 0,2 2,3 11,3 0,1 3,9Waterberg 4,5 0,5 0,2 0,7 5,5 0,2 1,9


8.8 Refuse removal Table 8.13 and Figure 8.12 show types of refuse removal in Limpopo and South Africa. The comparison shows the following:

• In Limpopo, 67,4% of owned refuse dumps compared to 32,5% nationally. • 15,5% of households in Limpopo did not have refuse dumps compared to 8,5%

nationally. • 15,1% of households in Limpopo had their refuse removed by local authority at least

once a week, compared to 55,4% nationally.

79

Table 8.13: Households by type of refuse removal, Limpopo and South Africa, 2001

Limpopo South Africa Type of refuse removal N % N % Removed by local authority at least once a week 188 587 15,1 6 531 774 55,4 Removed by local authority less often 11 893 1,0 207 155 1,8 Communal refuse dump 14 637 1,2 212 734 1,8 Own refuse dump 842 745 67,4 3 830 650 32,5 No rubbish disposal 193 336 15,5 999 310 8,5 NA 33 0,0 1 011 0,0 Total 1 251 229 100,0 11 782 635 100,0


Figure 8.12: Households by type of refuse removal, Limpopo and South Africa, 2001

Removed bylocal authority

at leastonce a w eek

Removed bylocal authority

less often

Communalrefuse dump

Ow nrefuse dump

No refuse removal0,0

10,0

20,0

30,0

40,0

50,0

60,0

70,0

80,0%

Limopopo 15,1 1,0 1,2 67,4 15,5South Africa 55,4 1,8 1,8 32,5 8,5 Source: Statistics South Africa, Population Census 2001 Table 8.14 and Figure 8.13 show the type of refuse removal by district council. The following is observed:

• In Capricorn, 4,6% of households had their refuse removed by local authority at least once a week, followed by Waterberg with 4,0%.

• In Capricorn, 2,3% of households did not have refuse dumps, followed by Sekhukhune (2,2%) and Waterberg (1,2%).

• Of the households in Capricorn, 15,4% owned refuse dumps, followed by 15,2% in Vhembe.

80

Table 8.14: Households by type of refuse removal by district council, Limpopo, 2001

Sekhukhune Bohlabela Mopani Vhembe Capricorn Waterberg Total Type of refuse removal N % N % N % N % N % N % N % Removed by local authority at least once a week 6 502 0,5 9 019 0,7 37 604 3,0 29 443 2,4 56 836 4,6 49 543 4,0 188 948 15,1 Removed by local authority less often 890 0,1 726 0,1 3 030 0,2 2 132 0,2 2 813 0,2 2 347 0,2 11 939 1,0 Communal refuse dump 831 0,1 988 0,1 2 810 0,2 3 024 0,2 4 207 0,3 2 663 0,2 14 524 1,2 Own refuse dump 116 300 9,3 100 516 8,0 143 715 11,5 190 085 15,2 192 033 15,4 98 803 7,9 841 451 67,3 No rubbish disposal 27 679 2,2 22 089 1,8 50 344 4,0 49 601 4,0 29 078 2,3 14 714 1,2 193 504 15,5

Total 152 202 12,2 133 338 10,7 237 503 19,0 274 284 21,9 284 968 22,8 168 071 13,4 1 250 366 100,0


Figure 8.13: Households by type of refuse removal by district council, Limpopo, 2001

0,5 0,7

3,02,4

4,64,0

0,1 0,1 0,2 0,2 0,2 0,20,1 0,1 0,2 0,2 0,3 0,2

9,3

8,0

11,5

15,2 15,4

7,9

2,2 1,8

4,0 4,0

2,31,2

Sekhukhune Bohlabela Mopani Vhembe Capricorn Waterberg0,0

2,0

4,0

6,0

8,0

10,0

12,0

14,0

16,0

18,0%

Removed by local authority at least once a w eek

Removed by local authority less often

Communal refuse dump

Ow n refuse dump

No rubbish disposal


8.9 Access to telephones Table 8.15 and Figure 8.14 show that:

• More households in Limpopo had access to public telephones nearby (51,2%) compared to 38,9% nationally.

• Households in Limpopo that had access to cell phones only accounted for 20,2% compared to 18,1% nationally.

• 6,5% of households in Limpopo had no access to telephones compared to 6,0% nationally.

• 4,4% of households in Limpopo had telephones in dwelling and also cell phones, compared to 13,8% nationally.

