SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

Keywords:

  • security;
  • surveillance;
  • mega-events;
  • South Africa

Abstract

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. Introduction
  4. Security and surveillance in Johannesburg: the activities of the JMPD
  5. Social, spatial and symbolic implications
  6. Concluding remarks
  7. Acknowledgements
  8. References

This paper analyses the 2010 FIFA World Cup that took place in South Africa by focusing on both security and surveillance dynamics and spatial implications in the city of Johannesburg. While securitisation dynamics and socio-political legacies have been explored by a substantial body of literature, the activities of the law-enforcement agencies in a specific urban setting, distinctive geographical patterns and aspects of security governance in South Africa seem to be more fragmented. In this contribution we argue that the tournament represents an important shift in FIFA security governance, namely a shift from reactive patterns of security provisions to more proactive policing approaches. Additionally, we shed light on power dynamics and on trends of securitisation of the urban space, such as the reliance on technology-based policing which resulted in the implementation of surveillance tools. Symbolic implications and spatial patterns are also discussed with an emphasis on either facility developments or on controversial event-driven projects. Overall, we contend that despite delivering a safe tournament and reducing crime rates, further investigation is needed to assess surveillance technologies both from a cost-benefit analysis and from socio-ethical implications, i.e. the stigmatisation of certain social groups. However, we also argue that inclusionary aspects in relation to event-driven impositions should be taken into account in the literature on mega-events in the global South.


Introduction

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. Introduction
  4. Security and surveillance in Johannesburg: the activities of the JMPD
  5. Social, spatial and symbolic implications
  6. Concluding remarks
  7. Acknowledgements
  8. References

In the last decade, a substantial international body of research has been focused on sport mega-events producing systematic and comparative analysis. This research has drawn attention to problems related to surveillance, security and control (inter alia Bennet and Haggerty 2011; Boyle and Haggerty 2009); Olympic-driven spatial implications (Poynter and MacRury 2009; Fussey et al. 2011); the socio-cultural-political and economic impact of individual sport mega-events in specific urban settings (Samatas 2007; Klauser 2008; Yu et al. 2009; Fonio and Pisapia 2011; Boyle and Haggerty 2009).

Scholars who have investigated mega-events thoroughly have emphasised aspects of urban renewal often related to new Olympic topographies (Pavoni 2011) and spaces of exceptions typified by socio-spatial purifications (Fussey et al. 2012). In the global North, mega-events securitisation has led to a reinforcement of the ‘visions of order’ which already exist (Fussey et al. 2011, 61) due to standardised approaches to policing, security and surveillance.

When looking at the literature focused on mega-events and the global South, and in particular on the 2010 FIFA World Cup that took place in South Africa, which is the main focus of this article, a few distinctive aspects seem to emerge. As Cornelissen argues, hosting countries in the global South have several of the same characteristics, for example similar socio-political dynamics and structural problems (Cornelissen 2011). Moreover, the 2010 FIFA World Cup is likely to be a blueprint for processes of securitisation in the global South, as it occurred before the World Cup that will take place in Brazil in 2014 and as it was a ‘first’ for the African continent.

Literature has shed light on symbolic aspects (Alegi and Bolsmann 2010), security planning and governance (Davies 2009; Cornelissen 2011) and urban development implications (Pillary and Bass 2008; Asmal 2012; Steinbrick et al. 2011). The symbolic relevance of such an event in a post-apartheid era raises issues that go beyond the spectacularisation of security (Boyle and Haggerty 2009). National identity, social cohesion, reconciliation (Human Sciences Research Council 2010) and poverty reduction (Pillary and Bass 2008) have been addressed in the literature on FIFA 2010. In this frame, not only is the event a catalyst for urban transformation but it can also be a catalyst for fostering inclusion and integration. Investments in infrastructures and public space go hand in hand with opportunities of bringing people together rather than ‘keeping them apart’ as occurred under apartheid (Asmal 2012).

This contribution looks at the 2010 World Cup from a twofold perspective: safety, security and surveillance dynamics1 implemented by the Johannesburg Metropolitan Police Department (JMPD); and social, symbolic and spatial implications of the tournament in the city of Johannesburg. The overarching research question is whether inclusionary features were implemented alongside exclusionary measures reminiscent of apartheid (Cornelissen 2011).

