COVID-19 LOCK-DOWN SOCIO-ECONOMIC CHALLENGES FACED BY HOUSEHOLDS IN RURAL AREAS: A PERSPECTIVE FROM VHEMBE DISTRICT, SOUTH AFRICA2

National responses to the COVID-19 pandemic have varied from country to country. In South Africa, the response has included a compulsory 21-day lock-down entailing restrictions of social and economic activities among other things. This arguably helped the country to avoid further spread of the virus, especially in townships, informal settlements and rural communities, where access to health facilities is often difficult. However, it has also exposed rural households to unforeseen challenges. This paper explores these challenges in view of proffering policy measures to help such households during subsequent lock-down. University students living within such rural households were purposively sampled to solicit electronic data from heads of households in Vhembe district. Using a qualitative method to analyze the data gathered from 82 households, five major issues emerged which include access to basic needs such as groceries, whereas water and health items were some of the challenges. The situation in households is further compounded by ‘limited source of income’ due to retrenchments and shutdown of subsistence businesses. ‘Depression and frustration’ emanating from the fear of contracting the virus, spousal domestic abuse, inability to meet home obligations, family squabbles as well as boredom caused by movement restriction also constitute part of the challenges. The lack of needed information regarding the virus, and ‘theft’ were other two challenges. Based on these findings, the 1 Ishmael.iwara@gmail.com 2 Considerable thanks to T. Marima; T. Mathebula; D. A. Mauba; M. Ngoveni; K. Matshubeng; O. Nemutamba; A. Singo; S. N. Nkiyasi, and N. Rihangwele for volunteering to be part of the data collection process for the study. Iwara et al., COVID-19 lock-down socio-economic challenges... 762 paper recommends thorough consideration of the identified challenges before the enforcement of such lock-down. It also encourages more improvement to be made in the area of service delivery in rural communities.


Introduction
Since World War II, the world has never found itself in a state of pandemonium as in the one now. Nations are paralyzed as life has almost come to a standstill due to the lock-down imposed by governments in an attempt to curb the spread of the novel Coronavirus 2019 . As of the first week of April, an estimated 3.9 billion people, or more than half of the world's population, were under some form of lock-down in different countries of the world (Kaplan, 2020). This entailed restriction of social and economic activities and indefinite closure of boaders to curb the spread of COVID-19 pandemic. It also entailed increased effort in identification of infected individuals (through testing) and isolation of such persons.
South Africa was one of the first countries to impose a national lock-down. Amidst unprecedented surge in COVID-19 infections, on 23 rd March South African President Cyril Ramaphosa announced a 21-day lock-down to mitigate the pandemic (iReport South Africa (iRSA), 2020). The lock-down started on 27 th March, 2020. This lock-down, among other things, entailed restrictions of social and economic activities throughout the country (except for those activities considered as essential); immediate ban of domestic and international travel; and indefinite closure of schools and institutions of higher learning throughout the country. Individuals were implored to self-isolate and stay at home, except for attending essential functions and procuring essential materials. People were also advised to avoid physical contacts with others and maintain proper hygienic measures such as wearing face masks in public domains, cleaning hands with soap and water or sanitizer when exposed to other people or objects (iRSA, 2020).
However, no matter how timely and useful these measures may have been, they have also posed some significant socio-economic challenges, especially for people living in the informal settlements and rural communities. This crop of people depends on daily economic activities for their livelihoods more than those in urban areas (Oni, Obi, Okorie, Thabede & Jordan, 2002). As a result, they have been hit hard by the lock-down that disrupted almost all social and economic activities, which brought about a multiplicity of socio-economic challenges.
This paper explores these challenges with the aim of providing appropriate policy responses to mitigate the subsequent socio-economic challenges brought by the COVID-19 lock-down. Using the case of Vhembe district, this paper investigates the challenges experienced by households in rural areas during the national lock-down from 27 th March until 16 th April 2020. The study also determines and ranks how much impact the identified challenges have on the rural households.
