Introduction

Free roaming livestock in an urban environment present a danger to both animals and humans e.g. traffic and health issues such as the distribution of household refuse. Ideally, livestock should be contained and managed in a safe environment with sufficient water and grazing. However, donkeys have become such a familiar sight that many people associate them with the town itself, becoming more accepting of their presence in town.

Local resident, Makhanda, Online survey

Southern urbanism is a perspective that calls for an expansion of urban theory and case studies through the inclusion of research from the global South (Lawhon & Le Roux, 2019; Parida & Agrawal, 2022, Pieterse, 2015). It is rooted in the discipline of Sociology, emerging within the World Systems theory of the 1970s, but has since been largely dominated by the disciplines of Planning and Development, and Geography (Parida & Agrawal, 2022). Like this theoretical root and various adjacent concepts like African Urbanism and Cosmopolitan Urbanism, it can be seen as a perspective based on the assertion that the experiences of urbanism and within urban settlements in the global North are not necessarily applicable to the geographic context of those in the global South (Harrison & Rubin, 2016; Schindler, 2017). Related to this, Lawhon et al. (2020) and Lawhon and Truelove (2020) argue that Southern urbanism is a postcolonial perspective that asks scholars to acknowledge the political dimension inherent within knowledge production. In other words, what is at the core of this project is an exploration of the essential nature of the ‘urban’ – free from the constraints of normative discourse, and, instead, embracing of a pluralist understanding that explores nuance and context. Through this lens “Africa ceases to be a basket case of multiple pathologies by Western modernist standards, and becomes rather an example of inventiveness – but not necessarily one en route to a preordained future” (Pieterse, 2011: 15). Lemanski and Oldfield (2009), for example, explored two ways in which urban residents in Cape Town, South Africa, have created spaces for themselves through the informal processes of gating and invading. In so doing, they throw off the dominant discourse surrounding these forces that frames them solely in juxtaposition and rather conceptualise them as plural urban forms through which residents claim the Right to the City and independence from government (Lemanski and Oldfield, 2009). Sutherland et al. (2018) conducted a study of the South African city of Durban that explores its particular brand of urbanism. Durban is a city, like all cities, where complex global, national, regional, and local systems converge and intertwine to create an urbanism of juxtaposition – modern and traditional, rural and urban, formal and informal (Sutherland et al., 2018).

Ultimately, Southern Urbanism entails movement beyond the narrow culverts that retain the flow of research within bounded channels to seek new pathways that may challenge existing structures. For Pieterse (2011), these academic culverts are the ‘policy-fix’ category of research that disregards the vibrant array of lived experiences within African cities. It means exploring experiences of identity, belonging, attachment, representation, connection, and navigation (Pieterse, 2011, 2015). This is particularly pertinent within the context of South Africa, which is grappling with the issues of identity and belonging alongside the democratic transformation that it has been undergoing. This transformation is often conceived of, rather superficially, in terms of grand political, economic, social, and ideological narratives. What is overlooked are more fundamental debates about what it means to be South African, to live in South Africa and how to best characterize local urban manifestations and ‘place’.

The concept of ‘place’ is at an interface between Geography, Psychology and Anthropology. It is a dimension of spatial thinking that links human and physical geographies, the intangible and tangible, and the metaphysical and physical. This dimension is thus phenomenological in nature (Seamon 2012). For instance, Heidegger’s concept of human being-in-the-world usefully illustrates the interwoven relationship between human beings and the physical environments in which they experience life (Seamon 2012). In essence, Seamon (2012: 5) argues that place is an ‘integral people-world whole’. Indeed, human existence is spatial in nature – we occupy space through our very being, and place is the way in which that relationship is manifested (Seamon 2012). Thus place can be understood as the layer of meaning in the GIS (Geographic Information Systems) of our lifeworld. More simply put, a sense of place is a person or community’s interpretation of a particular space (Hubbard et al., 2004). It is related to how that space is experienced, how it makes one feel, what meaning is made of it, and the value placed on it (Hubbard et al., 2004). Place is subjective, layered, and open to myriad interpretations that are changeable and often contested (Puren et al., 2012).