81

Table 8.15: Households by access to telephone facilities, Limpopo and South Africa, 2001

Limpopo South Africa Facility N % N % Telephone in dwelling and cell-phone 55 232 4,4 1 628 517 13,8 Telephone in dwelling only 38 736 3,1 1 176 887 10,0 Cell-phone only 253 292 20,2 2 129 825 18,1 At a neighbour nearby 54 169 4,3 771 759 6,5 At a public telephone nearby 640 235 51,2 4 585 990 38,9 At another location nearby 63 650 5,1 371 377 3,2 At another location; not nearby 63 444 5,1 396 240 3,4 No access to a telephone 81 603 6,5 709 677 6,0 Not applicable (institutions) 868 0,1 12 362 0,1 Total 1 251 229 100,0 11 782 635 100,0


Figure 8.14: Households by access to telephone facilities, Limpopo and South Africa, 2001

13,8

10,0

18,1

6,5

38,9

3,2 3,46,0

0,1

4,4 3,1

20,2

4,3

51,2

5,1 5,1 6,5

0,1

Telephone indw elling and

cellphone

Telephone indw elling only

Cellphoneonly

At a neighbournearby

At a publictelephone

nearby

At anotherlocationnearby

At anotherlocation,

not nearby

No accessto a

telephone

Institutions0,0

5,0

10,0

15,0

20,0

25,0

30,0

35,0

40,0

45,0

50,0

55,0%

Limpopo South Africa Source: Statistics South Africa, Population Census 2001 Table 8.16 and Figure 8.15 show access to telephone facilities by district council. They show that:

• In Capricorn, 12,0% of households had access to public telephones followed by 11,7% in Vhembe.

• A small proportion (0,9%) of households in Capricorn had telephones in the dwelling followed by 0,5% in Waterberg.

• 4,9% of households in Capricorn had access to a cellphone only, followed by Vhembe with 4,6%.

• In Vhembe, 1,2% of households had no access to telephones followed by 1,2% in Capricorn.

82

Table 8.16: Households by access to telephone facilities by district council, Limpopo, 2001

Sekhukhune Bohlabela Mopani Vhembe Capricorn Waterberg Total Facility N % N % N % N % N % N % N % Telephone in dwelling and cellphone

2 815

0,2

4 484

0,4

9 600

0,8

10 418

0,8

16 497

1,3

11 657

0,9

55 471

4,4 Telephone in dwelling only

3 901

0,3

3 624

0,3

4 670

0,4

7 061

0,6

11 584

0,9

7 961

0,6

38 800

3,1

Cellphone only 25 382 2,0 28 527 2,3 49 792 4,0 57 535 4,6 60 725 4,9 31 681 2,5 253 641 20,3 At a neighbour nearby

4 543

0,5

8 584

0,7

10 105

0,8

7 828

0,6

11 031

0,9

12 365

1,0

54 458

4,4

At a public telephone nearby

76 578

6,1

66 826

5,3

125 072

1,0

145 996

11,7

149 484

12,0

75 937

6,1

639 893

51,2

At another location nearby

9 758

0,8

6 307

0,5

12 612

1,0

14 374

1,2

12 004

1,0

8 300

0,7

63 355

5,1

At another location; not nearby

14 717

1,2

5 454

0,4

10 971

0,9

15 700

1,3

8 725

0,7

7 800

0,6

63 366

5,1

No access to a telephone

14 508

1,2

9 531

0,8

14 681

1,2

15 373

1,2

14 918

1,2

12 370

1,0

81 381

6,5

Total 152 202 12,2 133 338 1,7 237 503 19,0 274 284 22,0 284 968 22,8 168 071 13,4 1 250 366 100,0


Figure 8.15: Households by access to telephone facilities by district council, Limpopo, 2001

Telephonein dw elling

and cellphone

Telephoneonly in

dw elling

Cellphoneonly

At aneighbour

nearby

At a publictelephone

nearby

At anotherlocationnearby

At anotherlocation,

not nearby

No accessto a telephone

0,0

2,0

4,0

6,0

8,0

10,0

12,0

14,0%

Sekhukhune 0,2 0,3 2,0 0,4 6,1 0,8 1,2 1,2Bohlabela 0,4 0,3 2,3 0,7 5,3 0,5 0,4 0,8

Mopani 0,8 0,4 4,0 0,8 10,0 1,0 0,9 1,2Vhembe 0,8 0,6 4,6 0,6 11,7 1,2 1,3 1,2

Capricorn 1,3 0,9 4,9 0,9 12,0 1,0 0,7 1,2Waterberg 0,9 0,6 2,5 1,0 6,1 0,7 0,6 1,0


8.10 Ownership of selected household goods Table 8.17 and Figure 8.16 examine the extent to which households owned selected household goods such as televisions, radios, refrigerators and computers by province. It shows that in 2001:

• Households in Western Cape had the most household goods overall, followed by Gauteng.

• Limpopo had 69,7% of households with radios, but only 2,2 with a computer. • Eastern Cape had the smallest proportion of households with radios (64,3%),

televisions (38,6%) and refrigerators (31,7%).