The paper is divided into sections that provide a historical overview of COVID-19, a brief literature review that discusses the socio-economic impact and challenges of similar health pandemics in history, the methodological approach, the research findings and discussion. The paper concludes with a highlight of the implications of the findings, as well as some comprehensive recommendations that are based on the findings.

Overview of Coronavirus and the South African lock-down
Coronavirus 2019, also known as COVID-19, is an infectious disease caused by Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) which often manifests itself in the form of an acute respiratory syndrome (WHO, 2020d). The major symptoms of this virus include fever, cough, tiredness, shortness of breath and loss of taste and smell (Bogoch et al., 2020;Chan et al., 2020;Wax & Christian, 2020). In some cases, these mild symptoms have progressed to Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS) and further to cytokine storm, multi-organ failure, septic shock, and blood clotting (Bogoch et al., 2020;Chan et al., 2020;Wax & Christian, 2020).
The virus mainly spreads through person to person contact either through droplets of saliva and/or discharge from the mouth and nose, when an infected person sneezes or coughs (World Health Organization (WHO) 2020a). COVID-19 is a respecter of no race, gender, boundary and socioeconomic class; the health science community is yet to come up with a vaccine for the disease (Rothe et al., 2020;Wax et al., 2020;WHO, 2020a). Hence, health workers dealing with COVID-19 patients have to manage the situation without a confirmed medication. This has arguably led to unprecedented amount of infections and fatalities from the virus.
According to WHO (2020d), the virus was first detected in Wuhan, a city in China, in November 2019. Since then, the virus has continued to spread to different countries around the globe, leading to severe socio-economic and health hazards. According to WHO (2020c) report from April 2020, almost all the regions of the world have confirmed fatalities and/or active cases of the virus. At this point, there are about 1,991,562 confirmed active cases, out of which 130,885 people have lost their lives. These deaths are mostly in South East Asia (21,790 cases/990 deaths), Europe (1,013,093 cases/89,317 deaths), and North America (707,121 cases/30,245 deaths). So far, Africa has had the lowest number of confirmed cases (11,843) and deaths (550).
Country statistics from April 2020 in the WHO (2020c) report also indicates that so far the virus has spread to 213 countries around the world. Of all these countries, the United State of America (USA) has recorded the highest number, with 604,070 infections, and 25,871 fatalities. This is followed by Italy and Spain, with 165,155 active cases /21,647 deaths and 177,633 cases/ 8,579 deaths respectively. Other countries with a significant number of infections include France (105,155 cases/17,146 deaths), the United Kingdom (98,480 cases/12,868 deaths), Iran (76,389 cases/4,777 deaths), Belgium (33,573 cases/4,440 deaths), China (83,797 cases/3,352 deaths), the Netherlands (28,153 cases/3,134 deaths), Brazil (25,262 cases/1,532 deaths), Turkey (69,392 cases/1,518 deaths), and Sweden (11,927 cases/1,203 deaths).
In Africa, South Africa has the highest number of cases (2,506) and 34 deaths. Other countries with significant number include Algeria (2,160 cases/336 deaths), Burkina Faso (267 cases/22 deaths), the Democratic Republic of the Congo (855 cases/17 deaths), Cameroon (584 cases/14 deaths), Niger (144 cases/13 deaths) and Nigeria (373 cases/11 deaths). Many countries on the African continent have had no cases and fatalities by the time the research was performed in April 2020.
In an attempt to curb the spread of the virus, medical experts have recommended frequent hand washing, maintaining physical distance from others (especially from those with symptoms), quarantine (especially for those with symptoms), covering coughs, and avoiding contact with the face (WHO, 2020d). Virus carriers are expected to constantly use facemasks and avoid crowded environments whereas infected individuals should be isolated for at least 14 days (a period recommended to observe the development of COVID-19 in patients). Health experts have also recommended that countries shut down their economies for a few days to identify, checkmate and isolate individuals with the virus.
