Water Infrastructure Always In-The-Making: Distributing Water and Authority Through the Water Supply Network in Moamba, Mozambique

UvA-DARE (Digital Academic Repository)

Water Infrastructure Always In-the-Making: Distributing Water and Authority through the Water Supply Network in Moamba, Mozambique

Silva-Novoa Sanchez, L.M.; Kemerink-Seyoum, J.S.; Zwarteveen, M. DOI 10.3390/w11091926 Publication date 2019 Document Version Final published version Published in Water (Switzerland) License CC BY Link to publication

Citation for published version (APA): Silva-Novoa Sanchez, L. M., Kemerink-Seyoum, J. S., & Zwarteveen, M. (2019). Water Infrastructure Always In-the-Making: Distributing Water and Authority through the Water Supply Network in Moamba, Mozambique. Water (Switzerland), 11(9), [1926]. https://doi.org/10.3390/w11091926

General rights It is not permitted to download or to forward/distribute the text or part of it without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), other than for strictly personal, individual use, unless the work is under an open content license (like Creative Commons).

Disclaimer/Complaints regulations If you believe that digital publication of certain material infringes any of your rights or (privacy) interests, please let the Library know, stating your reasons. In case of a legitimate complaint, the Library will make the material inaccessible and/or remove it from the website. Please Ask the Library: https://uba.uva.nl/en/contact, or a letter to: Library of the University of Amsterdam, Secretariat, Singel 425, 1012 WP Amsterdam, The Netherlands. You will be contacted as soon as possible.

UvA-DARE is a service provided by the library of the University of Amsterdam (https://dare.uva.nl)

Download date:30 Sep 2021 water

Article Water Infrastructure Always In-the-Making: Distributing Water and Authority through the Water Supply Network in Moamba, Mozambique

Luis Miguel Silva-Novoa Sanchez 1,*, Jeltsje Sanne Kemerink-Seyoum 2,3 and Margreet Zwarteveen 2,3 1 Silvanovoa Consultores S.A.C., Jr. Tarapacá 131, Barranco, Lima 04, Peru 2 Integrated Water Systems and Governance Department, IHE Delft, Westvest 7, 2611 AX Delft, The Netherlands; [email protected] (J.S.K.-S.); [email protected] (M.Z.) 3 Governance and Inclusive Development Group, University of Amsterdam, Postbus 15718, 1001 NE, Amsterdam, The Netherlands * Correspondence: [email protected]

Received: 20 June 2019; Accepted: 2 September 2019; Published: 15 September 2019

Abstract: Using the concept of sociotechnical tinkering, this paper provides detailed empirical observations about the everyday practices of design, construction, operation, maintenance and use of a piped water supply network in a small town in Mozambique. We use these to show that the form, materiality, and functioning of this water infrastructure are constantly changing as result of interactions with its physical environment as well as in response to experimentation and improvisation by engineers, construction workers, operators and water users. Sociotechnical tinkering not just (re)distributes water, but also provides an avenue through which powers to control water ﬂows can be wielded and exercised. In this sense, empirical attention to sociotechnical tinkering provides a useful entry-point for rethinking the distribution of control, authority and responsibility in water governance, or more broadly the relations between power and infrastructure. This, in turn, may yield new inspirations for identifying pragmatic possibilities for progressive water politics.

Keywords: sociotechnical tinkering; water infrastructure; everyday practices; small towns; Mozambique

1. Introduction As stated elsewhere in this special issue, original infrastructural designs are not a very good guide for understanding how these infrastructures are laid-out and functioning in practice [1].When constructed and in-use, water infrastructures are constantly changing in form and materiality as a result of interactions with their physical environment, for instance through the scouring and creeping of water, the sedimentation of soils, changes in water and air pressures, algae blooms that block or roots of vegetation that punctures pipes. Changes are also induced by the actions of different actors, who may tinker with the infrastructure to make the water flow in the desired quantities and qualities to particular locations at specific times. In this sense, water infrastructure and its functioning are never fully stable or finished but always in-the-making, producing emergent spatial and temporal configurations and relationships (see also [2,3]). To better understand (the implications and possibilities of) this emergent nature of water infrastructure, the study of the everyday practices of engaging with and modifying flows of water is a good empirical entry-point (see also [4]). These importantly include practices of tinkering with the infrastructure to abstract, direct, store, drain, and spill water. In this paper, we use the term sociotechnical tinkering to refer to such acts, acts that produce deviations from the original