83

Table 8.17: Households with radio, television, computer and refrigerator, South Africa, 2001

Radio Television Computer Refrigerator Province N % N % N % N % Western Cape 927 922 79,1 868 935 74,1 213 140 18,2 862 339 73,5 Eastern Cape 971 967 64,3 584 351 38,6 59 907 4,0 480 112 31,7 Northern Cape 139 823 67,6 116 596 56,4 14 704 7,1 115 094 55,6 Free State 553 991 75,5 394 736 53,8 36 156 4,9 356 344 48,6 KwaZulu-Natal 1 523 347 73,0 986 098 47,3 148 315 7,1 978 643 46,9 North West 649 430 69,9 500 972 53,9 35 874 3,9 468 198 50,4 Gauteng 2 052 991 77,4 1 740 945 65,7 400 196 15,1 1 646 713 62,1 Mpumalanga 540 644 73,7 366 570 50,0 34 326 4,7 370 549 50,5 Limpopo 822 385 69,7 470 210 39,8 26 122 2,2 459 546 38,9 South Africa 8 182 500 73,0 6 029 413 53,8 968 740 8,6 5 737 538 51,2

Excluding all living quarters Source: Statistics South Africa, Population Census 2001

Figure 8.16: Households with radio, television, computer and refrigerator, South Africa, 2001

WesternCape

EasternCape

NorthernCape

FreeState

KwaZulu-Natal

NorthWest

Gauteng Mpuma-langa

Limpopo SouthAfr ica

0,0

20,0

40,0

60,0

80,0

100,0%

Radio 79,1 64,3 67,6 75,5 73,0 69,9 77,4 73,7 69,7 73,0Television 74,1 38,6 56,4 53,8 47,3 53,9 65,7 50,0 39,8 53,8Computer 18,2 4,0 7,1 4,9 7,1 3,9 15,1 4,7 2,2 8,6

Refrigerator 73,5 31,7 55,6 48,6 46,9 50,4 62,1 50,5 38,9 51,2 Excluding all living quarters Source: Statistics South Africa, Population Census 2001 Tables 8.18 and 8.19 show the ownership of these household goods at district council level. It shows that:

• In all district councils, the majority of households were in possession of a radio. • Capricorn had the highest percentage of households with a radio (72,0%). • The number of televisions available in each district council differs notably from that

of radios. The majority of households in each district council did not have a television set. Vhembe had the most households (65,6%) that did not have a television set.

84

• The same pattern is observed as far as refrigerators in households are concerned. The majority of households in all of the district councils did not have a refrigerator.

• Bohlabela was the district council with most households that had a refrigerator (40,4%).

• The picture changes completely as far as computers are concerned. Very few households had a computer, while more than 90% of households in all the district councils did not have a computer.

Table 8.18: Households with/without radio, television, computer and refrigerator by district council, Limpopo, 2001

District council

Radio

No radio Television

No television Refrigerator

No refrigerator

Computer

No computer

Sekhukhune 102 063 50 187 52 424 99 826 51 872 100 378 958 151 293 Bohlabela 90 433 42 960 53 340 80 053 53 903 79 490 1 597 131 796 Mopani 155 009 82 636 85 705 151 940 91 430 146 215 4 952 232 693 Vhembe 195 824 78 654 102 531 171 947 91 727 182 751 5 132 269 346 Capricorn 205 214 79 999 120 758 164 454 114 985 170 228 8 348 276 864 Waterberg 108 054 60 164 67 707 100 511 66 748 101 471 6 381 161 838


Table 8.19: Households with/without radio, television, computer and refrigerator by district council, Limpopo, 2001

Radio

No radio Television

No television Refrigerator

No refrigerator

Computer

No computer

District Council % % % % % % % % Sekhukhune 67,0 33,0 34,4 65,6 34,1 65,9 0,6 99,4 Bohlabela 67,8 32,2 40,0 60,0 40,4 59,6 1,2 98,8 Mopani 65,2 34,8 36,1 63,9 38,5 61,5 2,1 97,9 Vhembe 71,3 28,7 37,4 62,6 33,4 66,6 1,9 98,1 Capricorn 72,0 28,0 42,3 57,7 40,3 59,7 2,9 97,1 Waterberg 64,2 35,8 40,2 59,8 39,7 60,3 3,8 96,2


85

Chapter 9: Economy 9.1 Gross Domestic Product per Region (GDPR) Figure 9.1 shows the real economic growth rate per region for 2004. The following comparisons are observed:

• Preliminary estimates indicated that the highest real annual economic growth rate per region, as measured by the Gross Domestic Product per Region (GDPR) at market prices for 2004 compared with 2003, was recorded in Western Cape with 5,3%, followed by KwaZulu-Natal and North West with 4,9% and Eastern Cape with 4,6%. The rate of these provinces was higher than that of South Africa.

• Limpopo had the lowest real economic growth rate of 2,7%.

Figure 9.1: Real annual economic growth rate per region for 2004

& && & & & & & &

WesternCape

EasternCape

NorthernCape

FreeState

Kw aZulu-Natal

NorthWest

Gauteng Mpuma-langa

Lim popo0,0

1,0

2,0

3,0

4,0

5,0

6,0%

2004 5,3 4,6 3,0 3,9 4,9 4,9 4,4 4,2 2,7RSA 4,5 4,5 4,5 4,5 4,5 4,5 4,5 4,5 4,5&

Source: Statistics South Africa, Gross Domestic Product, annual estimates per region, 1995–2004 Figure 9.2 below shows the contribution of GDPR by province (region) to the GDP of South Africa in 2004.