The development of a sense of place can be linked to the natural environment (landscape, environment, climate), the built environment (buildings, parks, amenities), and the socio-cultural environment (human activities, events, festivals, rituals) (Davidson & Maitland, 1997; Ferreira, 2007). Both tangible and the intangible characteristics are equally important in the development of a sense of place. It is because of the nature of place and its connection with meaning that it can be linked to identity and belonging (Puren et al., 2012). A change or challenge to a particular sense of place, therefore, can have an impact on the identity and sense of belonging of the individuals or communities that inhabit that space (Puren et al., 2012). In South Africa, case studies like that of Nieu Bethesda (Ingle, 2012), Clarens (Marais et al., 2012), and the Vredefort Dome (Puren et al., 2012) have illustrated how contestations over—and challenges to sense of place have an interrelationship with community and individual identity and sense of belonging. The present research seeks to further the understanding of the contradictions of place-identity in South Africa by exploring the juxtaposition between common conceptions of urban space and urbanism, and the largely unregulated practice of urban livestock husbandry in the city of Makhanda.

To understand this juxtaposition, one must first recognise the historic relationship between livestock and city spaces, and the conceptions of urban spaces and urban planning practices that have developed from this. In the 19th Century, cities around the world were populated by livestock that were used for food and transport. The presence of livestock in urban areas poses many challenges, including human health, environment, and road hazards. Livestock can fight with and cause injury to each other or human pedestrians (Doron, 2021; Kheraj, 2015). Occasionally livestock cause traffic accidents (Asadu et al., 2021). They create a public nuisance, including noise, unappealing odors, the transmission of diseases and pests, and dung (McClintock et al., 2014). Dung left to decompose can be a source of harmful bacteria to humans and animals (Asadu et al., 2021). Roaming livestock forage garbage or public bins and damage lawns, trees, gardens, and parks (Asadu et al., 2021; Kheraj, 2015; Thondhlana et al., 2022). In 19th Century London these impacts of livestock in the city became viewed as a nuisance in need of regulation (Kheraj, 2015; Philo, 1995). Livestock regulations became part of urban planning and management across the globe, and colonial governments established municipal powers to regulate urban livestock by placing restrictions on them or prohibiting them from the city or residential areas (Kheraj, 2015). Related to these restrictions on urban livestock, the demarcation of different land use activities, or Euclidian zoning, was introduced (Butler, 2012). Through colonialism, therefore, countries in the Global South followed urban zoning borrowed from British practices, focusing on land use zoning and, therefore, livestock regulation (Christopher, 1997; Wekwete, 1995). Other forces have also been at play in the defining of animal husbandry as a rural rather than urban activity and the movement of livestock out of the city. Suburbanisation and urban sprawl has encroached on agricultural land on the periphery of cities (Butler, 2012). Likewise, the effect of globalization on the spatial extent of food networks, and the effect of improved transport and storage technologies on the food system have led to an increased spatial disconnection between production and consumption (Butler, 2012). In addition, the industrialization of food production has also led to a commercialization and concentration of food production, eliminating reliance on subsistence and small-scale food production (Butler, 2012).

These changes to the food system and the regulations in place in urban areas have altered the way that we have come to think about urban spaces and urbanism. This is a discussion around the identity, nature and meanings of urban settlements and urbanism and, in essence, place identity. The meanings that have developed around the nature and identity of urban areas and urbanism are, therefore, of great importance to any investigation of the relationship between livestock and the city. For example, Wolch and Emel (1995) and Philo (1995) have discussed the dominant conception of cities as spaces devoid of livestock and agricultural practices in general. Philo (1995: 666) argues that:

There are two larger and intertwining stories here: one involving the long-term process whereby all sorts of phenomena have become categorised in certain ways and allotted to certain spatiotemporal containers, thus raising the difficulties of what to do about 'matter out of place’; the other involving the equally long-term splitting apart of the urban and the rural as distinctive entities conceptually associated with particular human activities and attributes [the industrial and civilised city, the agricultural and barbarian countryside]

