Politics and Community-based Research: perspectives from Yeoville Studio, Johannesburg ed. by Claire Bénit-Gbaffou et al

Abstract

Reviewed by: Politics and Community-based Research: perspectives from Yeoville Studio, Johannesburg ed. by Claire Bénit-Gbaffou et al Paul Jenkins Claire Bénit-Gbaffou, Kirsten Dörmann, Sarah Charlton, Sophie Didier (eds) (2019) Politics and Community-based Research: perspectives from Yeoville Studio, Johannesburg. Johannesburg: Wits UP. This quite recent publication (2019) from Wits University Press is based on a ‘City Studio’ undertaken by the School of Architecture and Planning at the University of the Witwatersrand (Wits) in the three-year period 2010 to 2012. Originally planned as two separate books, it was eventually edited into one quite long publication (circa 400 pages) and published some considerable time later. Only available in hardback, while it is relatively accessible in South Africa (R550) it is – like so many limited-edition academic books these days – expensive elsewhere (eg £78 though Amazon UK, at almost three times the recommended South African price). This mention of the book’s cost is relevant to its potential readership, as it would be most likely to be of interest to academics working with communities (especially in South Africa), as well as community organisations and/or NGOs working with academia. While the former could benefit from library purchases, the latter are much less likely to access the book’s content in its current published form.1 This then leads to query: why produce a book with such a community focus? The editors’ declared objective is to examine the objectives, processes and (to a limited extent) the results of academic engagement – and it is explicitly a review from the university’s viewpoint, even more so, primarily that of the editors. The material is authored by 24 different people (four of whom are also the editors) – half of the authors being academic staff and half were students (at Masters or PhD level) at the time of the studio. Two [End Page 118] contacts, the others all at Wits University at the time (eight were based at the host School). Of the 28 chapters, the editors are involved in 16, and the lead editor (who also directed the studio) in 12 of these – including individually authoring the principal introductory and review chapters. There is thus a quite narrow authorial and editorial focus. Some authors, of course, have moved on since the studio was completed some eight years ago, and the relatively long time delay from studio implementation to book publications does show through in the text, which was generally not updated closer to publication date. That this was perhaps inevitable given time constraints from all involved is understandable, but with fast changing community politics it again reinforces the academic focus of the book project (and also to some extent, doubtless, the result of academic pressure to publish). Here is perhaps the moment to state the reviewer’s personal engagement with/awareness of the project. As a visiting professor at the School of Architecture and Planning at Wits University from 2010–2013, this brought an awareness of the studio through invitations to go along to at least one event in the area – but more so, the reviewer was appointed as head of the School in late 2013, stepping back to a part-time professorship in late 2018 and retiring a year later from academia. As such he was involved in the resource manage-ment issues for the City Studios which came subsequent to Yeoville, and also aware of the struggle for publication of this book by School staff. During this term as head of School there was no other direct involvement; however, the role did provide an understanding of the possibilities and constraints for how such community-based research can be accommodated within South African academia. The reviewer also has personally had extensive experience of community-based work, both professionally and academically, mostly in Portuguese-speaking Africa and UK academia – concerning planning and architecture issues – which also provides a wider context for this review. This included extensive action research, NGO training and community engagement (including in South Africa during the transition 1993–1996) of what has been termed ‘spatial agency’, which also has relevance for this review. Returning to the stated objectives of the book, according to the lead editor and...