Security and surveillance in Johannesburg: the activities of the JMPD

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. Introduction
  4. Security and surveillance in Johannesburg: the activities of the JMPD
  5. Social, spatial and symbolic implications
  6. Concluding remarks
  7. Acknowledgements
  8. References

One of the main security concerns raised both locally and internationally was the ability to successfully host the 2010 FIFA World Cup in a country with a high level of crime (Burger 2007). Despite the fact that South Africa successfully hosted a number of major sports events that have attracted international attention (e.g. African Cup of Nations in 1996, All African Games in 1999, Cricket World Cup in 2003) and assisted Mali in hosting the Africa Cup of Nations in 2002, hosting the FIFA World Cup in 2010 was clearly seen as different as it was going to be one of the largest and longest major sport events in the world, and the issue of safety and security was high up on the international agenda.

When the event was awarded to South Africa, the City of Johannesburg was identified as the main Host City of the 2010 FWC with two match venues (Soccer City Stadium and Ellis Park Stadium), two official Fan Fests areas (Elkah Stadium in Soweto and Innes Free Park in Sandton), both the opening and closing ceremonies of the event and the International Broadcast Center (IBC).

However, Johannesburg was still perceived as being a very unsafe destination at the time of the award. During South Africa's political transition in the 1990s, the metropolis, known for its divided and violent past, was named in numerous international media reports as being the murder capital of the country and was ranked, along with cities such as Bogotá, Colombia, as being one of the most dangerous places in the world.

In this critical urban setting, safety and security measures were planned and implemented in conjunction with three law enforcement agencies: the South African Police Service (SAPS), the Gauteng Traffic Police and the JMPD. Each of these agencies had its specific roles and responsibilities with regards to the safety and security of the event2.

Early participation in multi-agency planning structures (from 2005 until July 2010) was a key aspect in defining the overall approach to safety and security. It became clear during the first part of the planning phase that city authorities had an important role in safety and security planning. While the national and provincial law enforcement agencies focused on their wider responsibilities, the City of Johannesburg realised that, at city level, it had to take a more direct interest in security planning, including the cooperation and coordination of role players, integration of operational plans and resource requirements of all key departments and agencies.

The JMPD 2010 FWC safety and security operational plan (SSOP), composed of several documents (i.e. the deployment plan which detailed the JMPD resources; the road closure plan, the volunteer programme) was fully integrated with all the other City, Provincial and National department plans for the event.

The SSOP was implemented through different technologies, like CCTV and Geographic Information System (GIS) technology. The latter was used to develop the crime mapping and crime analysis and physical/social disorder issues assessment for Johannesburg Inner City. The GIS was employed to capture all relevant event-related information into geographical layers such as transportation hubs and routes, facilities, security layers (e.g. traffic warning zone) and road closures.

By physically defining, delimitating and identifying all the components of the Department's operational plan (e.g. road closures, spectators' flows) it was possible to develop spatial illustrations of each venue's safety and security plans. Furthermore, GIS-related information assisted in the development of accurate documents related to the event safety and security measures (e.g. road closures) and transportation plans (e.g. routes) targeted for the media, spectators and residents. In addition, GIS was helpful to develop crime mapping and crime analysis to assess and respond to crime trends and patterns before and during the tournament.

The overall approach to urban security, thus, drew on a proactive approach to predict and proactively counter issues through crime mapping and analysis. The proactive approach highlights an important shift in FIFA security governance: from the reactive pattern of security provisions to preventative policing (Berg et al. 2014, 87). This was not only due to the implementation of surveillance tools which have become a regular feature of mega events, but also to specific agreements ‘based on guarantees signed between FIFA and the state’ (Berg et al. 2014, 87). This had a deep impact on how security was framed and, as explained below, on the nature of security governance. What seems to emerge both from the reports issued after the World Cup and from the literature is an emphasis on the successful policing of the event. Moreover, South Africa reinvented itself ‘in the eyes of the world, casting off its reputation as a place defined by violent crime, poverty and AIDS. To a remarkable degree, it succeeded’ (Dugger 2010). However, it is less clear whether preventive policing has led to socio-ethical implications (i.e. the stigmatisation of social groups); whether there are legacies that go beyond mere technical tools and entail, for instance, law enforcement training or knowledge networks (Boyle 2011) that still permeate security governance at an urban and national level; and whether there are substantial spatial implications.