• In 2004, Gauteng was the highest contributor to the GDP (33,3%), followed by KwaZulu-Natal (16,7%), and then Western Cape (14,4%).

• Northern Cape made the smallest contribution of 2,2%, followed by Free State (5,5%), and North West (6,3%).

86

Figure 9.2: Percentage GDPR contribution to the national GDP, South Africa, 2004

WesternCape

EasternCape

NorthernCape

FreeState

KwaZulu-Natal

NorthWest

Gauteng Mpuma-langa

Limpopo0,0

5,0

10,0

15,0

20,0

25,0

30,0

35,0%

2004 14,4 8,1 2,2 5,5 16,7 6,3 33,3 6,8 6,7 Source: Statistics South Africa, Gross Domestic Product, annual estimates per region, 1995–2004 Figure 9.3 shows the average annual economic growth for the period 1996–2004.

• The highest average annual economic growth rate recorded among the provinces over the period 1996 to 2004 was that of Limpopo (3,5%).

• Limpopo, Western Cape and Gauteng had a higher average annual economic growth rate than that of South Africa, which was 3,1%.

• Free State recorded the lowest average real annual economic growth rate over the period with 2%.

Figure 9.3: Average annual economic growth per region, South Africa, 1996–2004

% %% % % % % % % %

WesternCape

EasternCape

NorthernCape

FreeState

Kw aZulu-Natal

NorthWest

Gauteng Mpuma-langa


0,0

0,5

1,0

1,5

2,0

2,5

3,0

3,5

4,0%

Province 3,4 2,5 2,2 2,0 3,1 2,2 3,3 3,0 3,5 2,8South Africa 3,1 3,1 3,1 3,1 3,1 3,1 3,1 3,1 3,1 3,1% Source: Statistics South Africa, Gross Domestic Product, annual estimates per region, 1995–2004

87

Table 9.1 and Figure 9.4 show the Gross Domestic Product per Region at current prices for Limpopo in 1996–2004.

• For GDPR at current prices, mining and quarrying remained the highest contributor to the economy of Limpopo over the period 1996 to 2004, which was 21,7%.

• Significant contributions were also made by general government services (17,3%), finance, real estate and business services (15,6%) and wholesale and retail trade, hotels and restaurants (11,5%). The lowest contributors were construction (1,4%), electricity, gas and water (2,8%) and agriculture, forestry and fishing (3,1%).

Table 9.1: GDPR and value added estimates per industry at current prices, Limpopo, 1996–2004

(Rand million) Industry 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 Primary industries 5 846 6 474 8 949 10 905 13 723 18 419 22 243 21 799 23 083 Agriculture, forestry and fishing 980 924 1 542 1 392 1 473 1 771 1 894 3 250 2 881 Mining and quarrying 4 865 5 550 7 407 9 513 12 250 16 647 20 348 18 549 20 202 Secondary industries 3 923 4 289 4 507 4 517 5 145 5 328 6 082 6 636 7 110 Manufacturing 1 651 1 805 1 862 1 924 2 265 2 433 2 819 3 031 3 242 Electricity, gas and water 1 266 1 387 1 536 1 521 1 689 1 691 1 899 2 375 2 580 Construction 1 006 1 096 1 108 1 072 1 191 1 204 1 364 1 231 1 288 Tertiary industries 21 544 25 817 28 5691 31 448 34 668 38 322 42 688 47 293 53 304 Wholesale and retail trade; hotels and restaurants 4 883 5 382 5 751 6 351 7 482 8 334 8 801 9 603 10 696 Transport, storage and communication 2 416 2 800 3 175 3 698 4 537 5 005 5 846 6 516 7 761 Finance, real estate and business services 5 965 6 925 7 598 8 222 8 503 9 824 11 036 12 633 14 523 Personal services 1 725 1 959 2 163 2 437 2 828 3 104 3 440 3 823 4 165 General government services 6 556 8 751 9 904 10 740 11 318 12 056 13 566 14 717 16 159 All industries at basic prices 31 313 36 580 42 047 46 870 53 536 62 069 71 013 75 728 83 498 Taxes less subsidies on products 3 029 3 511 4 388 4 885 5 418 6 221 7 088 7 756 9 691 GDPR at market prices 34 343 40 091 46 435 51 755 58 954 68 290 78 100 83 484 93 188

Source: Statistics South Africa, Gross Domestic Product, annual estimates per region, 1995–2004

88

Figure 9.4: Gross Domestic Product per Region – current prices (percentage contribution), Limpopo, 2004

Agriculture,forestry and

fishing

Mining andquarrying

Manufacturing Electricity, gasand water

Construction Wholesale andretail trade;hotels andrestaurants

Transportstorage and

communication

Finance, realestate andbusiness

Personalservices

Generalgovernment

services

0,0

5,0

10,0

15,0

20,0

25,0%

2004 3,1 21,7 3,5 2,8 1,4 11,5 8,3 15,6 4,5 17,3

Source: Statistics South Africa, Gross Domestic Product, annual estimates per region, 1995–2004 Table 9.2 and Figure 9.5 show the Gross Domestic Product per Region at constant 2000 prices for Limpopo in 1996–2004.