It was on this background that the South African government announced the 21-day lock-down on 23 rd March. The announcement followed what seemed to be a sudden spread of the virus, from 1 case (an inbound South African man that returned from Italy) on 5 th March, to 128 cases on the day the lock-down was announced. The lock-down, according to the South African President, was meant to protect and save the lives of people in the country (iRSA, 2020). To help oversee and lead the implementation of the nation's lockdown plan, the country also established the National Command Council for COVID-19 (South Africa Government, 2020). This entailed deployment of security personnel, especially in the most crowded townships and informal settlements to control the influx and unnecessary movement of individuals during the lock-down.
Challenges faced by households in rural areas amidst the global pandemic Most often, rural populace, especially the low-income households, confront more severe consequences during economic lock-downs than those in the in urban areas (Andrulis et al., 2012;Groom et al., 2009;Massey et al. 2009;Parker et al., 2009). This is mostly because the clear majority of people in rural communities rely on basic supplies from the urban areas for sustenance. They also depend on daily subsistence activities for their livelihoods. When such economic and social activities are halted, it disrupts the urban-rural supply chain that trickles down to the rural households. This leaves them in an economic quagmire that goes deep within their communities (Massey et al. 2009).
Crisis-related studies have shown that at the peak of previous global emergencies similar to COVID-19, access to medical facilities, food supplies and proper education and/or needed information on the state of affair is always a challenge in rural areas (Massey et al., 2009;Andrulis et al., 2012;World Bank, 2020). This is largely because rural areas are often neglected by decision-makers. Amid crises, the government is saddled and pre-occupied with a huge responsibility of providing for the needs of people (Alexander, 2010;Allen, 2010;Chikulo, 2016;Brinkerhoff et al., 2018;Lam et al., 2018;Yusuf, 2018). Unfortunately, people in rural communities who seem to need government attention even more are given less attention. During the infamous Spanish-Flu pandemic (1919 to 1920), most communities in the US did not enjoy sufficient attention. Many households in the rural areas of the country were largely left on their own to struggle and contain the situation. As such, they suffered more severe socio-economic consequences far more than those in the urban areas (Dlomo, 2020). Even though there are no clear indicators that measure the effects, the historical United States Government Report reveals a more decline in economic activities in rural areas, lack of appropriate information, inaccessibility of health facilities, higher job losses, higher mortality rate globally in rural areas (Strath, 1919). The report also explained that the social and economic impact of the epidemic particularly among American Indians, who lived mostly in the rural areas, was "extremely severe" and significantly higher than that of those in the urban areas. The mortality rate was 4 times higher in rural areas than the rate reported for larger cities in the country.
This was also the same in the case of aboriginal indigenous people living within the rural communities in Australia. While ordinary Australians living in the urban areas had an average 0.4% mortality rate, the aboriginal communities within the rural areas in Australia, in contrast, had an over 50% mortality rate (Massey et al., 2009). The frequent and intense exposure to the virus, due to crowded housing conditions and limited access to medical care, contributed to the high attack rates, and the subsequent increased mortalities and decrease in economic activities in these communities (Strath, 1919;Massey et al., 2009).
Recent pandemics have also corroborated similar trends. For instance, the 2009 H1N109 swine flu had more significant devastating socio-economic impacts on communities in the rural areas than in the urban areas (Groom et al., 2009;Massey et al., 2009;Parker et al., 2009;Andrulis et al., 2012). A study of the number of mortalities in Australia during the pandemic indicates that indigenous people were over-represented in the Australian cases (Massey et al., 2009). The study shows that people within rural communities are approximately five times more likely than others in urban areas to be hospitalized for swine influenza (Massey et al., 2009). This proportion of people would also require intensive care treatment to stand a chance of surviving the pandemic. With the continued decline in both government presence and in socio-economic activities, the lack of information about the pandemic, and inaccessibility of the Australian social support and healthcare services, these communities become more vulnerable to severe socio-economic challenges and more intense health hazards that led to higher mortality rates than those in the urban areas (Massey et al., 2009).
The Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) which hit Africa in the 1970s as well as the most recent Ebola outbreak in 2014, presented more devastating challenges in the rural areas than in the urban ones (Booysen et al., 2002;Oni et al., 2002;Parker et at., 2009;World Bank Report, 2013;Richards et al., 2015), even though the diseases were first diagnosed in urban areas. As earlier discussed, the rural households received a larger share of the consequences. Facilities for the diagnoses and treatment of such diseases are mostly not found in the rural areas in the way they are found in the urban areas (Oni et al., 2002). This makes it cost and time effective for people in the urban areas. In most cases, people living in the rural areas travel long distances to access health facilities. These challenges suggest the need to scale up infrastructural development, both in health and education systems in rural areas; a concern that should be addressed with urgency.
Empirically, South Africa is not immune to these challenges either (Booysen et al., 2002;Oni et al., 2002;Parker et. al., 2009;Alexander, 2010;Chikulo, 2016;Brinkerhoff et al., 2018), as the research in previous health pandemics shows how rural households have grappled with devastating challenges. This study was conducted to explore the challenges faced by households in rural areas during the COVID-19 lock-down. This study helps to provide a clue about what people in rural areas have been going through during the lock-down. The findings of the current study which draw on Vhembe district municipality can be used to develop and shape policy actions taken by government in response to the outbreak of the COVID-19. The study forces the government not to take interests of people in rural areas during pandemics as an afterthought. It calls on government to consider appropriate measures that can ensure rural household sustainability during similar global crises in the future.

Research Method
The study adopted a case study research design which allows for collection and analysis of qualitative data (Creswell, 2017). It is most ideal given that it provided room to interact and explore the participants' experiences of the lock-down for the COVID-19. Due to movement restriction and social distancing regulations, physical contact with the participants was impossible. Thus, electronic data collection techniques such as telephone, Skype and WhatsApp were utilized for conducting in-depth one-to-one interviews with the participants. However, before the data collection, a purposive sampling technique was used to identify nine University of Venda students as key informants. The rationale was based on the fact that these students were from the households in rural areas in Vhembe District in Limpopo province. They had contact with other similar households living in rural areas. They also spoke indigenous languages like Venda and Tsonga, and were also familiar with the use of the electronic data collection technique.
The study relied on semi-structured in-depth interviews of heads of households from 12 villages in Vhembe district (see Table 1). Using a convenient sampling technique, the students were able to engage with 82 participants on the challenges they face during the lock-down. While 57% of the participants were females, 43% were males. The in-depth interviews were guided by data saturation.
Only those participants who conceded to the ethical consent of the study were interviewed accordingly. The narratives consolidated from the 82 participants were captured in a Microsoft word document and fitted in to Atlas.ti v8 software for the qualitative analysis. The open coding system within the software was harnessed for the analysis. This was useful for categorizing the participants' narratives in themes.

Study Area
The study area is located in Vhembe district, Limpopo province, which is in the northern part of South Africa. It shares boundary with Botswana, Mozambique and Zimbabwe. The district is composed of four local municipalities, namely: Collins Chabane, Thulamela, Makhado and Musina. The choice of the 12 villages selected for this study was based on rurality and distance to service centres. Just like any other district in the province, Vhembe is known for mainly being rural and for its large scale and subsistent agrarian activities. This, alongside various forms of business, constitutes a larger part of sustainable livelihood.
The district has a population of over 1.1 million inhabitants and covers an area of 21,407 km 2 (Statistics South Africa, 2011). The area is predominantly rural and deficient with critical basic services (Chauke et al., 2013). It has been profiled to produce up to 4.4% of the country's total agricultural output, 8.4% of the sub-tropical fruit and 6.3% of its citrus (Vhembe District Municipality, 2018). Limpopo Province is one of those with the highest poverty level and unemployment in the country, with Vhembe district contributing significantly. Majority of the households are involved in roadside vending, micro-scale enterprises and other forms of menial jobs to sustain a living.

Results
As depicted in Figure 1, five major themes and several items emerged. Firstly, getting basic needs such as groceries, water and health items. The source of income for a living resulting from retrenchments and shut-down of small businesses posed another challenge. Depression and frustration caused by the fear of contracting the virus, spousal abuse, inability to meet home obligations, boredom due to movement restriction as well as household squabbles were mentioned. ' Access to needed information' regarding the virus resulting in anxiety, and 'theft' were also identified.

