Families in Africa: Economic Hardships and Intergenerational Support

IF 0.5 Q4 SOCIOLOGY
M. Rabe, S. Kumswa
{"title":"Families in Africa: Economic Hardships and Intergenerational Support","authors":"M. Rabe, S. Kumswa","doi":"10.1080/21528586.2023.2180428","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"A phrase such as “Families in Africa” conjures up varied images. In fact, the term ׅ“families” in itself can be seen as elusive, even though it is so familiar to all of us. Individuals have specific experiences of families that they often regard as unique, and this may lead to increasing resistance against general definitions of families. Generalised definitions of families have been seen as too restrictive in the past, sometimes side-lining certain family forms and dynamics or regarding some family forms as “ideal”. Families in Africa are sometimes easily classified as either large extended networks, where family members support each other, or “in crisis” and failing in pertinent roles, such as socialising children and taking care of vulnerable members of society. This latter perspective stems from a deficit paradigm where families are blamed for negative elements in society, such as brutal acts of violence and hardship. Mokomane (2013) is one of the authors who caution us against such a simplistic understanding of families as families live in complicated environments. The articles in this Special Issue, continues to highlight and explain these complexities within specific African contexts. In South Africa, the first White Paper of Families was published in 2012 (DSD 2012) and although the definition was fairly inclusive, other aspects of the White Paper were severely criticised by both activists and academics (see Rabe 2017). In this first publication of the White Paper, the moralistic tone and idealisation of heterosexual nuclear families with assumed access to resources, despite acknowledging the wide variety of family forms, was difficult to fathom. After much consultation, an updated version of the White Paper was published early in 2022 (DSD 2022). Although the definition of families did not change in the revised White Paper, the underlying moral sentiments and explicit preferences for particular family forms were largely removed and the variety of family forms were confirmed. The fluidity of families and households, partly fuelled by a long history of different forms of migration, is not only prominent in South Africa, but in many parts of the African continent (Kumswa, Agboola, and Kang’Ethe 2022; Hall and Posel 2019; Oucho, Gelderblom, and Van Zyl 2006; Rugunanan and Xulu-Gama 2022; Spiegel 1996). Special issues on specific elements of families help us to focus attention on recent research on the African continent. Rabe & Naidoo (2015) edited a special issue on Families in South Africa in the South African Review of Sociologywhere they stated that there is a huge interest in family issues. The editorial for this 2015 issue is the most read article of SARS, with 7094 views (as noted on 30 January 2023), which supports this view that family matters is an ongoing interest. In the current special issue, we wanted to expand on this 2015 issue by not only collating submissions from South Africa, but also invite scholars from other African countries to contribute to a greater understanding of how different forms of intergenerational support are experienced on the African continent. We are thus happy to report that the current issue contains articles from South Africa, Zimbabwe and Nigeria. All the articles are based on qualitative research where in-depth discussions are used to help us understand the agency of family","PeriodicalId":44730,"journal":{"name":"South African Review of Sociology","volume":"150 1","pages":"1 - 4"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"South African Review of Sociology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/21528586.2023.2180428","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"SOCIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

