View/Open - University of Zululand Institutional Repository

interviewed (31 %) were within the highest income bracket. The income groups R1501­
R3000 and R3001-R6000 were represented by 24% each in Section C. Approximately 15%
of respondents from Section C were earning between R251 - R1500. It is important to also
acknowledge that about (5%) ofthe interviewees were within the R 1-R250 bracket.
In unit D, the largest (modal) category is the most highly paid group being R6001 and above
(36%). The category R3001-R6000 represented 23% whilst the R251-RI500 as well as RI­
R250 groups were each represented by 13%. The income bracket R 150 I-R3000 registered
9% and the unemployed category had 6%. The relatively high unemployment level in Section
A should influence policy direction of the Local Municipality about the need to spearhead
sustainable poverty alleviation programmes.
Respondents were asked to reveal their knowledge pertaining to existence of poverty
alleviation in the study area. As such, Table 6.16 presents the various poverty alleviation
programmes in the Ulundi municipality known to residents. Among these programmes were
Table 6.16: Responses relating to knowledge of poverty alleviation programmes of
U1undi in 2001
Programmes
(poverty alleviation)
!
Frequency
i
I,
! Percentage
Cumulative
oercental!.e
Gardening ! 29 i 10.5 10.5
Provision ofhouses
I
6 i
I 2.2 , 12.7
Road construction & repairs i 13 I 4,7 17.4 I
Water supply I , 0.4 17.8
Electricity I 4 :
1.4 19.2 i
Art & craft i 12 i
! 4.3 I 23.6
None (Perceived) 210 i 76.1 i 99,6
I
Social grant I 0.4 100
Tola/ i 276 i 100 , !
gardening (10.5%), provision of houses (2.2%). road construction and repairs (4.7%), water
supply (.4%), electricity (l.4%), art and craft (4.3%) and social grant (less than 1%). Over
75% had no knowledge ofpoverty alleviation programmes in the Ulundi municipality. From
the aforementioned, it can be said that quite a sizeable percentage are ignorant about the
164
.-