Getting basic needs
Amid the lock-down, access to health facilities was a challenge to some rural residences. Even though the government had categorized all forms of health systems such as hospitals, clinics and local pharmacies as essential, which allowed them to be operational throughout the lock-down, most of them, especially the privately-owned ones, were inefficient and sceptical in attending to people's needs in rural areas. It was mainly because of the fear of the virus. This became a serious challenge for people in the rural households, as they had to travel many miles to access health facilities: "…I could not take my wife to the hospital; I don't have the means to get private transport from the village to town� Even when we tried to reach out to the hospital to assist with an ambulance, no response…" (P2) Undeniably, the government had put in place the measures that ease movement for essential services such as health. Yet these measures in most cases where thwarted by the security personnel's approach in enforcing the law.
"…security personnel don't wait for an explanation; they beat and even detain anyone caught out there without a permit…" (P7)� Many also expressed frustration caused by the strenuous process of securing a permit to move from one community to another from police authorities, political representatives or tradition leaders. Transport scarcity resulted in long queues at the park, which left some people behind. Hospitals were overcrowded as they were servicing many villages, and this resulted in the easy spread of the virus.
"We fear that if we take our father to the hospital, he might contract the virus and die� Health workers in our area are very ignorant� Most hospitals are often crowded; health workers are not even practising strict precautions amid the pandemic…" (P27).
During the 21-day lock-down, most small businesses in the villages were shut down. There were few supermarkets operating in remote and rural areas. People in remote areas were forced to travel for long distances to buy items in large scale to serve them for weeks. Public transport operation was restricted to certain hours limiting movement to 6 am -10 am and 4 pm -10 pm. Apart from the challenge of queuing for transportation, the queues at the shopping malls posed a serious challenge. High demand for protective materials such as sanitizers and masks as well as food items inflated prices, leaving the poor with no option than letting go of some basic items. Some of the items were out of stock as indicated below.
"…rural shops were not receiving sufficient supplies; it causes inflation, making it difficult for us to buy much needed basic items with our limited resources��� " (P12).
"The government should have subsidised basic commodities, put price control task force to prevent the inflation of basic items� People do what they wish with their markets� They take advantage of the situation to exploit us…" (P48).
"We only heard supplies of personal protective materials to people, apparently the vulnerable have been marginalised…; we did not see anything� " "Even water the government promised to bring has been a challenge, we have to wait in long queues for hours every day to get water…" "…the government wants us to wash hands with water even though we do not have enough to drink� " (P34).
"Politicians used those items for a campaign, building of social ties and enriching themselves� They share both the protective materials and food items to their political members, friends and families� " (P1).

Source of income
Just like in the urban areas, all forms of economic activities were forced to close down in rural areas as well. Only businesses for essential services were allowed to operate during the lock-down. Small business operators, especially vendors stopped operating in line with the lock-down regulations. Unfortunately for some, they had been retrenched before the end of 21-day lock-down. Thus, savings, social grant and donated food parcels were means of survival. It becomes a huge challenge to those who only relied on donated food parcels for survival: "The government should never have closed livelihoods paths for rural people without ensuring proper alternative support measures� Populated structures such as schools, churches, cinemas, gyms, museums, sports could be restricted not small businesses that provide basic needs for our us…" (P11) "Every business is essential to the owner, so I don't understand what the government meant by 'essential', refusing us to do our businesses� Hunger will end up killing even more than the virus…" (P21) "Small businesses that provide food on the table of rural poor were locked down while big/rich owned businesses such as 'Shoprite', 'Spar', 'Game', 'Boxer' and Pick n Pay were authorised to operate� The government adds more wealth to the rich at the detriment of the poor� They could have provided protective materials and proper orientation to small business holders to help them operate and earn a living…" (P63)

Dealing with depression and frustrations
The lock-down restricted movement, limiting people to their houses. Boredom becomes a major issue to people who stay alone while many others find it difficult to deal with oppressions from people around them.