Water 2019, 11, 1926; doi:10.3390/w11091926 www.mdpi.com/journal/water Water 2019, 11, 1926 2 of 17 infrastructural plans and designs [1]. Rather than considering these deviations as shortcomings that need to be redressed, we take them to be symptomatic for the work needed to make the infrastructure function. Hence, sociotechnical tinkering is inherent in any water infrastructure. As we show, sociotechnical tinkering changes the original intentions of the infrastructure, as well as the effects of its use. Hence, what it means for the infrastructure to function also changes. The evidence presented in this paper shows that not only those who are trained to do so—engineers—tinker with water infrastructure but also many other actors actively alter the infrastructure’s form or materiality. These include construction workers, operators, and water users. Acknowledging these challenges, the existence of identifiable centers of control in water management and governance, and prompts (more) modesty about the extent to which water flows can be centrally controlled. By expanding the number and types of people who interfere with and make decisions about how and where water flows, it also prompts a rethinking of how roles, responsibilities, authority, and expertise are (to be) distributed in water service provisioning. In this paper we want to explore further how sociotechnical tinkering provokes changes in the understanding of the relationship between water infrastructure, power, and politics. Paying empirical and analytical attention to everyday attempts to make water flow is an interesting way of documenting how authority and expertise get decentralized in practice (see also [5]): It reveals that operators, plumbers and water users have more agency than is usually assumed in analyses or than is formally granted to them. In this way, a research focus on rather mundane acts of sociotechnical tinkering helps to explain that the ways in which water actually flows—and who can direct it, access it, store it, use it and spill it—is not determined in a top-down fashion by know-it-all engineers, utility managers or policymakers in far-away-offices, but happens through a range of actors who make use of the emerging nature of water infrastructure (see also [6–10]). As we show in this paper, even though many acts of tinkering are experimental and pragmatic, the possibility to tinker provides a deeply political possibility. Making use of it may allow even marginal actors to claim entitlements to the town’s water supply, and in that way push for social change. Pointing out that infrastructure can be tinkered with and is always in-the-making does not mean that the initial form and materiality of the water infrastructure do not matter; acts of tinkering are conditioned by the tenacious nature of the infrastructure. However, recognizing that engineers and operators never fully control the infrastructure and the water it conveys, and accepting that water infrastructure is never fully known nor knowable, draws attention to the possibility that actual water flows are—at least partly—the contingent outcomes of the interactions and negotiations between different people, water(s), infrastructure and much else [1,2,11,12]. Moreover, since only a few of those actors have formal responsibilities, rights and powers, tinkering with infrastructure is as much about making the water flow as it is about redistributing authority—authority to speak and decide on water. The work presented in this paper is based on a detailed qualitative study of the piped water system in Moamba, a small town located 62.5 km from Maputo, Mozambique. Four months of fieldwork were carried out between November 2017 and February 2018 with a follow-up fieldwork period from January to March 2019. These months correspond to the rainy season. Systematic observations of the water infrastructure and its functioning, as well as the everyday practices of operators and water users, were cross-checked with data collected through in-depth semi-structured interviews conducted with 47 actors. Four of the informants are staff of local authorities; nine are workers in the water utility company (including the general manager); two are construction workers that participated in the rehabilitation and extension of the system undertaken between 2011 and 2013. The remaining thirty-two interviewees are water users in a specific neighborhood which was selected for this research. In addition, original design documents and satellite images were analyzed to track changes in the designs and the built infrastructure. As a methodological device, we compared the different stages of development of this particular water infrastructure to analyze the water supply system in its entirety and trace its modifications through different political eras. As our research approach reveals, this research should not be considered as a piece of engineering research aimed at identifying malfunctions Water 2019, 11, 1926 3 of 17 in the water infrastructure nor to present possible (technical or managerial) solutions to these problems but rather ethnographic-oriented research aimed at documenting acts of tinkering with the water infrastructure in the case-study area. The paper is organized into six sections. The following one is a description of Moamba’s water treatment and distribution system. After providing some context, the paper presents and analyses our primary research findings, which revolve around the sociotechnical tinkering practices observed among engineers and construction workers, operators, and water users. We use one section for each type of actor. Finally, we present a section of conclusions in which we use our findings to reflect on the role played by water infrastructure in distributing technical expertise and agency in society. We also discuss how sociotechnical tinkering creates room for social change, especially in relation to providing alternative means to claim access to the town’s piped water supply. We particularly pay attention to how the collective action invested in the practices of modification and maintenance of the infrastructure opens spaces for the (re)production of hydraulic rights and property.

2. Setting the Scene The town of Moamba is the capital of the district that carries the same name, Moamba. It is located approximately 60 km north-west from Maputo, the national capital city of Mozambique. Its rapid and unplanned growth has been correlated to the fact that Moamba is located at the intersection of national roads and the railway that connects Mozambique to the Republic of South Africa, making of Moamba a corridor of persons and goods [13]. People interviewed during fieldwork pointed out that the civil war, which ravaged Mozambique between 1976 and 1992, led to a first wave of migrants settling in Moamba in the early 1980s. Moamba’s water treatment and distribution network was selected as our main unit of analysis with a specific focus on the practices of the actors tinkering with it. The first version of the infrastructure was built in the early 1960s by the Portuguese colonial government to abstract water from the Incomati River and provide it to the Portuguese population that had settled in Moamba. This population was constituted mainly by employees of the Railway Company and public servants. Later in 1972, the water distribution network was extended to also provide water to the small sections of the Mozambican population who worked for the railway company and collaborated with the colonial authorities. In 1975 Mozambique became independent and the government modernized the treatment plant in 1989 and extended the distribution network during the following years. In 2011 a new project to rehabilitate and extend the system was commissioned by the national government, which coincided with the implementation of new water and economic policies, characterized by the commercialization of the potable water provision service in the country. In 2013 this renewed water infrastructure was inaugurated to be operated by a private operator in a concession area with a population of approximately 24,650 inhabitants and projected coverage of 45%. Nowadays Moamba’s water supply system has three general components (Figure1): An intake station in Incomati River, approximately 3 km north from the town; a small water treatment station; and a water distribution system composed by two elevated reservoirs and piped water distribution network (see Figure A1 in AppendixB). The mainline transports water from the intake station to the treatment station; and the water distribution network. Additionally, from Moamba’s water distribution network the water is transported towards the Administrative Post of Pessene, 14 km away in South-Eastern direction from Moamba, and from there to the settlements of Tenga 9 km away from Pessene. For a more detailed list of the components of the system, please see Table A1 in AppendixA. Water 2019, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 4 of 17