Here we understand animal husbandry to be a backward, traditional, and rural practice, a practice that is in complete contrast to the crown jewel of modern civilisation—the city. The geography of the city is, therefore, the geography of human civilisation, supported by a distant and invisible food production system. Gaynor (2007) argues that we have developed an ‘imaginative geography’ where cleanliness, order, amenities, and privacy are upheld as key elements of a desirable and functional city space. The maintenance of this imaginary geography is not just linked to maintenance of urban imagery that aligns to modern urbanism, but also supports the protection of property values within the bounds of the city and the quality of the ‘urban’ (Butler, 2012; Gaynor, 2007). Productive animals and their associated nuisances are, therefore, anathema to the civilised and modern city dweller. There are, of course, many contradictions within this conception of ‘the city’ (Philo, 1995) and this polarization of urban and rural spaces, but the dominant discourse persists.

Donkeys, in particular, have become a symbol of backwardness or rural practices or lifestyles (Jacobs, 2001; Blench et al., 2004; Alarcon et al., 2017). This is likely inseparable from the ways in which their character has developed in religion, philosophy, literature, and film. Bough (2011) explains that Greco-Roman philosophy has associated donkeys with servility, stupidity and stubbornness, while Jewish/Christian ideology has framed them as symbols of peace, humility, service and suffering. In the South African settlements of Upington and Polokwane, donkeys have been ascribed Judeo-Christian symbology through the erection of monuments in the 1980s in recognition of their contribution to the local economies (Jacobs, 2001). Within the South African context, the cultural and economic value placed on cattle means that, in contrast to donkeys, they are associated with high social status (Jacobs, 2001). The low status afforded to donkeys and donkey owners came to a head during a period of drought in Bophuthatswana, a former black African homeland established during the apartheid era (Jacobs, 2001). Unfounded colonial beliefs about the negative environmental impact of donkeys and their seeming uselessness within modern society and farming practices led to a series of anti-donkey policies emanating from South African government (Jacobs, 2001; Pinnock, 2022). In rural Bophuthatswana, these beliefs and policies combined with the whims and economic interests of large-scale cattle owning African elites meant that the significant contribution of donkeys to the livelihoods of low-income communities was disregarded (Jacobs, 2001). This resulted in the violent killing of about 20 000 donkeys in 1983 (Jacobs, 2001). In the wake of this event, donkeys became a political symbol within the region (Jacobs, 2001).

Another layer of this discourse that warrants exploration in connection to this understanding of urbanism are the binary categories of colonial and apartheid narratives. As discussed by Ballard (2004), white urban dwellers in South Africa used urban planning and segregation within the city to create their own comfort zones – reflective of their culture, Western ideals, conceptions of modernity and definitions of the ‘urban’. This was enabled by the fact that European settlers positioned themselves as the urban host society in South Africa (Christopher, 2001). The bubble that was created to maintain this comfort zone has burst in the post-apartheid period as new permutations of urbanism have arisen and contradictions have appeared within urban spaces. Paquet (2023) explored this in Secunda, where informal urban practices and perceived disorder have served to challenge the subjectivities of white residents.