In the city of Johannesburg, intelligence-led policing (Maguire 2000) relied on a technology-based strategy which aimed at developing a spatially centred operational plan. One of the most important spatial statistic tools was, for instance, the so-called ‘nearest neighborhood hierarchical cluster’ focused on the identification of hot spots defined on the basis of the highest number of specific types of incidents. A pre-emptive policing tool was the ‘kernel density estimation’ which consists of laying a grid over the analysed area. Each cell of the grid has been given a number which represents the risk in a given area (the cell) of having contact crime. All cells have been classified into five different categories that represent the level of crime risk. The kernel density estimation indicates in which area the highest level of crime is likely to take place, and therefore, where law enforcement activities should focused.

One of the most problematic areas was the area surrounding the Ellis Park Stadium, located in the Johannesburg Inner City. Its precinct, defined as a 2 km radius from the centre of the venue, includes the central/eastern portion of the Johannesburg Inner City area, which has recorded, in the last two decades, exceptionally high levels of crime, especially violent crime. Disaggregated crime data collected by the South Africa Police Service from 2004 to 2011 were analysed to measure the impact of hosting the World Cup upon crime levels. From the analysis3 it emerged that the perception of safety of residents, business owners and law enforcement officers increased during the FIFA World Cup. Therefore, it seems that crime levels significantly dropped during the event, possibly thanks to the implementation of safety and security measures such as high policing visibility and checkpoints, along with the use of crime prevention through environmental design.

If, on the one hand, the area of the Ellis Park Stadium benefited from the implemented security measures, on the other, in this area, as described in the following section, the regeneration project impacted negatively on already marginalised social groups. Policies of urban renewal, thus, which also included the successful ‘fight against crime’, were far from being unproblematic in terms of a lack of attention to residents and ‘unwanted’ groups, such as the poor.

It is also worth noting specific geographical patterns of ‘exclusion’, namely the ‘exclusion zones’ outside the perimeter of the stadiums. While exclusion zones are commercial restriction zones which are not per se related to security, due to pressure from FIFA, agencies involved in security, especially in the lead-up to the World Cup, frequently raided the stalls. According to Vigneswaran (2013, 124) ‘this was an act of policing performance designed to appease an international audience’ and, perhaps more importantly, arrested traders were more often charged for immigration offences rather than for piracy. Vigneswaran (2013, 124) argues that laws on mobility were thus used to deal with law-enforcement problems. The issue of criminality was considered a ‘spatially fixed disorder’ (2013, 125) which led to explicit geographical patterns. However, it is not clear which agencies were directly involved in these ‘policing performances’ as it should be noted that some activities were outside the remit of the JMPD. Yet, this seems to shed light on security governance as it was clearly FIFA who decided what spaces should be policed and how they should be policed within the exclusion zones (Berg et al. 2014, 86). As suggested by Eick (2011), the securitisation of urban spaces seem to go hand in hand with the securitisan of FIFA's profits.

Surveillance tools were also implemented to capture and record physical, social and land use disorders in a specific area of Johannesburg where high levels of disorder took place, namely the Noord Street precinct in the inner city. Law enforcements used GIS handheld devices, cameras and audio recorders to monitor these disorders. The objective of such an exercise was to establish the root causes of such disorders with the active involvement of local committees, residents, business owners and local government departments.

GIS is one of the most tangible technological legacies of FIFA 2010 as it is currently used for safety and security purposes by the JMPD. While this technology is widely used to optimise decision making during mega-events, research on new ‘geographies’ emerging from a spatial approach to security planning is fragmented. Nevertheless, understanding the consequences of technology-based strategies (van Brakel and de Hert 2011) would be beneficial to grasp some critical aspects, such as unintended social consequences (e.g. social sorting), privacy and legal issues and the non-neutrality of technology. In addition, the simplified approach to space brings with it certain risks, on a socio-spatial level. The use of GIS allows the manipulation of spatial and other data which can be matched with databases and it could thus have implications that go beyond efficient planning.

As mentioned above, other surveillance measures like CCTV were implemented. The City of Johannesburg is not a stranger, along with other South African cities, to the use of surveillance cameras. The first CCTV systems were installed in the late 1990s in the central business districts (CBDs) and subsequently expanded in the first few years of the new millennium (Minnaar 2007, 2011). In the last 10 years, either public fears about safety or high crime levels have vindicated the use of surveillance cameras in major cities in South Africa.