"A day has not passed by since the 21-day lock-down without a fight with my wife� It is more fearful at home than the virus out there� If not for the lock-down, I would be in my workplace or hook up with friends to overcome her; sincerely I am stuck…" (P7).

"It is either sex or food… My husband hits me hard every day� He caged me so badly and does anything he feels at will� Usually, our neighbours come to my rescue but they stopped for the fear of the virus� Unfortunately, I don't have anyone to report, I could not travel to my parents due to the lock-down…" (P24).
The fear of losing means of income, living with hunger and possibly seeing the world ending because of the pandemic grasp the minds of many households. Similarly, there is anxiety about spousal abuse as well as the pressure to meet family household obligations such as food and utility bills. This challenge forcefully changed the composition of household consumption as many would have to economise limited resources such as food, water and electricity to survive the lock-down. Some participants had issues with house rent. To many, space was an issue. The home becomes congested as everyone returned home because of COVID-19. Some had their spouses and children with them: "…I felt hopeless, seeing how we struggle to get basic needs during 21 days…" "It was scary"� "No means of livelihood, no savings; we are grateful to the government for the child's social grant� Things would be out of hands…, people are suffering…" (P31).

Access to needed information
Rural households believed the scale of awareness regarding the pandemic was not sufficient in their areas. Most families in rural areas struggle to access first-hand news from the government and understand what the virus is all about except for those that can afford television and radio sets. As a result, many rely on neighbours or friends for basic information. Regardless of the source, anything that teaches them about the cause of the pandemic, precaution and cure of the virus is appreciated. Some of the households said: "… We struggle to know what COVID-19 is all about� No one could explain better to us in this village� All we saw was security personnel who walk around forcing people to stay inside their houses…" (P16).
"Some time ago, we made concoctions with lemon and ginger� Our neighbour told us it is effective in curing the virus� It has been our morning and night tea, not until we called our daughter in the city who advised us to stay indoors, the virus is dangerous and does not have a cure yet� We panicked…" "…Maybe proper community engagement and sensitization about the pandemic would reduce false information and take off anxiety the vulnerable are facing…" (P19).
There is a widely shared belief amongst the participants that people living in remote and rural areas in South Africa continue to be denied their human rights such as access to information regarding education, access to resources such as internet and electricity which are basic to education, and access to education itself. Even though education is free, the lack of basic infrastructure in some areas constrains many of the privilege: "…It is not very clear the modalities government has put in place to enhance e-learning, no one has talked to us about that yet pupils are expected to be engaging online for their classes� Unfortunately, my children will be left behind education; apart from a computer, which we don't have to download lesson materials, access to the internet in this village is a big issue…" (P71).

Theft
While everyone is expected to be indoors except for essential workers, criminality abounds amid COVID-19. Closed schools and shops were vandalised and looted. Some households also experienced burglaries which compounded their COVID-19 trauma.
"Area boys go around during this period stealing from people in this village� They vandalise people's properties� This is because the level of desperation this time has increased�" Evidently, households that have experienced these kinds of incidences had to deal with loss of scarce resources that they desperately needed during the lock-down. In most cases, the participants had blamed the government for enforcing lock-down without proper security measures.

Discussion of the Findings
This study has identified numerous challenges that rural households in Vhembe district grapple with during the South African lock-down due to COVID-19. The challenges were categorized into five themes. They include getting basic needs such as groceries, water and health items; limited source of income due to retrenchments and shut down of subsistent businesses; depression and frustration caused by fear of contracting the virus, domestic violence, inability to fulfill home obligations and family squabbles, as well as boredom caused by movement restriction; inability to access needed information regarding the virus; and theft.