Water 2019, 11, 1926 4 of 17

Figure 1. Moamba’s Water Supply System Scheme. (Source: Collins Sistemas de Agua Lda.). Figure 1. Moamba’s Water Supply System Scheme. (Source: Collins Sistemas de Agua Lda.). Moamba water supply is intermittent for different reasons. One is the frequent interruptions in the electricityMoamba needed water supply for the is pumps intermittent to abstract for different water from reasons. the river. One Another is the frequent reason interruptions is the recurrent in droughts,the electricity which needed affect for the the water pumps table to ofabstract the Incomati water from River the and river. reduce Another the capacityreason is ofthe the recurrent intake stationdroughts, to inject which water affect into the the water water table treatment of the and Incomati distribution River system. and reduce Finally, the another capacity common of the intake cause forstation interruptions to inject water in the into water the supply water servicetreatment is frequentand distribution ruptures system. and leakages Finally, in another the distribution common network.cause for These interruptions breakdowns in forcethe water the operators supply toservice turn oisff thefrequent pumps ruptures and interrupt and theleakages service in until the theydistribution have fixed network. the problem. These breakdowns Based on the force interviews the operators conducted to turn with off managers the pumps and and operators interrupt of thethe waterservice utility, until wethey identified have fixed Bairro the Centralproblem. (meaning Based on central the interviews neighborhood) conducted as one with of themanagers areas with and majoroperators challenges of the water in supplying utility, waterwe identified in Moamba. Bairro The Central interviewees (meaning stated central that neighborhood) these difficulties as have one toof dothe with areas the with typography major challenges of the terrain in supplying and with thewater low in pressure Moamba. in theThe distribution interviewees network. stated that Knowing these thedifficulties historical have development to do with ofthe the typography water infrastructure of the terrain in Moambaand with asthe a low whole, pressure we decided in the distribution to zoom in onnetwork. this particular Knowing neighborhood the historical todevelopment further explore of the the water emerging infrastructure nature of in the Moamba infrastructure as a whole, in this we problematicdecided to zoom area, alsoin on looking this particular at the outcomes. neighborhood to further explore the emerging nature of the infrastructure in this problematic area, also looking at the outcomes. 3. Imagining the Water Flow: The Technical Expertise of Engineers 3. ImaginingAnalyzing the the Water water Flow: infrastructure The Technical and the Expertise issue of of providing Engineers water services to Bairro Central revealsAnalyzing important the features water aboutinfrastructure everyday and practices the issue of engineering. of providing According water services to the to general Bairro manager Central ofreveals the water important utility and features the operators about everyday of the system, practices the challenges of engineering. of supplying According water to to Bairro the Centralgeneral aremanager caused of by the its water elevated utility terrain and andthe operators the insuffi ofcient the pressure system, inthe the challenges system. Inof relationsupplying to this,water the to GeneralBairro Central Manager are of caused the water by its utility elevated stated terrain that: and “ ... theevery insufficient time the pressure water supply in the systemsystem. is In stopped, relation theto this, water the in General the pipes Manager in Bairro of Central the water is completelyutility stated removed. that: “… This every reduces time the the water water supply pressure system and increasesis stopped, the the time water needed in the to pipes refill thein Bairro pipes. Central This is whyis completely when the removed. system is This restarted, reduces residents the water of Bairropressure Central and increases have to wait the moretime needed [than the to rest refill of the neighborhoods] pipes. This is towhy have when water the in system their taps” is restarted, (IN37). residentsStudying of Bairro the design Central drawings have to wait and mapsmore [than of the the distribution rest of neighborhoods] network shows to thathave Bairro water Central in their istaps” separated (IN37). from the better-supplied neighborhoods in the north by the railway. The shortest way to connectStudying the distributionthe design drawings network and of Bairro maps Central of the distribution with the rest network of the network shows that in the Bairro north Central is by installingis separated an undergroundfrom the better pipe‐supplied that crosses neighborhoods the railway in at the a point north next by the to therailway. train station.The shortest This isway how to itconnect was originally the distribution envisioned, network as indicated of Bairro in the Central 2008 designwith the drawing rest of ofthe the network water network in the north (Figure is 2by). Thisinstalling pipe wouldan underground not need to pipe be longerthat crosses than 150the m,railway and the at a water point would next to flow the bytrain gravity station. to BairroThis is Central.how it was However, originally the Mozambican envisioned, Railwayas indicated Company in the (CMF) 2008 insisteddesign drawing that the installation of the water of thisnetwork pipe