Hosting the 2010 FIFA World Cup led to further implementations of CCTV systems in host cities both around the venues and at potential hot spot areas. In Johannesburg, the number of dome cameras increased and allowed a greater coverage of the Johannesburg Inner City, including areas that were not previously under CCTV control (e.g. Fordsburg, Doornfontein). According to Cornelissen, the system was expanded by 100 additional cameras linked to a national database containing biometric data (Cornelissen 2011, 3234). By 2010, the CCTV network system spanned from the Ellis Park Stadium precinct in the East to Mayfair in the West and from Yeoville in the North to Village Deep in the South of the Johannesburg CBD. As per the CCTV Operational Plan, 237 dome cameras have been installed in strategic areas of the Inner City, such as key access points into and out of the CBD, crime hot spots, transportation hubs, important institutions such as banks' headquarters and general places of interest (e.g. tourist areas).

Overall, the implementation of the surveillance camera system in Johannesburg highlights two major trends that seem to emerge in the international literature focused on mega-events in the global North: the reduction of surveillance-free urban area and infrastructural surveillance-related legacies with long-term implications on the public space. However, there is still need for further investigation into the more specific use and impact of surveillance cameras in Johannesburg during the World Cup.

Another similarity with mega-events in the global North relates to security governance, in particular, institutional ‘knowledge networks’ (Boyle 2011). The sharing and transfer of knowledge, best practices and lessons learned from previous major sport events was, in fact, an important part of the key activities carried out by the JMPD. Official visits to Germany (2006 FWC) and Greece (2004 Summer Olympics Games) were arranged. In addition, training sessions on safety and security measures for major sport events were organised with senior officials of the United Nations Interregional Crime and Justice Institute (UNICRI) and German Police Force. The engagement with UNICRI and the German Police Force formed part of the broad training programme for the Jo'burg Metro Police Officers for the FIFA event. The programme consisted of, in addition to the workshops on security for major events, various training sessions on the Department's strategic and operational plan for the event.

A crucial aspect of security governance analysed by Berg et al. (2014) was the rise of a ‘polycentric system of security governance’ determined by FIFA. Polycentric systems of governance emerged at the 2010 World Cup as ‘a variety of independent states and non-state auspices from a number of scales (international to local) took part in governing security – but without a central authority4 (FIFA enrolled others but did not centrally govern the entire World Cup)’ (2014, 88). This trend in security governance of mega-events brings systemic, democratic and normative challenges (2014, 90) which relate to the overarching theme of this contribution, namely the implementation of inclusionary and/or exclusionary features. When non-state actors take on regulatory roles, issues of transparency and accountability seem to be particularly problematic. Moreover, the increasing privatisation of security calls into question the sovereignty of the State. However, as argued by the above-mentioned authors, it is too simplistic to assume that the state delegated its power to private actors and in doing so weakened its authority. On the contrary, the collaboration with non-states can enhance the power of the state and this can result, as in the case of FIFA 2010, in delivering a successful event.

Social, spatial and symbolic implications

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. Introduction
  4. Security and surveillance in Johannesburg: the activities of the JMPD
  5. Social, spatial and symbolic implications
  6. Concluding remarks
  7. Acknowledgements
  8. References

As noted by Asmal, the 2010 FIFA World Cup was an unparalleled opportunity to reimagine, reconsider, create and democratise public spaces which were, until a few decades ago, split by apartheid (Asmal 2012). The South African, white, minority-ruled government, which ended with the first democratic elections on the 27 April 1994, were in fact aggressive in using urban planning to physically divide communities: while cities were for ‘whites only’, townships ‘became, in effect, the mechanism for housing the nonwhite labor force. Such policies accelerated the growth of separate townships across the country at all scales – from cities like Cape Town and Johannesburg to the smallest villages’ (Findley and Ogbu 2011). In an urban landscape which was forged by spatial segregation, socio-spatial consequences of mega-events should take into account tangible symbolic legacies related to the issue of inclusion. Hosting the 2010 World Cup provided both opportunities and risks. The opportunity of linking divided communities (Ishibashi 2012), for instance, is paralleled with the risk of reinforcing physical and social gaps through exceptional security regimes or space purification strategies.