As a challenge to the rural–urban dichotomy that has dominated thinking urban planning, the promotion of urban farming practices as a sustainable urban development strategy has occurred in the global South in response to growing urban populations (Thondhlana et al., 2022). This increase in urban dwellers has been accompanied by urban poverty, unemployment, high inflation, and limited access to resources (Thondhlana et al., 2022) and, therefore, urban farming practices have been promoted. Urban farming involves both the growing of crops and the keeping of livestock. Livestock keeping became necessary for food security and as part of other livelihood strategies (Alarcon et al., 2017; Asadu et al., 2021). Employed people engage in farming to supplement their income, for traditional or cultural purposes, and as a hobby (Alarcon et al., 2017). Blench et al. (2004) explain why people use donkeys in Nigeria, which started in the 1980s when structural adjustments were introduced that devalued the currency, created high inflation, and the country began to depend on expensive imports. Donkeys offer alternative transportation and an opportunity for income generation; the money generated can be spent on household needs (Blench et al., 2004; Geiger et al., 2020; Hanekom, 2004). Donkeys can transport goods such as groceries, water, and harvested crops to markets; their owners can start businesses and employ others. Blench et al. (2004) reveal that in south Nigeria, donkey owners also generate income by selling donkey meat. In response to urban farming practices, regulating livestock is a goal of urban planners because of their associated negative impacts, but it is challenging to implement the regulations. In Nairobi, Kenya, bylaws dating back to 1961 view livestock production within the city center as an illegal activity, and it can be licensed only under specific strict conditions (Alarcon et al., 2017). However, there is still unplanned and uncontrolled livestock presence in the city because enforcement of the law is weak, and it is often applied in a contradictory manner (Alarcon et al., 2017). The authorities are hostile to urban livestock keepers, while government veterinarians, on the other hand, give them advice on farming practices. The government culture of working in silos confuses the public. Another challenge is that there is little government capacity to regulate livestock in urban areas because of understaffing and a lack of transport. The city council’s attitude towards livestock keeping as a business and food security strategy is also in flux—new policies are under consideration to allocate land for urban farming (Alarcon et al., 2017).

The present research centers on Makhanda, which is a small South African city that has many donkeys and other livestock roaming its streets. Thondhlana et al. (2022) produced research into livestock husbandry in Makhanda and the focus of their study is on the ecosystem services and disservices that arise from livestock in an urban area. The study, as well as one by Memela (2023), highlights the tensions that exist in the city between urban livestock husbandry that forms part of livelihood generation and holds cultural value for local communities, but also presents hazards and challenges to the management of the city. The findings suggest that there is a need to develop effective strategies to manage livestock in the city and create balance or trade-offs between the services and disservices. The present research extends the understanding of stray livestock in Makhanda through a focus on the dynamics of place, identity and belonging within the city. The research focuses on the relationship that has developed between donkeys and the character of the city. In this way, it adds another layer of understanding in conceptualizing livestock in the city and the city itself. Donkeys are of particular interest because of their link to the character of the city and because of the myriad meanings associated with them.

Two data collection methods were combined within the research. Six key informant interviews were conducted with local businesses, a local mural artist, the Grahamstown Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (SPCA), and a town planner. These semi-structured interviews were utilised to understand the management of livestock and specific perceptions of the link between donkeys and the local sense of place. In addition, a short online survey was shared via social media platforms using Google Forms. A total 97 residents of the city completed the survey to explore the connection between the character of the city and the donkeys that roam the streets. This produced qualitative and descriptive data which was examined using thematic analysis.

Makhanda

Makhanda (formerly Grahamstown) is a small city in the Eastern Cape province of South Africa (Fig. 1). The city was established as a British military garrison in 1812 and grew rapidly with the arrival of the 1820 Settler communities from Britain (McDaniel, 1985). The city, and especially the city centre, retains much of its original Georgian and Victorian architecture and streetscapes, which lend’ it a historical character (Hoefnagels et al., 2022). The city is small and has not experienced major economic development since its early years when it served as an important economic centre for the eastern region of the Cape Colony (O’Meara, 1995; Reynolds & Reynolds, 1974). With a university, top private and public schools, a High Court and festivals like the National Arts Festival in its repertoire, the contemporary economy is dominated by education, law, and tourism (Hoefnagels et al., 2022). The city is very connected to the rural hinterland where agricultural activities are mingled with game farms and wildlife conservation efforts (Hoefnagels et al., 2022). Socio-economic inequalities are starkly visible within the city and, as with South African urban settlements in general, low-income communities are generally located within peripheral black townships (Irvine, 2021). Recently, local government in the form of Makana Local Municipality, has been characterized by mismanagement, capacity shortfalls, financial irregularities, and other signs of general dysfunction (Irvine, 2021). This has led to a failure to properly manage the urban area, implement regulations, maintain infrastructure, and provide basic services to residents (Dlongolo et al., 2024; Irvine, 2021).