• For GDPR at constant 2000 prices, the growth rate for most of the industries in Limpopo was steadily increasing at a positive growth rate, except for the agriculture, forestry and fishing industry which had a negative growth rate (-7,1%).

• The highest growth rate in Limpopo was recorded by the construction industry (7,0%) followed by the finance, real estate and business industry (5,9%).

89

Table 9.2: GDPR and value added estimates per industry at constant 2000 prices, Limpopo, 1996–2004

(Rand million) Industry 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2,004

Primary industries 12 310 12 961 13 823 13 980 13 724 15 424 16 613 17 109 17 284

Agriculture, forestry and fishing 1 134 1 116 1 386 1 508 1 473 1 532 1 700 1 686 1 566

Mining and quarrying 11 176 11 844 12 438 12 472 12 250 13 892 14 913 15 424 15 718

Secondary industries 4 798 4 932 4 877 4 789 5 144 5 148 5 381 5 437 5 711

Manufacturing 2 067 2 123 2 106 2 135 2 265 2 342 2 379 2 345 2 457

Electricity, gas and water 1 542 1 619 1 646 1 596 1 688 1 616 1 677 1 948 2 030

Construction 1 189 1 190 1 125 1 058 1 191 1 190 1 325 1 144 1 224

Tertiary industries 29 695 32 365 33 509 34 516 34 669 36 689 37 776 38 834 40 016

Wholesale and retail trade; hotels and restaurants 6 342 6 486 6 611 6 989 7 482 8 003 8 065 8 187 8 453

Transport, storage and communication 3 137 3 514 3 835 4 269 4 537 5 434 6 324 6 573 6 721 Finance, real estate and business services 8 862 9 146 9 175 9 055 8 503 9 138 9 257 9 718 10 288

Personal services 2 445 2 450 2 603 2 701 2 829 2 894 2 968 3 086 3 121

General government services 8 910 10 768 11 284 11 504 11 318 11 219 11 162 11 270 11 434

All industries at basic prices 46 803 50 258 52 210 53 286 53 537 57 261 59 770 61 380 63 011

Taxes less subsidies on products 5 119 5 521 5 624 5 546 5 418 5 713 5 867 6 009 6 207

GDPR at market prices 51 922 55 779 57 834 58 832 58 955 62 975 65 637 67 389 69 218


Figure 9.5: Gross Domestic Product per Region for Limpopo, 2004 – constant 2000 prices (percentage changes)


fishing

Mining andquarrying



Transport,storage and

communication


Personalservices

Generalgovernment

services

0,0

5,0

10,0

15,0

20,0

25,0

30,0

35,0

-5,0

%

2004 -7,1 1,9 4,8 4,2 7,0 3,2 2,3 5,9 1,2 1,4


90

Figure 9.6 compares the Gross Domestic Product per Region at current prices for Limpopo and South Africa for the period 1996–2004.

• For GDPR at current prices, mining and quarrying remained the highest contributor to the economy of Limpopo for the period 1996–2004, which was 21,7%, while transport, storage and communication remained the highest contributor to the economy of South Africa (21,9%).

• The lowest contributor to the economy of Limpopo was the construction industry (1,4%) while the mining and quarrying industry contributed the least to the economy of South Africa (4,2%).

Figure 9.6: Gross Domestic Product by region current prices for Limpopo and South Africa, 2004 (percentage contributions)


fishing

Mining andquarrying



Transport,storage and

communication


Personalservices

Generalgovernment

services

0,0

5,0

10,0

15,0

20,0

25,0

30,0%

Limpopo 3,1 21,7 3,5 2,8 1,4 11,5 8,3 15,6 4,5 17,3South Africa 26,4 4,2 21,3 18,1 17,0 16,8 21,9 14,1 16,7 14,7 Source: Statistics South Africa, Gross Domestic Product, annual estimates per region, 1995–2004 Figure 9.7 compares the Gross Domestic Product per Region at constant 2000 prices for Limpopo and South Africa in 1996–2004.

• For GDPR at constant 2000 prices, the construction industry remained the highest contributor to the growth rate of the economy of Limpopo and South Africa, i.e. 7,0% and 10,7% respectively.

• The lowest contributor to the growth rate of the economy of Limpopo and South Africa was recorded for the agriculture, forestry and fishing industry, which was -7,1% and -1,7% respectively.