Water 2019, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 5 of 17 Water 2019, 11, 1926 5 of 17 (Figure 2). This pipe would not need to be longer than 150 m, and the water would flow by gravity to Bairro Central. However, the Mozambican Railway Company (CMF) insisted that the installation ofbe this done pipe by be their done sta ﬀbyto their guarantee staff to that guarantee the construction that the construction works would works not negatively would not anegativelyﬀect the railway affect theinfrastructure. railway infrastructure. Since the water Since utility the andwater the utility railway and company the railway could company not come could to an agreement not come aboutto an agreementhow much about money how should much be money paid to should the railway be paid company to the railway to carry company out these works,to carry it out was these decided works, (in it2011) was todecided delete the(in 2011) pipe fromto delete the designthe pipe map. from the design map.

Figure 2. 20082008 design design map map of of the the water water distribution distribution network in Bairro Central. Red circle 1 shows the proposed pipeline under the railway. Red circle 2 shows the absence of the pipe connecting to Bairro Central (source: Collins Collins Sistemas de Agua Lda.).

The engineers thus had to adjust the design.design. They They now proposed conveying water to Bairro Central through a pipe crossing the railway at its intersection with the highway in the south south-eastern‐eastern part of the town. This This meant meant the the water water had had to to travel travel a a distance distance of of approximately approximately 2600 2600 m, m, first first downhill downhill and later uphill, to reach Bairro Central. Engineers areare often often portrayed portrayed as non-politicalas non‐political actors actors whose whose task is task a mere is technicala mere one,technical consisting one, consistingof making of optimal making designs optimal based designs on precise based on calculations precise calculations and rational and decisions. rational decisions. The above The example above exampleshows that shows they that cannot they escape cannot from escape the from power the dynamicspower dynamics in which in theywhich operate. they operate. Indeed, Indeed, the work the workof engineers of engineers importantly importantly also consistsalso consists of mediating of mediating and adjustingand adjusting their their designs designs to make to make it fit it the fit thesocio-political socio‐political environment environment in which in which the the infrastructure infrastructure is located. is located. The The changes changes they they had had to to make make to toavoid avoid installing installing a pipea pipe that that crossed crossed the the railway railway suggests suggests the the influence influence ofof thethe railway company, its ability toto imposeimpose its its will will and and have have its its interests interests materialized. materialized. This This influence influence drastically drastically altered altered the water the waterflow, jeopardizing flow, jeopardizing the reliability the reliability of the waterof the supplywater supply for the for residents the residents of Bairro of Central.Bairro Central. The railway company was not the only one to affect affect the work of the engineers. engineers. Also, Also, the the residents residents of Bairro Central shaped the form and layout ofof thethe waterwater infrastructureinfrastructure duringduring construction.construction. The numerous changes in the number and position of pipes in the distribution network of Bairro Central are aa testimonytestimony of of this. this. When When comparing comparing the the 2011 2011 design design map usedmap forused the for construction the construction of the network of the networkwith the infrastructurewith the infrastructure that was that actually was build,actually it isbuild, striking it is thatstriking the section that the of section the network of the network with the withshape the of shape an inverted of an inverted ‘P’ on the ‘P’ mapon the (see map dotted (see dotted circle circle in Figure in Figure3) follows 3) follows straight straight lines, lines, while while the thesatellite satellite image image of the of built the built infrastructure infrastructure (Figure (Figure4) presents 4) presents a narrower a narrower shape just shape in the just area in wherethe area it whereconnects it connects with a standpipe. with a standpipe. The standpipe The standpipe is also located is also located in a diff inerent a different location location than indicated than indicated on the ondesign the design map. map.

Water 2019, 11, 1926 6 of 17

Water 2019,, 11,, x FOR PEER REVIEW 6 of 17

Figure 3. DetailDetail of thethe shapeshape and layoutlayout of thethe water distribution network in in Bairro Central in in design map 2011. (Source:(Source: Collins Collins Sistemas Sistemas de de Agua Agua Lda.). Lda.).

FigureFigure 4. Shape 4. Shape and layoutlayout and layout of thethe ofbuilt the water built waterdistribution distribution network network inin Bairro in Bairro Central Central 2017. 2017.