Fig. 1
figure 1

Location of Makhanda, South Africa

Full size image

The city was established during the settler-colonial era and, therefore, the British acted as the urban host society (Irvine, 2021). As a result, the urban planning and regulations were British in origin and like those adopted in other colonies (Memela, 2023). Likewise, the later apartheid era influenced urban planning (Irvine, 2021). The resultant regulations were often focused on the supporting white, European communities, and marginalized residents of colour or low-income communities like in the context of Bophuthatswana (Jacobs, 2001). This has meant that traditional African cultural practices related to livestock keeping has not been sufficiently understood or acknowledged (Memela, 2023). In the post-apartheid era, South Africa has implemented various new regulations and planning philosophies which are focused on transforming settlements and communities in line with the South African Constitution. The Spatial Planning and Land Use Management Act 16 of 2013 (SPLUMA) is part of this broader transformative project. In South Africa, SPLUMA tasks the municipalities to develop land use with "minimal impact on public health, environment, and natural resources", which has resulted in cities adopting bylaws that support livestock keeping adjacent to the residential area (Nel, 2016). Makana Municipality also has commonage areas where urban livestock should be kept and graze, and roles and regulations are defined by a bylaw (Makana Local Municipality, 2007b). Commonage land was established in colonial urban settlements in South Africa as land made available for urban residents to engage in agricultural activities (TCOE and LRC 2010). The commonage in Makhanda is under the management of the local municipality, and in use for these and other activities (Kepe et al., 2015). Commonages are seen by national policy as a vehicle for land reform and as a resource for livelihood generation for low-income urban residents (TCOE and LRC, 2010). Commonage space has been expanded over time to support urban farmers and to relieve the pressure on the land (Hamaamba, 2004; Kepe et al., 2015).

However, the issue of roaming and stray livestock is a longstanding and ongoing issue that dates back to at least the early 2000s (Grocott’s Mail, 2015; Hamaamba, 2004; Kotze, 2020). Makana Municipality has bylaws that regulate livestock keeping, but their implementation is absent. Based on the Prevention of Public Nuisances and Keeping of Animals bylaw of 2007, the owner has to ensure that animals do not "interfere with comfort, convenience, peace or quiet of other people" and ensure that they have food and shelter (Makana Local Municipality, 2007a, p. 136). The Impoundment of Animals bylaw of 2007 gives the authority to impound animals that are not kept in commonage area, causing a public nuisance (Makana Local Municipality, 2007c). The bylaw outlines the costs and fines that are levied on the owner of any animal that is impounded and this is intended as a deterrent (Makana Local Municipality, 2007c). Memela (2023) found that, in the context of the broader municipal dysfunction, these bylaws were not enforced, or their implementation supported by the local authorities. Commonage space is unmanaged and unfenced, and the municipal pound is closed (Memela, 2023). Issues with the lack of rotation of grazing on commonage land, vandalism and theft of fences, and a lack of supervision of livestock were seen to lead to the lack of containment of livestock within the commonage (Grocott’s Mail, 2015; Maclennan, 2017b). The municipal pound was managed by the Grahamstown SPCA until 2016 (Maclennan, 2017a). The pound stopped operating in 2016 due to a lack of payment from the Municipality for impoundment services and, therefore, an inability to do required maintenance on the facilities and feed the impounded livestock (Maclennan, 2017a). It is at this point that stray livestock truly got out of hand because regulations are largely ignored by residents, and the bylaws remain unenforced by local authorities (Memela, 2023).

Donkeys are kept in Makhanda by low-income communities for transport purposes, the income they can generate as well as the fulfilment of other livelihood strategies like the collection of wood (Memela, 2023). While some residents keep their donkeys in an enclosure on residential plots (Memela, 2023), many are left to roam freely (Thondhlana et al., 2022).