When looking at urban implications of the FIFA World Cup, controversial analyses seem to emerge. Some emphasise positive socio-spatial implications while others focus more on missed opportunities. Steinbrik et al. (2011) highlight that a large-scale urban renewal initiative, the ‘Greater Ellis Park Development Plan’ (GEPD), resulted in the displacement of former inhabitants and thus contributed to the marginalisation of already disadvantaged social groups. Initiated in 2004, the GEPD is part of a long-term policy of the Johannesburg inner city regeneration project but the World Cup brought an economic boost to the plan (Human Sciences Research Council 2010, 200). In this specific case, the opportunity to democratise public space through regeneration was missed as marginalised groups were not included in the regeneration projects of the area but rather were excluded through the imposition of a particular vision of order.

More often than not, event-driven urban policies in the global South have led to displacements linked either to the ‘sanitisation’ of the public space or to construction work related to the event. Yet, the most controversial event-driven project in the South African context did not occur in Johannesburg but rather in Cape Town. The beautification of the N2 gateway project, in fact, entailed the displacement of thousands of people who lived in informal settings near the airport. Citizens who were rehoused have no prospect of returning to their former houses (Newton 2009)5.

In both the above-mentioned cases spatial event-driven impositions, namely fast-track developments in derelict areas, do have social implications and negative legacies. Regeneration projects required by mega-events often fail to involve the local community in crucial issues of urban governance and thus challenge notions of transparency and democracy (Human Sciences Research Council 2010).

Conversely, spatial patterns of inequality typified by physical and symbolic distance from the inner city to the over 25 townships of Johannesburg were partly disrupted by facility developments and venues. The major World Cup stadium, Soccer City, was built in the black township of Soweto which is now, thanks to large-scale infrastructural investments, well connected to Johannesburg through the rapid transit bus line (Rea Vaya). In cities like Johannesburg, public transport facilities, prior to the FIFA World Cup, were not fully developed due to apartheid legacies and low citizen-awareness of public transportation (Ishibashi 2012).

Johannesburg is now also linked by a high-speed train to Pretoria and to the OR Tambo International Airport. Nevertheless, Bond and Cottle (2011, 21) notice that the Gautrain probably shifted the commuting behaviours of those who can afford to pay for expensive tickets. Therefore, questions concerning who really benefited from the facility developments seem to arise. Likewise, ‘white elephant’ stadiums (2011, 21 or upgraded sport facilities are more beneficial to ‘wealthy’ citizens.

As noted by Dvornak (2010, 8), there are also significant ‘symbolic politics’ of Johannesburg's urban space captured by specific narratives aimed at re-configuring African identity for an international audience and at representing the city as a world-class African host location to its population. Dvornak's insights on poster campaigns that conveyed a dominant narrative focused on pro-World Cup discourse in the public realm, shed light on an underlying leit-motif: the symbolic construction of Johannesburg as a ‘modernised hub’ or as a ‘brand of cosmopolitanism’ that seeks to shift the public imagination through specific discourses on space.

The symbolic centrality of space emerges also from official documents, such as the City of Johannesburg integrated development plan (2009–10)6 in which policy guidelines entail the ‘re-engineering of distorted urban forms’ (p. 44) to provide, inter alia, new social opportunities, ‘public spaces (other than formal parks) where citizens can interact freely and safely (p. 94), design intervention strategies for townships and link, for instance, Soweto to the City in order to address ‘the historical segregation of the City from its south-western suburbs’ (p. 290).

Concluding remarks

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. Introduction
  4. Security and surveillance in Johannesburg: the activities of the JMPD
  5. Social, spatial and symbolic implications
  6. Concluding remarks
  7. Acknowledgements
  8. References

In this paper we explored the 2010 FIFA World Cup and its security, surveillance, socio-spatial implications in the city of Johannesburg. Despite the lack of literature focused on surveillance tools implemented in the aforementioned urban context, we argue that surveillance-related strategies, like surveillance cameras, led to an overall reduction of surveillance-free areas in the inner city. However, security measures also delivered a safe tournament, reduced crime rates and increased the perception of safety. We also contend that further investigation is needed to assess surveillance technologies from a cost–benefit analysis perspective and to examine both social impact and unintended consequences of intelligence-led policing. Moreover, we touch upon the complex issue of polycentric security governance and its implications.

Additionally, we brought to the fore social, spatial and symbolic issues of particular relevance to grasp some distinctive aspects of the 2010 World Cup. There are no clear-cut answers to the overarching research question, namely whether inclusionary features were implemented alongside exclusionary aspects often highlighted in international literature. Nevertheless, important spatial implications pertaining to the redistribution of physical and symbolic borders between the inner city and at least one of its townships has begun to take shape. We contend, thus, that inclusionary aspects – in relation to spatial and event-driven impositions – should be taken into account in the literature focused on mega-events in the global South. However, we argue that there is a need to investigate who really benefited from the tournament and especially what were and are the benefits in terms of legacies for the domestic population. We also believe that comparative analysis between the 2010 and the 2014 FIFA World Cups might offer further insights that have not been captured so far, especially as far polycentric security governance is concerned.