According tototo two twotwo construction construction workers workers involved involvedinvolved in the inin extensionthethe extension of the of water thethe distributionwater distribution system systemin Bairro inin Central, Bairro Central, they were theythey forced were to forcedforced modify toto the modify position thethe and position length and of the lengthlength pipes of every thethe pipes time every they found timetime theythatthey a foundfound building thatthat was a building constructed was constructed precisely in theprecisely area where inin thethe the area design where map thethe indicated design map that indicatedindicated pipes should thatthat pipesbe placed. should They be alsoplaced. had They to creatively also had modify toto creatively the layout modify of the thethe pipes layoutlayout when of thethe streetspipes when were toothethe narrow streets wereto allow tootoo the narrow passage toto allow of the thethe machinery passage of needed thethe machinery to install needed the pipes. toto installinstall These the deviationsthe pipes. These from deviations the design werefromfrom neededthethe design mainly were because needed the mainly original because design thethe stemmed original fromdesign 2008, stemmed while thefromfrom construction 2008, while only thethe constructionstarted in 2011. only The started rapid inin and 2011. unplanned The rapid construction and unplanned of houses construction in Bairro Centralof houses drastically inin Bairro changed Central drasticallythe urban map, changed with thethe many urban new map, buildings with being many erected new buildings in the time being between erected design inin thethe and timetime construction. between designSince the and project construction. budget did Since not thethe include project funds budget for did compensating not includeinclude families fundsfunds forfor to compensating move elsewhere, familiesfamilies it could toto movenot remove elsewhere, houses itit tocould make not space remove for the houses installation toto make of space the pipes. forfor thethe Therefore, installationinstallation the of construction thethe pipes. Therefore, company thethe construction company had toto findfind creative ways of modifying thethe layoutlayout of thethe pipe inin some sections of thethe network, inin such a way thatthat thethe interestsinterests of particular familiesfamilies and neighborhoods

Water 2019, 11, 1926 7 of 17 had to find creative ways of modifying the layout of the pipe in some sections of the network, in suchWater a way2019, 11 that, x FOR the PEER interests REVIEW of particular families and neighborhoods were met. This example7 of shows 17 that the construction of infrastructure often happens in a never fully known and constantly changing environment,were met. This which example requires shows engineers that the and construction construction of infrastructure workers to tinker often withhappens the originalin a never design fully in orderknown to make and constantly it fit. changing environment, which requires engineers and construction workers to tinkerConstruction with the original workers design also in modified order to the make infrastructural it fit. design to make it fit with the form and materialityConstruction of the materials workers availablealso modified to assemble the infrastructural the infrastructure. design to Formake instance, it fit with two the construction form and workersmateriality explained of the thatmaterials they hadavailable made to a assemble small change the infrastructure. in the installation For instance, of the elevated two construction tank in the distributionworkers explained center: “that... theywe shouldhad made have a small used change an iron in bendthe installation of 45 degrees of the while elevated we tank only in had the an irondistribution bend of 90 center: degrees “… available. we should Here have we used used an curvesiron bend made of 45 of degrees galvanized while iron we thatonly are had not an easyiron to bend.bend So, of we90 degrees preferred available. to cut the Here accessory we used to curves place made the tank, of galvanized but even iron by doing that are so not the easy entrance to bend. of the tankSo, was we preferred not exactly to wherecut the theyaccessory [the engineers]to place the projected tank, but even it“. The by doing construction so the entrance workers of made the tank these was not exactly where they [the engineers] projected it“. The construction workers made these pragmatic changes in consultation with the supervisor of the construction works. They state that “ ... pragmatic changes in consultation with the supervisor of the construction works. They state that “…it it happened several times that the map said that the pipe had to go through a particular point, but we happened several times that the map said that the pipe had to go through a particular point, but we did not have the right assembling ironware and we had to make an adjustment to be able to place the did not have the right assembling ironware and we had to make an adjustment to be able to place the pipes” (IN44, IN45). pipes” (IN44, IN45). TheThe need need for for tinkering tinkering during during thethe constructionconstruction of water water infrastructure infrastructure also also arose arose because because of of biophysicalbiophysical processes processes that that are are never never fullyfully knownknown in advance, especially especially in in places places where where historical historical recordsrecords or sophisticatedor sophisticated forecasting forecasting technologies technologies are notare available. not available. In the In case the of case Moamba, of Moamba, the engineers the hadengineers very little had data very on little the fluctuationsdata on the fluctuations in the water in flow the ofwater the Incomatiflow of the River Incomati when River they when designed they the intakedesigned structure. the intake As a structure. result, the As capacity a result, of the the capacity intake stationof the intake that injects station water that injects into the water piped into system the is compromisedpiped system is every compromised time the water every table time inthe Incomati water table River in drops. Incomati This River usually drops. happened This usually during thehappened dry season during between the Julydry season and September. between July However, and September. according However, to one of theaccording operators to one of the of waterthe supplyoperators system, of the recent water changes supply insystem, the rainfall recent patternchanges caused in the rainfall more frequent pattern caused dry spells, more also frequent during dry the restspells, of the also year, during with low the flowsrest of in the the year, river regularlywith low compromisingflows in the river the capacityregularly of compromising the intake structure. the Hecapacity also attributed of the intake lower structure. river flows He to also an increase attributed in waterlower abstractionsriver flows to in upstreaman increase South in water Africa. Currently,abstractions the in water upstream utility South company Africa. deals Currently, with thisthe water problem utility by company renting mechanical deals with this excavators problem to buildby renting a small mechanical weir of stones excavators and sand to tobuild create a small a small weir pond of stones in the and river sand at theto create water a abstraction small pond point in withthe a river higher at waterthe water level abstraction (Figure5). point Since with the water a higher utility water company level (Figure depends 5). on Since the the availability water utility of this machinerycompany for depends implementing on the availability this solution, of this its machinery execution andfor implementing the restarting this of the solution, water its supply execution system and the restarting of the water supply system can take a long time. During the fieldwork in January can take a long time. During the fieldwork in January 2018, the interruption in the water supply service 2018, the interruption in the water supply service as a result of this issue lasted five days. In the as a result of this issue lasted five days. In the absence of an available excavator, a group of six water absence of an available excavator, a group of six water utility employees tried, with no success, to utility employees tried, with no success, to manually rebuild the weir. Luckily, after five days, the manually rebuild the weir. Luckily, after five days, the water table in the river recovered to the water table in the river recovered to the minimum level required to restart the water supply system. minimum level required to restart the water supply system.