Results

Donkeys, signs of their presence and references to donkeys can be found throughout the city of Makhanda. Figure 2 illustrates the tangible evidence of donkeys in the city – their presence as they draw carts or linger on the verge, their representation in traffic signs, and other visible signs of their recent occupation and interactions with urban spaces. Figure 2(a) shows donkeys within the space of church square in the city centre. Figure 2(b) shows a traffic sign prohibiting donkey carts on a steep, winding, and narrow road in the city. Figure 2(c) shows a stray donkey eating waste put out for collection in the city’s High Street. What is not depicted are the sounds of braying, the swerving of vehicles on city streets, the daily interactions with residents who feed them carrots and apples, the volunteers who treat their wounds, the residents who chase them from their gardens, the disbelief of visitors, and their frequent immortalisation in photographs shared within local social media groups. These daily encounters and interactions have come to characterise life in Makhanda.

Fig. 2
figure 2

The presence of donkeys in Makhanda. (a) Donkey in Church Square within the city centre (b) A sign prohibiting donkey carts on Lucas Avenue (c) A donkey spreading and consuming solid waste waiting for municipal collection

Full size image

This research sought to explore the link between of the character of the city with the free-roaming donkeys that are present on its streets. Findings reveal that 71% of the respondents said that donkeys add to the character of the city and 73% agreed that they have become a symbol of the city. The local artists and businesses interviewed had utilised the donkey symbolically – explicitly linking them to the character of the city. In this way, their products or artworks can be seen as playing with and utilising this link in their branding or marketing. This can be observed in Fig. 3. Figure 3(a) and (b) illustrate murals created by Mook Lion that depict donkeys on the walls of buildings within the city. Figure 3(c) and 3(d) show two donkey-themed products, a crochet donkey toy sold at a local shop and Wonkidonki African Pale Ale, respectively. The owner of Featherstone Breweries used a reference to donkeys in both the name of a local beer, Wonkidonki, and the design of its label. The label is an illustration of a donkey alongside the backdrop of the Cathedral of St Michael and St George – an iconic landmark within the city centre. He explained his choice of branding with reference to the identity of the city (Personal Communication, 12 November 2022). Figure 3(e) shows the Pothole and Donkey restaurant and bar located within the city’s High Street.

Fig. 3
figure 3

Local donkey depictions and references. (a) Donkey street art on a residential property in Hill Street (b) Donkey street art on a business in Market Street, the Cock House (c) A crochet donkey toy made and sold locally (d) local Wonkidonki craft beer with donkey artwork on the label (e) The Pothole and Donkey restaurant in High Street

Full size image

A total of 53 percent of respondents said that their associations between donkeys and the city were both positive and negative in nature. Another 25% said their associations were largely negative and the remaining 23% characterised these associations as positive. To understand these responses, open-ended questions were posed to the respondents and three primary themes were identified regarding the link between donkeys and the character of the city. The first theme is related to how donkeys are seen as a feature that makes Makhanda unique and sets it apart from other cities.

They are the first notable things you notice when you come to Makhanda. It is first a shock coming from a place that does not have them. And soon enough, you realise they are a fixture.

[Donkeys are] something unique to the city.

The second theme is related to the juxtaposition of an urban space with the presence of animals that are more often associated with rural activities and spaces. Respondents said that the presence of donkeys contributed to the rural and quaint atmosphere of the city.

[Donkeys are a] break away from [the] rigid concrete jungle city atmosphere.

They make us seem like a quaint, semi-rural town.

Having grown up in Gauteng, I love having animals wandering the streets and creating a more rural small-town feeling.

Gtown is a historical and mellow town and I think the presence of the donkeys just adds to that general feeling.

They remind more privileged residents that not everybody lives like them.

Developing this theme further, Mook Lion (Personal Communication, 20 September 2022), a local mural artist, said that he had used the donkeys in some of his murals because of their symbolic association with the city. Within the interview he explored this association further – choosing them as subjects for the murals because they are symbolic of disruption of Western-centric conceptions of public urban space by nature. To him, therefore, donkeys represent a reclamation of public urban space – grassed verges of suburbia no longer solely ornamental in purpose but providing pasture for livestock.