Acknowledgements

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. Introduction
  4. Security and surveillance in Johannesburg: the activities of the JMPD
  5. Social, spatial and symbolic implications
  6. Concluding remarks
  7. Acknowledgements
  8. References

The authors wish to thank Francisco R. Klauser and Pete Fussey for their support and encouragement. Furthermore, the authors would like to acknowledge the useful advice and guidance offered from the anonymous reviewers.

Notes
  1. 1

    One of the co-authors was involved in security planning for these games.

  2. 2

    The General Security Concept, the document developed by SAPS and the 2010 Organizing Committee in conjunction with the Host Cities which entails the security strategy for the FIFA event, stated that SAPS would be the lead agency to deal with national security and matters of law enforcement, crime prevention and the protection of identified VVIP guests to the 2010 FIFA World Cup.

  3. 3

    The actual statistic cannot be published because it is confidential.

  4. 4

    However, it is important to acknowledge that SAPS was ultimately responsible for the safety and the security of the event. Therefore, the overall argument of ‘polycentric security governance’ should be framed by taking into account a central authority in charge of security that is different from FIFA.

  5. 5

    On the complex dynamics of the N2 gateway project, see also, inter alia, Centre on Housing Rights and Violations (2009) and Cross (2006).

  6. 6

    Available at: www.joburg.org.za/pdfs/draft09_10idp.pdf (accessed 28 March 2014).