SMALL WEIR

FigureFigure 5. 5.Picture Picture of of small small weir weir next next toto thethe intake structure (Silva (Silva-Novoa.‐Novoa. 24 24 January January 2018). 2018).

ThisThis ‘add-on’ ‘add‐on’ infrastructure, infrastructure, thethe weirweir built with sand sand and and stones, stones, shows shows how how the the form form and and functioningfunctioning of of the the infrastructure infrastructure is the the outcome outcome of of the the interactions interactions between between the infrastructure the infrastructure and its and itssocial social and and biophysical biophysical environment. environment. As As these these environments environments are are not not entirely entirely predictable predictable and and only only partiallypartially known, known, the the performance performance of of thethe infrastructureinfrastructure is also also not not totally totally predictable. predictable. On On the the other other hand,hand, as as the the barrier barrier is is washed washed away away every every rainyrainy season, it it has has to to be be reconstructed reconstructed every every year year to toensure ensure the intake structure can abstract a fair amount of water also during the drier parts of the year. For the intake structure can abstract a fair amount of water also during the drier parts of the year. For this this reason, the weir was rebuilt mid‐2018, just before the start of the dry season, so that interruption of the water supply system due to low water levels in the river could be prevented. The operators foresee that this measure has to be carried out again in 2019 as the high water levels at the start of the

Water 2019, 11, 1926 8 of 17 reason, the weir was rebuilt mid-2018, just before the start of the dry season, so that interruption of the water supply system due to low water levels in the river could be prevented. The operators foresee that this measure has to be carried out again in 2019 as the high water levels at the start of the year indicate that the weir will be washed away again by the force of the river. This improvised solution and its provisional nature is something that needs to be dealt with until other materials become available for a more permanent resolution for the problem at hand. Regardless of the specificity of the context of this case, our thesis here is that this experimental and improvised way in which the water infrastructure is used and developed, and how its materiality matters in this process, is not anecdotal nor exceptional, but rather an intrinsic characteristic of its making. The water treatment station is another example of how (data on) natural processes shape the design and functioning of water infrastructure. Between 2011 and 2013, the period in which the water supply system was rehabilitated and extended, the National Water Authority reported a lower turbidity level in the Incomati River than current measurements show. Based on this relative low turbidity and because of the limited budget available, the engineers decided that an expensive clarifier, a sedimentation tank that helps to reduce turbidity, was not needed. Instead, they gave priority to other components of the water treatment system. Since turbidity is higher than was anticipated, during the rainy season water users complain that they receive muddy water through their taps. To overcome this, some households have ‘made’ their own clarifier, a simple barrel in which they store water until the sediments have settled. The infrastructure does not only interact with its physical and social environment but also with the matter it conveys: Water. A clear example of this interaction ‘between matters’ within the water supply system of Moamba is the recurrent problem of what is referred to as the “water hammer” effect. This phenomena mainly happens in the section of the pipe that transports water from the intake station to the water treatment plant. The water hammer effect is produced by the slope in the terrain (and thus as well in the pipe) in this area which causes the water in the pipe to flow down suddenly when the pumps in the intake station stop working. According to the general manager of the water utility “ ... this mobilizes big amounts of positive and negative pressure and as a result the pipe tends to break in the more fragile points of this section of the pipe.” According to one of the operators, on average, this happens once every three months and leads to major bursts in the pipe (IN33). The water hammer effect could be avoided by the installation of hydro-pneumatic tanks that can store compressed water (and air) and as such act as a cushion by exerting or absorbing pressure to maintain consistent pressure in the pipes. However, installing such tanks is not a straightforward intervention as it requires a detailed understanding of the functioning of the system. According to the general manager of the water utility, they need to “ ... register the frequency of the problem and identify the exact location of the water hammer and the pressures it mobilizes to decide where the tanks need to be installed” (IN37). This information is currently not available, nor do they have sufficient funding to determine the best location of the pneumatic tanks by trial and error. Consequently, the utility is forced to carry out reactive maintenance every time the pipe bursts. That the pipe bursts in specific, more fragile, points are a reminder of how the particularities of each individual piece of the infrastructure, in this case a section of pipe, can make a difference. The manager of the local office (IN32) of the water utility explains that the fragility of the pipes in Moamba is, at least partly, caused by exposing the pipes to severe weather conditions, in particular, intense sunlight, when storing the pipes before they are installed as the water utility has no shed available for storing construction materials.

