Chapter 4

SURVEY METHODOLOGY

Given the difficulties encountered with surveys discussed in the introduction, as well as financial and time constraints, the methodology for the city victim surveys required careful consideration. The Durban victim survey was initiated to gain an understanding of the levels of crime and violence in different communities within the Durban Metropolitan Council. This entailed:

the collection, collation and synthesis of all existing and available research and information on generic types of communities (including demographic statistics) and residential areas located within the Durban metropolitan area;



the development of broad profiles of the defined constituents, including some select demographic statistics on age, gender, vocation and place of work and study;



the identification of the ratio of victims to non-victims of crime by race and residential areas; and



the development of the necessary sampling formulae to accommodate this ratio.

The administration of interviews in an uncontrolled environment, such as on the street, at nodal interchanges and in other public spaces such as places of welfare, is unique to the street survey methodology. This is a significant departure from typical crime surveys that rely either on face-to-face interviews in a controlled environment, or on postal surveys. Such surveys have advantages, but are both expensive and time-consuming to administer.

Given the financial constraints of the project, it was decided to conduct a survey based on a street sample instead. The methodology had been applied in similar studies conducted by the ISS and DRA Development in Johannesburg, Cape Town and in Pretoria.13 This resulted in the calculated application of a more refined research methodology as the surveys proceeded in each metropolis. As the second survey within the ISS city victim survey series, the Durban survey methodology was improved from the original survey conducted in Johannesburg. The most significant improvement was made in relation to the questionnaire design, tailoring the survey to generate more useful forms of data.

Careful planning was required to establish the sample mix and sample points. This was done in a number of stages.

Stage 1

The Durban survey, similar to the Johannesburg survey, included the separation of the grid questionnaire that determines crime levels (providing a profile of both victims and non-victims in the metropolis by age, gender, race, residential area, crime type, victimisation level, as well as repeat victimisation and multiple victimisation) from the more detailed section of the survey. In the latter, respondents were required to provide specific information about the most recent incidents of victimisation for each of the crime categories covered.

In total, 1 884 people were approached in different areas across the Durban metropolitan area. In each sampling node, a predetermined number of people were approached in four age categories, equally divided into male and female respondents. This provided the minimum required subsample in each age and gender category. Prior to approaching the respondents, no distinction was made between victims and non-victims. The only screening criterion was age.

Stage 2

It was decided that, although the research could not be representative of individual substructures with the Durban Metropolitan Council, it should represent the various area types within the metropolis. Since there are very few areas in Durban that do not have a residential population, all geographic localities were included in the sample framework with the exception of industrial areas.

To target the correct types of sample areas, at least one sample point was selected to represent each residential generic typology. In order to ensure that the selected sample points covered the entire metropolis, and that all residential generic typologies were represented, a series of primary sample points were identified for the grid survey. Another series of primary sample points were identified for the detailed survey. Primary sample points were suburbs, townships, the inner city and informal settlements.

Within each primary sample point, a number of secondary points were selected where interviews would be conducted. Examples of primary points included:

shopping and recreation centres (shopping malls, flea markets, corner cafes and stores, plazas, spazas, shebeens, sports grounds, public parks and major streets);



transport nodes (taxi ranks, bus stops, railway stations and parking lots);



education centres (schools, universities and technikons);



health and welfare centres (pension pay-out points, civic buildings, hospitals); and



residential areas (private homes, old-age centres, apartment blocks and informal settlements).

At least five secondary points were identified in each primary sample point. Secondary points were identified within the locality of each of the primary points, but in places of lower accessibility, such as civic buildings, gardens of residential complexes and public health facilities. A minimum of 15% of the quota of respondents for each primary sample point were selected at the secondary points.

Within each secondary sample point, an interview referral point had to be identified. This achieved two objectives:

the identification and selection of respondents; and

an appropriate interview environment.

Finally, in order to limit any selection bias, the number of interviews conducted at each secondary sample point was restricted by both time-delay and locality factors.

Stage 3

The questionnaire was refined through the experiences and results of the Johannesburg city victim survey. The pilot study thus functioned more as a training tool for refining interview techniques, measuring the length of the questionnaire and establishing a respondent sampling technique.

For respondents who had been victims of crimes that required detailing in the second section of the survey, the average interview time was 30 minutes — slightly longer than for the Johannesburg survey. For those respondents who were not crime victims and were required to provide only answers to grid questions, the interview was usually completed in less than five minutes. Generally, respondents wanted to speak about their experiences. In fact, fieldworkers often had difficulty to terminate interviews.

As with the Johannesburg survey, it was confirmed that male enumerators could only interview men, while women could be used to interview both men and women. Of interest was the fact that cross-race interviews were undertaken with relative ease. This suggested that the issue of crime and violence transcends racial inhibitions. Despite this finding, however, and as a precaution, the race of the interviewers in the final survey matched that of respondents. To this end, five field teams of four people were used as follows:

Team 1 surveyed predominantly white and Asian areas and comprised four people (two men, two women).



Team 2 surveyed coloured areas and comprised four people (two men, two women).



Teams 3-5 surveyed African areas and comprised twelve people (mixed gender).

It was found that the success rate, both in terms of selecting respondents and the time taken to execute each subsample, was much higher among the enumerators dressed in an identifiable ‘uniform’. The field team therefore wore a ‘T-shirt’ and cap and carried a bag — all bearing the logo of DRA Development and the ISS.

An important component of the pilot survey was the construction of a respondent selection technique that would allow the enumerators to obtain their necessary quotas, while ensuring that the selection process was both random and rigorously implemented. During the actual fieldwork stage, dummy respondents were used to ensure that these standards were being adhered to. As a further check, enumerators had to calculate the rate of flow of respondents (who roughly fell in the sample unit that was being targeted) at that specific referral point.

Stage 4

Fieldworkers underwent a full-day training course that included a number of practice interviews undertaken in a controlled environment, as well as in the field. In addition, the field teams participated in a one-day workshop on how to empathise with respondents. Fieldworkers were selected from a variety of sources, although all were Durban residents. A similar exercise was undertaken during the debriefing session that followed the research process.

The demographic profile of the realised sample closely resembles the general population trends in the Durban metropolitan area. Table 1 illustrates some of the key characteristics of the Durban victim survey sample.