Evidently, these challenges are not far removed from the previous research regarding rural households globally and within the context of South Africa. This suggests that the current study has only contributed to crystallizing and defining the challenges. The argument is consistent with Massey et al. (2009), Parker et al. (2009 and World Bank Report (2020), within which access to basic services was found to be a very serious challenge to people living in rural areas, especially during global health crises. As with the previous studies (Massey et al., 2009, Parker et al., 2009, and World Bank, 2020, these challenges (access to health facilities, basic welfare and lack to information) underline recurring issues that people living in rural areas in the different parts of the world are confronted with in their daily lives. These realities only become more accentuated at the dawn of lock-down of social and economic activities following the outbreak of COVID-19. Their severity is also exacerbated because people living in such communities totally depend for their subsistence on the social and economic activities which were obstructed by imposition of the lock-down to contain the spread of COVID-19.
Another significant aspect of the current study's findings is the confirmation that rural households in Vhembe had suffered and had been deprived access to basic services from the government (Emenike et al., 2017;Drummond & Snowball, 2019;Fransman & Yu, 2019). The findings in the current study, much like in the above mentioned studies show that access to basic roads, water supply, electricity and the internet remain a challenge for rural households. In this situation, people such as students who live in the rural areas suffer most since the availability of these resources is critical for their academic engagements. Unlike people in other parts of the country, they are left behind in the e-learning programme encouraged by the government. In general, these suggest that there is a huge disparity in the provision of basic services for rural and urban communities. Governments tend to prioritize people living in the major cities at the detriment of those in the rural communities. Urban areas attract a large proportion of government investments on infrastructure, while little attention is paid to the rural communities where such services are muchneeded (Vearey et al., 2010;Saleem & Abideen, 2011;van der Hoeven et al., 2012;Brain et al., 2014;Walker& Mathebula, 2019). Even though rural areas contribute significantly to raw materials, food and manpower required to sustain urban economies (van der Hoeven et al., 2012), they remain marginalized when it comes to distribution of basic services. The COVID-19 outbreak has shown the need to scale up provision of these basic services, especially internet connection services and access to other essential services in rural areas.
Earlier, a discourse in Emerging Voices Report (2005) captures marginalization of rural households and expresses a nagging feeling that unless the real gap between urban and rural areas is delineated, accepted and given adequate attention, inequalities will persist and come to haunt generations to come. Over two decades after the demise of apartheid, rural areas in the country are still grappling with insurmountable obstacles, with little or no change in sight for those who need it most (Moletsane, 2012;Mburu & George, 2017;Drummond & Snowball, 2019). This calls for swift intervention measures to address rural-urban inequality, poverty, unemployment, affordability and access to health care. The effectiveness of what has been done so far in South Africa to address rural-urban inequality is still questionable given that very little has changed after 25 years of South Africa's democracy. Scholars such as Turpie et al. (2008), De Kadt and Lieberman (2017), Ndebele and Lavhelani (2017), and Nkomo (2017) revealed that the masses often attribute such failure to a high level of corruption, incompetence and ethnic divide.
Empirically, majority of rural households survive through subsistence farming, micro-businesses, and mini-jobs (Hunter et al., 2014;Ubisi et al., 2017;Wilkinson, 2017). They hardly have savings from their earnings for difficult times. They depend on day to day economic and social activities of the country to survive. This being the case, a total shutdown of their economic and social activities means a total shutdown of their source of livelihood and hence starvation. Even though the government has put social relief measures, such as R500 increase in the social grant and a R350 welfare grant for formally unemployed people in the country (South Africa Government, 2020), the participants' narrative indicates that these do very little to enable people within the rural households to meet their basic needs. In some cases, the study also shows that the people in rural areas have often found it impossible to access government assistance meant for them. This, coupled with starvation has caused more panic than the virus itself.
The issue of theft or burglary in South Africa as discussed amidst crises is well-documented in the literature (Misago, 2019;Ngcamu & Mantzaris, 2019;Marumo et al., 2019). People in developing countries have often demonstrated strong tendencies of breaking into public and private properties to loot during crisis, especially in the urban areas. In 2018 for instance, businesses were raided amidst the xenophobic crisis in some areas of Kwazulu-Natal and Gauteng with much focus on establishments belonging to black African migrants (Mngadi & Njoli, 2018;Ogunnoiki & Adeyemi, 2019). A similar incident occurred in 2019, resulting even in loss of lives (Times Live, 2019; Maromo, 2019). At the peak of COVID-19 in 2020, many South Africans took to streets, broke and looted shops (Times Live, 2020; SABC News, 2020). Therefore, theft, especially in the urban areas, during a physical crisis in the country, is nothing new. However, when it comes to the rural communities there seems to be little or no existing literature on this. This could mean that there are relatively low cases of such issues as oppose the urban areas or lack of documentation. It is not clear either what measures the government has in place to curb such incidences.