4. Forcing the Water Flow: The Technical Expertise of the Operators In the previous section, we described how engineers and construction workers are tinkering with the infrastructure, as making it work requires continuous alignments to dynamic physical and social-political environments. These tinkering practices results in a water supply system that deviates from the original design. The responsibility to operate this oft-changing system in order to distribute water lies with the operators of the water utility. On an everyday basis, they tinker with the system Water 2019, 11, 1926 9 of 17 to make it deliver a distribution of water that comes as close as possible to what was agreed. For instance, to deal with the insufficient pressure in the pipelines that direct water to Bairro Central, the operators established a rotational water distribution schedule for the whole town. During five hours per day (from 10:00 h to 15:00 h they supply water only to Bairro Central and Passene and not to other neighborhoods. The operators do this by manually closing five valves located in different sections of the distribution network, to make all available water flow towards the south. At 15:00 h the operators need to go to the valves located in the different parts of town again to manually open them. Since valves are not metered, some operators judge whether the valves are sufficiently open or closed based on the vibration and sound of the water flowing through the pipe, while other operators base it on the number of times, they turn the wheel that operates the valve. However, the problem is not only to make water flow to Bairro Central, but also to make it stay there. As mentioned before, every time there is a prolonged interruption in the water supply service, water flows downhill from Bairro Central back into the main pipe, aking the pipes in Bairro Central run empty. When the supply service is restarted, it takes time (up to 24 h) to make water reach this neighborhood. To compensate the residents of Bairro Central, the operators usually extend the duration of water provision to this area as soon as water flows through the pipes again. For instance, because of a broken pipe due to the water hammer effect no water was available in the network during mid-December 2017. After four days, the water supply system was restarted, but the residents of Bairro Central did not receive any water until the next day. To allow them to refill their water storage containers, this day the operator decided to extend the duration of water provision to this neighborhood until 23:00 h by keeping the mentioned valves closed during this period. The next day, to compensate the residents of the other neighborhoods, the operators kept these valves opened until 17:00 h, instead of closing them at 10:00 h as the schedule stipulates. After that, the water distribution schedule returned to normal. To solve the challenges of providing water to Bairro Central the operators requested the local water utility manager (in 2016) to purchase a non-return valve to be installed at the point the slope begins. However, the person in charge of buying this piece of hardware bought a valve that did not fit the diameter of the pipes, and for this reason, the valve could not be installed. In 2018, the original idea of installing a pipe under the rail to shorten the distance that water has to travel before reaching Bairro Central was revived by the operators. One of them came with the idea to install the water pipe inside an abandoned pipe that was put in place by the colonial authority and already crosses the railway. In this way the water utility would not have to disturb the railway service and would not depend on the railway company to carry out the works. Since the water utility does not have (detailed) maps of the colonial water supply network, the operator who initiated this plan had to rely on the memory of his grandfather to locate the old pipe. This grandfather used to be an operator of the water supply system during colonial times and luckily remembered the exact location of the pipe. Early 2019, the operators unclogged the 110 mm wide and 96 m long iron colonial pipe under the railway, using a large piece of iron they found elsewhere and inserted the brand new 63 mm wide polyethylene pipe inside of it. This pipe now supplies water to Bairro Central much faster and with more pressure than before. Only in the southern part of the neighborhood it still takes time to resume water provision after interruptions in the network for (yet) unknown reasons. This case shows that even though this intervention did not solve all challenges in providing water to Bairro Central, the creativity and tacit knowledge of the system acquired by (generations of) operators greatly improved the situation for large part of the residents in this neighborhood. The empirical data also shows that acts of tinkering with infrastructure often necessitate and/or trigger further acts of tinkering. This is best illustrated by the following example of the practices of the water operators in the water treatment plant. Due to an omission in the original design of this station a bypass, meant as an emergency measure during prolonged interruption of the water supply, was placed in the wrong location. As explained earlier, in case the water supply system needs to be restarted it is necessary to refill the pipes in the distribution network in order to recover the water Water 2019, 11, 1926 10 of 17 pressure in the pipes which is needed to convey water to the different neighborhoods in town. When the population has been suffering from a prolonged interruption in the water supply, the bypass can be usedWater by 2019 the, 11 operators, x FOR PEER to refillREVIEW the distribution network in the shortest possible time by skipping10 of parts 17 of the water purification process. Currently, the system is designed such that when operators open the decantation, filtration and disinfection processes. However, to prevent outbreaks of waterborne valve of the bypass, raw water flows directly into a 500 m3 storage tank, skipping the decantation, diseases, the raw water should be redirected to the section of the pipe where the chlorine is filtration and disinfection processes. However, to prevent outbreaks of waterborne diseases, the raw automatically injected instead of flowing straight to the storage tank (Figure 6). The result is that now water should be redirected to the section of the pipe where the chlorine is automatically injected instead the operators need to add the chlorine manually and on their own discretion in the 500 m3 storage of flowingtank to safeguard straight to not the only storage the quantity tank (Figure but 6also). The the result quality is thatof the now water the they operators deliver. need Interestingly, to add the 3 chlorinehowever, manually not only and the on amount their of own chlorine discretion is determined in the 500 by m thestorage operators tank but to also safeguard the practice not of only using the quantitythe bypass but also itself. the Depending quality of the on waterthe operator they deliver. in charge, Interestingly, the practice however, has become not only part the of amount normal of chlorinebusiness. is determined During our byfieldwork the operators at least but one also out theof the practice two operators of using in the charge bypass of itself.Moamba’s Depending water ondistribution the operator center in charge, used thethe practicebypass several has become times partat moments of normal he business.noticed that During the water our fieldworklevel in the at leasttank one was out getting of the twolow. operatorsHis practice in chargethus aimed of Moamba’s at preventing water any distribution interruption center in the used water the supply bypass severalservice times rather at moments than addressing he noticed emergency that the watersituations level of in prolonged the tank was cuts getting in the low. water His provision. practice thus In aimedother at words, preventing manually any treating interruption the water in the has water become, supply at least service for this rather operator, than addressinga normalized emergency practice. situations of prolonged cuts in the water provision. In other words, manually treating the water has become, at least for this operator, a normalized practice.