91

Figure 9.7: Gross Domestic Product per Region for Limpopo and South Africa, 2004 (percentage changes)


fishing

Min ing andquarrying



Transportstorage and

communication


Personalservices

Generalgovernment

services

0,0

5,0

10,0

15,0

20,0

25,0

30,0

35,0

-5,0

-10,0

%

Limpopo -7,1 1,9 4,8 4,2 7,0 3,2 2,3 5,9 1,2 1,4South Africa -1,7 2,8 4,6 2,4 10,7 5,7 4,6 7,5 1,1 1,4


9.2 Agriculture Table 9.3 and Figure 9.8 show that the proportion of the land used as farming area in Limpopo in 2001 was 103 372 000 hectares, which constituted 32,8% of the farming area in the country. There were 278 000 farming operations in the province during the period of the survey. This constituted 25,5% of the entire farming operations in South Africa.

Table 9.3: Farming operations by land surface area and province, South Africa, 2001

Land area Farming operations Province Ha ('000) % Ha ('000) % Western Cape 33 915 10,8 23 2,1 Eastern Cape 61 063 19,4 407 37,3 Northern Cape 45 780 14,5 12 1,1 Free State 19 559 6,2 56 5,1 KwaZulu-Natal 15 982 5,1 216 19,8 North West 18 780 6,0 51 4,7 Gauteng 5 922 1,9 4 0,4 Mpumalanga 10 755 3,4 45 4,1 Limpopo 103 372 32,8 278 25,5 South Africa 315 128 100,0 1 092 100,0

Source: National Department of Agriculture, 2001

92

Figure 9.8: Distribution of farm operations in South Africa by province, 2001

WesternCape

EasternCape

NorthernCape

FreeState

Kw aZulu-Natal

NorthWest

Gauteng Mpuma-langa

Limpopo0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

Farm

ing o p

eratio

ns in

1 00

0

Farming operations

( 1 000 hectares)

23 407 12 56 216 51 4 45 278

Source: National Department of Agriculture 2001

Table 9.4 and Figure 9.9 below show quantity harvested for maize for grain by province in South Africa. The table shows that:

• Free State had the largest percentage of maize harvested in 2001 (37,4%), followed by North West which harvested 5 053 151 tons of maize (36,6%).

• Both KwaZulu-Natal and Gauteng harvested 2,6% each in 2001. • Limpopo had the lowest percentage of maize harvested in 2001 (0,4%) • The total maize that was harvested in South Africa in 2001 was estimated at

13 791 055 tons.

Table 9.4: Quantity harvested by province, South Africa, 2001: Maize for grain

Province

Tons % Western Cape 211 252 1,5 Eastern Cape 1 217 242 8,8 Northern Cape 84 639 0,6 Free State 5 156 801 37,4 KwaZulu-Natal 352 538 2,6 North West 5 053 151 36,6 Gauteng 354 300 2,6 Mpumalanga 1 306 202 9,5 Limpopo 54 930 0,4 South Africa 13 791 055 100,0

Source: National Department of Agriculture 2001

93

Figure 9.9: Percentage of quantity harvested by province, maize for grain, South Africa, 2001

WesternCape1,5%

EasternCape8,8%

Limpopo0,4%

FreeState37,4%

Gauteng2,6%

Kw aZulu-Natal2,6%

NorthWest36,6%

NorthernCape0,6%

Mpumalanga9,5%

Source: National Department of Agriculture 2001 Table 9.5 below shows the number of farming units and market value of their assets by province in South Africa. The following is observed from this table:

• Free State had the highest number of farming units (8 531) with an asset market value of R12 477 269 million, followed by Western Cape (7 185) with an asset market value of R27 863 636 million, and Northern Cape (6 114) with an asset market value of R9 698 368 million.

• Gauteng had the lowest number of farming units (2 206) with an asset market value of R2 962 276 million, followed by Limpopo (2 915) with an asset market value of R9 720 910 million.

• There were 45 818 farming units with an asset market value of R98 428 255 million in South Africa.

94

Table 9.5: Number of farming units and market value of assets by province, South Africa, 2002

Province

Number of farming units

Market value of assets

(R'000) Western Cape Eastern Cape Northern Cape Free State KwaZulu-Natal North West Gauteng Mpumalanga Limpopo South Africa

7 185 4 376 6 114 8 531 4 038 5 349 2 206 5 104 2 915

45 818

27 863 636 7 704 486 9 698 368

12 477 269 9 900 145 8 419 760 2 962 276 9 720 910 9 681 405

98 428 254

Source: Statistics South Africa, Census of commercial agriculture 2002, Financial and production statistics Figure 9.10 shows gross farming income and farming debts by province in South Africa. The following is observed in this figure:

• The formal agricultural sector generated a total gross farming income of approximately R53 billion in 2002.

• Western Cape contributed the highest gross income, followed by Free State, then Mpumalanga, KwaZulu-Natal, North West, Gauteng, Northern Cape, Limpopo and Eastern Cape.

• Farming debts amounted to approximately R31 billion. • Western Cape was responsible for the largest part of the debt, followed by Free State

and Northern Cape, while Gauteng had the lowest proportion of debts.