The third theme identified was that of municipal dysfunction and the impact this has had on the urban fabric and everyday life of residents in the city. Linked to this, 64% of the survey respondents indicated that they believed stray donkeys to not belong in the city. They referred to the negative connotations and dangers within the city that stray livestock bring about – traffic hazards, odours, disease, noise, strewn rubbish – to explain this opinion. A concern for the welfare of roaming livestock in this setting was also expressed by some respondents.

They are an environmental hazard. Their tearing and eating of garbage are not only bad for the environment but also for themselves. They do not belong in the city, and it is cruelty to animals to allow them to be exposed to rubbish, traffic, and people that do not respect them.

They make it clear that we have a dysfunctional local government.

They add character in a negative way. They are yet another symbol of the municipality’s poor management.

The Pothole and Donkey restaurant, Fig. 2(e), plays on the idea of municipal dysfunction with its name and slogan, ‘making a meal of service delivery’ (Dayimani, 2020). The restaurant’s owner came up with the name and slogan with the aim of connecting to the city’s character, creating a talking point, and promoting the restaurant (Dayimani, 2020).

Discussion and conclusion

This research has found that free-roaming donkeys in Makhanda have developed as a symbol of the city and have become linked with its character or place-identity. There is a sense that this lends the city a unique air and quaint atmosphere. It is the quirkiness of the presence of donkeys within the city that is worth further exploration and can be used to understand the overall contention of this paper. This quirkiness is related to the sense that donkeys are out of place within the city – they do not belong. Residents have identified this contradiction in their responses, seeing donkeys as something both positive and negative. Donkeys are seen as something to celebrate and appreciate, and have been utilised in the branding of local businesses and products. They are also, however, seen as something that needs management and shutting away. There is a sense that the modern, Western planning models and Euclidean zoning principles that were discussed by Butler (2012) and Kheraj (2015) have been challenged and disrupted. To develop a metaphor regarding the subject of stray livestock, it is clear that modern, Western conceptions of urban space and urbanism have gone astray in Makhanda. Like the case studies of Cape Town (Lemanski and Oldfield, 2009) and Durban (Sutherland et al., 2018) have shown, the city and its donkeys present complexity and a juxtaposition of modern/traditional, urban/rural and developed/underdeveloped dichotomies. This can be understood as a challenge to conceptions and comfort zones. It is a challenge to our definitions of urban space and urbanism – what makes a city a city? It is a disruption of the urban–rural dichotomy highlighted by Wolch and Emel (1995), Philo (1995), Gaynor (2007) and Butler (2012). The ever-increasing way in which we, as urban dwellers, are disconnected from food systems with our lives becoming characterised by consumption over production (Butler, 2012). It also represents a departure from the perceived orderliness of modern cities – with the local municipal dysfunction and mismanagement as a corruption of this. This discomfort arises in a different form within the context of Makhanda. It is a discomfort of urbanims colliding – one middle-class, mainly white and the other—low-income, primarily black African. It is an illustration of the collision of life worlds that has occurred in post-apartheid South Africa. Different cultures, values and ways of life, kept and managed separately within cities during the colonial and apartheid periods. In this way, it is the disruption of the ‘comfort zone’ spoken of by Ballard (2004) and Paquet (2023). To return to the concept of place, it is a challenge to the place-identity of the city and the place-ballet of everyday city life.

In terms of Southern Urbanism, this case study reiterates the need to engage with urban spaces in the Global South and engage with their inherent juxtapositions and contradictions. This engagement needs to be about exploring what it means to live within an African or South African city – culturally, economically and spatially diverse and a mosaic of representations, identities, and experiences. Spaces that are neither urban nor rural, modern nor traditional, and developed nor underdeveloped. The citizens, artists and business owners in Makhanda are already grappling with these questions and using them to characterise and brand their city.