References

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. Introduction
  4. Security and surveillance in Johannesburg: the activities of the JMPD
  5. Social, spatial and symbolic implications
  6. Concluding remarks
  7. Acknowledgements
  8. References
  • Alegi P and Bolsmann C eds 2010 South Africa and the global game Routledge, London
  • Asmal Z ed 2012 Reflections & opportunities: design, cities and the World Cup Designing South Africa
  • Bennett C J and Haggerty K D eds 2011 Security games. Surveillance and control at mega-events Routledge, New York
  • Berg J, Nakueira S and Shearing C 2014 Global non-state auspices of security governance in Arrigo B and Bersot H eds The Routledge handbook of international crime and justice studies Routledge, New York 7798
  • Bond P and Cottle E 2011 Economic promises and pitfalls of South Africa's World Cup in Cottle E ed South Africa's World Cup. A legacy for whom? University of KwaZulu-Natal Press. Available at http://ccs.ukzn.ac.za/files/Bond%20Cottle%20World%20Cup%20economics.pdf Accessed 28 March 2014
  • Boyle P 2011 Knowledge networks: mega-events and security expertise in Bennett C J and Haggerty K D eds 2011 Security games. Surveillance and control at mega-events Routledge, New York 169184
  • Boyle P and Haggerty K D 2009 Spectacular security: mega-events and the security complex International Political Sociology 3 257274
  • Burger J 2007 A golden goal for South Africa: Security arrangements for the 2010 FIFA Soccer World Cup, South African Crime Quarterly (http://www.issafrica.org/uploads/CQ19BURGER.PDF) Accessed 11 April 2014
  • Centre on Housing Rights and Violations 2009 N2 Gateway Project: housing rights violations as ‘development’ in South Africa (http://westerncapeantieviction.files.wordpress.com/2009/09/090911-n2-gateway-project-report.pdf) Accessed 28 March 2014
  • Cornelissen S 2011 Mega event securitisation in a Third World setting: glocal processes and ramifications during the 2010 FIFA World Cup Urban Studies 48 32213240 (http://usj.sagepub.com/content/48/15/3221.abstract) Accessed 11 April 2014
  • Cross C 2006 Local governance and social conflict: implications for piloting South Africa's new housing plan in Cape Town's informal settlements in Huchzermeyer M and Karam A eds Informal settlements: a perpetual challenge? UCT Press, Cape Town 250269
  • Davies G 2009 Managing the Alchemy of the 2010 Football World Cup in Development and dreams: the urban legacy of the 2010 Football World Cup HSRC Press, Cape Town 333 (http://www.hsrcpress.ac.za/product.php?productid=2259) Accessed 11 April 2014
  • Dvornak D 2010 The 2010 FIFA World Cup and the re-imagined African identity: the symbolic politics of the host city Poster Campaign Postamble 6 (http://postamble.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/Dvornak.pdf) Accessed 28 March 2014
  • Dugger C W 2010 South Africa pushes to make the cup its own, The New York Times, http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/24/sports/soccer/24safrica.html?_r=0 Accessed 28 March 2014
  • Eick V 2011 ‘Secure our profits!’ The FIFA in Germany 2006 in Bennett C J and Haggerty K D eds Security games: surveillance and control at mega-events Routledge, London 87102
  • Findley L and Ogbu L 2011 South Africa from township to town (http://places.designobserver.com/feature/south-africa-after-apartheid-from-township-to-town/31148/) Accessed 28 March 2014
  • Fonio C and Pisapia G 2011 Gran Torino: social and security implications of the XX Winter Olympic Games in Bennett C J and Haggerty K D eds Security games: surveillance and control at mega-events Routledge, London 137149
  • Fussey P, Coaffee J, Armstrong G and Hobbs D 2011 Securing and sustaining the Olympic city: reconfiguring London for 2012 and beyond Ashgate, Aldershot
  • Fussey P, Coaffee J, Armstrong G and Hobbs D 2012 The regeneration games: purity and security in the Olympic city British Journal of Sociology 63 260284
  • Human Sciences Research Council (HSRH) 2010 Impact of 2010 World Cup on social cohesion, national building and reconciliation (www.hsrc.ac.za/en/research-data/ktree-doc/8349) Accessed 28 March 2014
  • Ishibashi K 2012 Linking divided communities in Asmal Z 2010 ed Reflections & opportunities: design, cities and the World Cup Designing South Africa 63
  • Klauser F 2008 Spatial articulations of surveillance at the FIFA World Cup 2006TM in Germany in Franko Aas K , Oppen Gundhus H and Lomell Mork H eds Technologies of insecurity Routledge, London 6180
  • Maguire M 2000 Policing by risks and targets: some dimensions and implications of intelligence-led crime control Policing and Society 9 315336
  • Minnaar A 2007 The implementation and impact of crime prevention/crime control open street Closed Circuit Television surveillance in South African Central Business Districts Surveillance & Society 4 174207 (www.surveillance-and-society.org/articles4(3)/southafrica.pdf) Accessed 11 April 2014
  • Minnaar A 2011 The growth and further proliferation of camera surveillance in South Africa in Doyle A , Lippert R and Lyon D eds 2011 Eyes everywhere. The global growth of camera surveillance Routledge, London 100121
  • Newton C 2009 The reverse side of the medal: about the 2010 FIFA World Cup and the beautification of the N2 in Cape Town Urban Forum 20 93108 (http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs12132-009-9048-y) Accessed 11 April 2014
  • Pavoni A 2011 Turning the city: Johannesburg and the 2010 World Cup Brazilian Journal of Urban Management 3 191209
  • Pillary U and Bass O 2008 Mega-events as a response to poverty reduction: the 2010 FIFA World Cup and its urban development implications Urban Forum 19 329346
  • Poynter G and MacRury I eds 2009 Olympic cities and the reshaping of London Ashgate, London
  • Samatas M 2007 Security and surveillance in the Athens 2004 Olympics: some lessons from a troubled story International Criminal Justice Review 17 220238
  • Steinbrink M, Hafenburg C and Ley A 2011 Festivalisation and urban renewal in the Global South: socio-spatial consequences of the 2010 FIFA World Cup South African Geographical Journal 93 1528
  • The City of Johannesburg 2009–10 Integrated Development Plan (www.joburg.org.za/pdfs/draft09_10idp.pdf) Accessed 28 March 2014
  • Van Brakel R and De Hert P 2011 Policing, surveillance and law in a pre-crime society: understanding the consequences of technology based strategy Journal of Police Studies 20 163192 (www.vub.ac.be/LSTS/pub/Dehert/378.pdf) Accessed 11 April 2014
  • Vigneswaran D 2013 Making mobility a problem: how South African officials criminalize migration in Aas Franko K and Bosworth M eds The Bordes of Punishment: migration, citizenship and social exclusion Oxford University Press, Oxford 111127
  • Yu Y, Klauser F and Chan G 2009 Governing security at the 2008 Beijing Olympics International Journal of the History of Sport 26 390405