Figure 9.10: Gross farming income and farming debt by province, South Africa, 2002

WesternCape

EasternCape

NorthernCape

FreeState

KwaZulu-Natal

NorthWest

Gauteng Mpuma-langa

Limpopo SouthAfr ica

0

10 000 000

20 000 000

30 000 000

40 000 000

50 000 000

60 000 000

Gross farming income 11 129 958 3 213 986 3 578 025 9 125 579 6 429 273 5 125 343 3 962 582 6 186 402 4 577 904 53 329 052Farming debt 7 913 782 1 948 108 3 086 128 5 060 522 3 144 070 2 808 754 997 487 3 164 808 2 734 233 30 857 891

Source: Statistics South Africa, Census of commercial agriculture 2002, Financial and production statistics

95

Table 9.6 shows a breakdown of gross farming income by type of division and province in South Africa. The table depicts the following:

• In total, field crops generated the highest income, followed by animals, horticulture, animal products and then other products.

• Free State contributed the largest share of field crops and animals to the gross farming income, whereas Western Cape contributed the largest share in horticulture, animal products and other products.

• Eastern Cape contributed the smallest share in field crops, North West in horticulture and other products, and Limpopo in animal products.

Table 9.6: Breakdown of gross farming income by type of division and province, South Africa, 2002

Field crops Horticulture Animals and animal

products Other products

Province R '000 % R '000 % R '000 % R '000 %

Western Cape 1 295 835 7,9 5 976 340 42,0 3 295 138 15,5 562 645 40,2

Eastern Cape 184 361 1,1 833 403 5,9 2 160 350 10,2 35 871 2,6

Northern Cape 971 869 5,9 1 065 784 7,5 1 517 207 7,1 23 163 1,7

Free State 5 067 205 30,8 620 318 4,4 3 410 581 16,1 27 475 2,0

KwaZulu-Natal 2 773 151 16,8 614 458 4,3 2 615 346 12,3 426 317 30,4

North West 2 448 308 14,9 363 358 2,6 2 305 785 10,9 7 892 0,6

Gauteng 384 056 2,3 811 240 5,7 2 696 978 12,7 71 307 5,1

Mpumalanga 2 566 165 15,6 1 624 945 11,4 1 853 552 8,7 141 740 10,1

Limpopo 785 982 4,8 2 319 058 16,3 1 368 681 6,4 104 181 7,4

South Africa 16 476 933 100,0 14 228 904 100,0 21 223 618 100,0 1 400 591 100,0

Source: Statistics South Africa, Census of commercial agriculture 2002, Financial and production statistics

9.3 Consumer Price Index (CPI) Figure 9.11 below shows the percentage change in Consumer Price Index for Limpopo and South Africa during the period April 2003 to March 2004.

• The CPI figures in Limpopo showed a downward trend in inflation from April 2003 to October 2003, followed by stabilisation, then an upward-downward trend between December 2003 and February 2004, followed by stabilisation in March 2004.

• The national CPI figures showed a downward trend in inflation from April 2003 to June 2003, followed by stabilisation, then another downward trend from September 2003 to October 2003, followed by stabilisation between November 2003 and December 2003. It then showed an upward trend between January 2004 and February 2004, followed by a downward trend between February 2004 and March 2004.

• The CPI for South Africa was always above that of Limpopo during this period.

96

Figure 9.11: Annual inflation rate on a monthly basis, Limpopo and South Africa, April 2003 to March 2004

'

'

'

''

'

'

''

'

'

'

#

#

#

# # #

#

# # # ##

Apr -03

May -03

Jun -03

Jul -03

Aug -03

Sep -03

Oct -03

Nov-03

Dec -03

Jan-04

Feb -04

Mar -04

0,0

1,0

2,0

3,0

4,0

5,0

6,0

7,0

8,0

9,0

10,0

South Africa 8,5 7,7 6,4 6,6 6,3 5,4 4,4 4,1 4,0 4,2 4,8 4,4Limpopo 7,3 6,7 5,7 5,1 4,7 3,5 1,3 0,7 1,1 0,2 1,3 1,0

#'

Source: Statistics South Africa, Consumer Price Index, 2003–2004

9.4 Human Development Index (HDI)

Figure 9.12 below shows that:

• The HDI for the white population group was the highest in all provinces, followed by that of the Indian/Asian, coloured and then black African population groups.

• The HDIs for Limpopo in all population groups were lower than those of South Africa as a whole.

Human Development Index: The Human Development Index of the United Nations Development Program is used for obtaining internationally comparable indicators of the ability of individuals within a country or across various countries to live long, informed and comfortable lives. It has three components: (1) Longevity measured by life expectancy at birth. (2) Educational attainment measured by adult literacy rate (two-thirds weighting) and

combined gross enrolment at primary, secondary and tertiary. (3) Comfortable lives measured by a GDP Index. (4) The Human Development Index is the average of these three components.