Just like theft, domestic abuse, especially gender-based violence, has also been a burning issue in the country (Sexual Violence Research Initiative, 2020). Arguably, all genders perpetrate and experience domestic partner abuse. However, population-based surveys show an alarming surge of abuse cases against women, with intimate partner violence being the most common (Dunkle et al., 2004;Machisa et al., 2011;Sexual Violence Research Initiative, 2020). For instance, over 56% of South African women murdered in 2009 were victims of intimate male partner violence (Jewkes et al., 2009). Up to 40% of the total number of women in the country have gone through sexual and/or physical intimate partner abuse Jewkes, 2012), and over 50% have experienced either emotional or economic abuse from their partners (Jewkes, 2012;Sexual Violence Research Initiative, 2020). To mitigate the surge, a protection order was enforced, civil society organizations and Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) joined forces in the formation of the National Strategic Plan, as well as programmes that front campaigns against gender-based domestic violence.
Among a myriad of others, FAMSA, Legal Aid South Africa, People Opposing Women Abuse (POWA) are functional bodies established in an effort to curb the scourge of gender-based violence. A cursory look at these structures shows that their scope of operation has not covered rural areas sufficiently as many rural households still lack basic orientation on steps to follow when abused (Usdin et al., 2005;Dunkle et al., 2007;Lince-Deroche et al., 2018;Shai, 2018). It becomes even difficult for them as they do not understand their rights, what private or government agency to reach out or how to coordinate their actions to escape such scenarios when they live in situations where there is a huge lack of government presence. This could lead to a great feeling of insecurity and vulnerability that is internalized and carried over to other areas of their lives.
The lack of proper representation also explains the reasons rural households struggle with access to basic information (education) regarding the pandemic. This often results in anxiety and depression. Amid crises, rural households rely mostly on their representative to spur their hopes. Participants' narrative shows that little or no efforts were made by the government to take this into consideration. Basic information, as part of any consideration, remained accessible to the few who could afford the media stations. Apparently, except for those with access to television sets, radio and smartphones, others remain unaware of what is going on with other communities in the country. This supports Balfour and De Lange (2012) who maintain that even though education is pivotal for developing environmental awareness, solving societal challenges and critical for transformation, it remains an underexplored dimension of rural life. Arguably, fear from further spread of the virus may have constrained political representatives and traditional leaders to take measures. Distribution of food parcels amidst the lock-down was successful even in the rural areas (Asma, 2020;Mbuza, 2020;Pule, 2020); a piece of information may as well go around using a similar technique. It is important to bring rural households to the social plane of events amidst the crises.

Conclusion
A pandemic response driven only by medical or economic data alone is obviously inadequate. The response to health hazards such as these needs to be shaped by the specificity of needs in different demographics of the country. Continuous expansion of resources for monitoring and tracking is critical, as is successful management of broad and rapidly evolving data flows on the spread of the pandemic. But understanding the socio-economic problems faced by people living in rural areas, where relief is most needed, and the most effective kind of relief is just as important. This kind of understanding can only be provided by reliable social data, and the governance infrastructure to absorb and respond to crises that may crop up either in rural or urban areas. This exploratory study reveals that 'getting basic needs' such as groceries, water and health items were some of the challenges grappled with by households in rural areas. 'Source of income' for a living resulting from retrenchments and shut-down of small businesses posed another challenge. 'Depression and frustration' caused by the fear of contracting the virus, spousal abuse, inability to meet home obligations, boredom due to movement restriction as well as household squabbles were also mentioned. ' Access to needed information' regarding the virus resulting in anxiety, and 'theft' constituted part of the challenges.