A phrase such as “Families in Africa” conjures up varied images. In fact, the term ׅ“families” in itself can be seen as elusive, even though it is so familiar to all of us. Individuals have specific experiences of families that they often regard as unique, and this may lead to increasing resistance against general definitions of families. Generalised definitions of families have been seen as too restrictive in the past, sometimes side-lining certain family forms and dynamics or regarding some family forms as “ideal”. Families in Africa are sometimes easily classified as either large extended networks, where family members support each other, or “in crisis” and failing in pertinent roles, such as socialising children and taking care of vulnerable members of society. This latter perspective stems from a deficit paradigm where families are blamed for negative elements in society, such as brutal acts of violence and hardship. Mokomane (2013) is one of the authors who caution us against such a simplistic understanding of families as families live in complicated environments. The articles in this Special Issue, continues to highlight and explain these complexities within specific African contexts. In South Africa, the first White Paper of Families was published in 2012 (DSD 2012) and although the definition was fairly inclusive, other aspects of the White Paper were severely criticised by both activists and academics (see Rabe 2017). In this first publication of the White Paper, the moralistic tone and idealisation of heterosexual nuclear families with assumed access to resources, despite acknowledging the wide variety of family forms, was difficult to fathom. After much consultation, an updated version of the White Paper was published early in 2022 (DSD 2022). Although the definition of families did not change in the revised White Paper, the underlying moral sentiments and explicit preferences for particular family forms were largely removed and the variety of family forms were confirmed. The fluidity of families and households, partly fuelled by a long history of different forms of migration, is not only prominent in South Africa, but in many parts of the African continent (Kumswa, Agboola, and Kang’Ethe 2022; Hall and Posel 2019; Oucho, Gelderblom, and Van Zyl 2006; Rugunanan and Xulu-Gama 2022; Spiegel 1996). Special issues on specific elements of families help us to focus attention on recent research on the African continent. Rabe & Naidoo (2015) edited a special issue on Families in South Africa in the South African Review of Sociologywhere they stated that there is a huge interest in family issues. The editorial for this 2015 issue is the most read article of SARS, with 7094 views (as noted on 30 January 2023), which supports this view that family matters is an ongoing interest. In the current special issue, we wanted to expand on this 2015 issue by not only collating submissions from South Africa, but also invite scholars from other African countries to contribute to a greater understanding of how different forms of intergenerational support are experienced on the African continent. We are thus happy to report that the current issue contains articles from South Africa, Zimbabwe and Nigeria. All the articles are based on qualitative research where in-depth discussions are used to help us understand the agency of family
非洲家庭:经济困难和代际支持
像“非洲的家庭”这样的短语会让人联想到各种各样的画面。事实上,ׅ“家庭”这个词本身可以被视为难以捉摸,尽管它对我们所有人来说都是如此熟悉。个人对家庭有特殊的经历,他们常常认为这些经历是独一无二的,这可能会导致对家庭一般定义的抵制日益增加。过去,对家庭的广义定义被认为过于严格,有时会将某些家庭形式和动态排除在外,或将某些家庭形式视为“理想”。非洲的家庭有时很容易被归类为大型扩展网络,家庭成员相互支持,或者“处于危机”中,未能发挥相关作用,例如使儿童社会化和照顾社会弱势成员。后一种观点源于一种缺陷范式,在这种范式中,家庭被归咎于社会中的消极因素,例如野蛮的暴力行为和困难。Mokomane(2013)是警告我们不要过于简单地理解家庭的作者之一,因为家庭生活在复杂的环境中。本期特刊的文章继续强调和解释非洲特定背景下的这些复杂性。在南非,第一份家庭白皮书于2012年出版(DSD 2012),尽管该定义相当包容,但白皮书的其他方面受到了活动家和学者的严厉批评(见Rabe 2017)。在这份白皮书的首次出版中,尽管承认家庭形式的多样性,但对异性恋核心家庭的道德基调和理想化却难以理解。经过多次磋商,白皮书的更新版本于2022年初发布(DSD 2022)。虽然修订后的白皮书对家庭的定义没有改变,但基本的道德情感和对特定家庭形式的明确偏好在很大程度上被删除,家庭形式的多样性得到了确认。家庭和家庭的流动性不仅在南非突出,而且在非洲大陆的许多地方(Kumswa、Agboola和Kang 'Ethe 2022;Hall and Posel 2019;Oucho, Gelderblom, and Van Zyl 2006;Rugunanan和Xulu-Gama 2022;明镜周刊1996)。关于家庭的具体因素的特别问题帮助我们集中注意最近对非洲大陆的研究。Rabe & Naidoo(2015)在《南非社会学评论》上编辑了一期关于南非家庭的特刊,他们在其中表示,人们对家庭问题非常感兴趣。2015年这期的社论是阅读最多的关于SARS的文章,有7094条评论(如2023年1月30日所述),这支持了家庭问题是一个持续关注的观点。在本期特刊中,我们希望在2015年这期的基础上进行扩展,不仅要整理来自南非的投稿,还要邀请来自其他非洲国家的学者,为更好地理解非洲大陆上不同形式的代际支持做出贡献。因此,我们高兴地报告,本期载有来自南非、津巴布韦和尼日利亚的文章。所有的文章都是基于定性研究,通过深入的讨论来帮助我们理解家庭的中介作用
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
25.00%
发文量
26
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信