97

Figure 9.12: Human Development Index by population group and province, South Africa, 2003

WesternCape

EasternCape

NorthernCape

FreeState

Kw aZulu-Natal

NorthWest

Gauteng Mpumalanga Lim popo SouthAfr ic a

0,0

0,2

0,4

0,6

0,8

1,0

Black African 0,6 0,5 0,5 0,5 0,5 0,5 0,6 0,5 0,5 0,5Coloured 0,6 0,6 0,5 0,6 0,7 0,6 0,7 0,7 0,7 0,6

Indian/Asian 0,8 0,8 0,8 0,7 0,7 0,8 0,8 0,7 0,8 0,7White 0,9 0,8 0,8 0,8 0,9 0,8 0,9 0,8 0,8 0,9

Source: Global Insight SA: Ref 2003

9.5 Provincial budgets Table 9.7 shows that:

• The Department of Education was allocated the highest budget of about R8,5 billion for the 2003/2004 financial year, followed by Welfare with about R5 billion, Office of the Premier (about R3,5 billion), and Public Works (about R1,2 billion).

• The Department of Safety and Security was allocated the smallest budget (R12 895 000) in the province, followed by Sport, Arts and Culture (R50 626 000), and Legislature (R70 980 000).

98

Table 9.7: Provincial budget allocation by department, Limpopo, 2003/2004

Department

Amount(R'000)

%

Agriculture 189 337 0,9 Education 8 511 801 39,8 Health 788 004 3,7 Premier 3 465 572 16,2 Transport 371 165 1,7 Public Works 1 243 639 5,8 Safety and Security 12 895 0,1 Welfare 4 979 752 23,3 Legislature 70 980 0,3 Local Government and Housing 824 936 3,9 Finance 864 143 4,0 Sport, Arts and Culture 50 626 0,2 Total 21 372 850 100,0

Source: Department of Finance, 2004 Figure 9.13 below also shows the picture as depicted above.

Figure 9.13: Percentage provincial budget allocation by department, Limpopo 2003/2004

Note: 0% denotes figures between 0% and 0,5% of the total budget Source: Department of Finance, 2004

Sport, Artsand Culture

0,2%

Education39,8%

Welfare 23,3%

Safety and Security 0,1%

Premier 16,2%

Transport1,7%

Health3,7%

Legislature0,3%

Public Works5,8%

Finance4,0%

Agriculture0,9%

Local gov. and housing3,9%

99

Chapter 10: Politics This chapter compares the 1994, 1999 and 2004 democratic election results in terms of the allocation of seats to political parties in the Limpopo Provincial Legislature.

10.1 Profile of the Limpopo Provincial Legislature Table 10.1 shows that:

• In all three elections, the African National Congress occupied more seats than all other political parties, with 38 seats in 1994, 44 in 1999 and 45 in 2004.

• In 1994, the Freedom Front and New National Party occupied 1 seat each. • In 1999 the African Christian Democratic Party, Democratic Alliance, New National

Party, Pan Africanist Congress and United Democratic Movement occupied 1 seat each.

• In 2004 the Democratic Alliance Party occupied 2 seats followed by the African Christian Democratic Party and United Democratic Movement occupying 1 seat each.

Table 10.1: Composition of the Limpopo Provincial Legislature, 1994, 1999 and 2004

Number of seats Political party 1994 1999 2004 African Christian Democratic Party (ACDP) - 1 1 African National Congress (ANC) 38 44 45 Democratic Alliance (DA) - 1 2 Freedom Front (FF) 1 - - New National Party (NNP) 1 1 - Pan Africanist Congress (PAC) - 1 - United Democratic Movement (UDM) - 1 1 Total 40 49 49

Source: Limpopo Provincial Legislature, 2004 Table 10.2 below shows the provincial election results for Limpopo in 2004. This table indicates that:

• Limpopo had a total valid votes of 1 614 514. • The African National Congress received the highest number of votes (89,18%) in the

province, followed by the Democratic Alliance (3,59%), the United Democratic Movement (1,72%) and the African Christian Democratic Party (1,26%).

• The Nasionale Aksie received the lowest number of votes (0,14%), followed by the Independent Democrats (0,17%) and the United Christian Democratic Party (0,22%).

100

Table 10.2: Provincial election results, Limpopo, 2004

Party N % African Christian Democratic Party 20 418 1,26 African National Congress 1 439 853 89,18 Alliance for Democracy and Prosperity 9 933 0,62 Azanian People's Organisation 8 204 0,51 Democratic Alliance 57 930 3,59 Independent Democrats 2 730 0,17 Nasionale Aksie 2 213 0,14 New National Party 7 443 0,46 Pan Africanist Congress of Azania 15 222 0,94 United Christian Democratic Party 3 477 0,22 United Democratic Movement 27 780 1,72 Vryheidsfront Plus 9 724 0,60 Ximoko xa Rixaka Party 9 587 0,59 Total valid votes 1 614 514 100,00

Source: Independent Electoral Commission, 2004

provincial profile 2004 - statistics south africaprovincial profile 2004: limpopo / statistics south...

Documents