Figure 6. Detail of the bypass in the water treatment station. In red the bypass in its current state. The greenFigure dotted 6. Detail line represents of the bypass how in itthe should water be treatment to prevent station. adding In red the the chlorine bypass manually. in its current state. The green dotted line represents how it should be to prevent adding the chlorine manually. The operators also tinker with the infrastructure in order to respond to requests or complaints of residents,The for operators instance, also in thetinker reports with ofthe false infrastructure readings of in the order water to respond meters installedto requests in or Bairro complaints Central. Theseof residents, meters are for meant instance, to monitor in the reports the water of false consumption readings of individualthe water meters households installed and in form Bairro the basisCentral. for the These water meters bills. However,are meant residentsto monitor complain the water that consumption the meters indicateof individual much households higher amounts and thanform the the volume basis for of waterthe water they bills. used. However, According residents to the complain water utility, that the the meters false readings indicate much in the higher meters areamounts generated than by the air volume trapped of in water the pipesthey used. which According goes out to through the water the utility, taps inthe the false households. readings in Thisthe phenomenonmeters are isgenerated especially by prevalent air trapped in in Bairro the pipes Central which as the goes pipes out regularly through the dry taps when in the waterhouseholds. service is interrupted.This phenomenon To solve is especially the problem, prevalent the operators in Bairro have Central installed as the air-valves pipes regularly in the dry area. when Every the time water the service is interrupted. To solve the problem, the operators have installed air‐valves in the area. Every pipe is reﬁlled, the valves automatically force the air out of the pipes and thus prevent it from passaging time the pipe is refilled, the valves automatically force the air out of the pipes and thus prevent it through the water meters. However, during a visit to Bairro Central, one of the operators explained from passaging through the water meters. However, during a visit to Bairro Central, one of the that the problem is not yet completely solved. According to him, at least two more air-valves need to operators explained that the problem is not yet completely solved. According to him, at least two be installed in the main pipe that is buried under the main road in Bairro Central. The operators do not more air‐valves need to be installed in the main pipe that is buried under the main road in Bairro exactly know what the best location is for these additional air-valves. According to the interviewees, Central. The operators do not exactly know what the best location is for these additional air‐valves. According to the interviewees, the only way to determine the correct location of the air‐valves is by trial and error (IN33). This is a clear example of the experimental process of infrastructural development and the emerging nature of the infrastructure itself.

Water 2019, 11, 1926 11 of 17 the only way to determine the correct location of the air-valves is by trial and error (IN33). This is a clear example of the experimental process of infrastructural development and the emerging nature of the infrastructure itself.

5. Appropriating the Water Flow: The Technical Expertise of Water Users Sociotechnical tinkering is not only reserved for those employed or hired by the water utility. Also, water users in Moamba are actively involved in making changes to the water infrastructure. Two types of interventions illustrate well the expertise of these actors. One is the extension of the water distribution network carried out by collectives of residents in several neighborhoods in Moamba, including Bairro Central. This allowed users in marginalized areas of the town also to access water from the water distribution network. Such access would, given the limitations of the water utility company to implement extension works, otherwise have taken much longer to materialize. The other type of intervention that (collectives of) residents carry out is the fixing of recurrent leaks in the part of the network that runs through their neighborhood. Both types of interventions are made with materials water users have at hand and by using very pragmatic and improvised methods. To further illustrate this tinkering with infrastructure by residents, we focus here on the case of one specific block of households in Bairro Central, called Quarteirão 11 (Block Q11). Residents of Block Q11 twice requested for an extension of the network in their area: once when the infrastructure was constructed, and later when the infrastructure started to be operated. The water utility informed the residents that it was impossible for the company to implement these extension works because of insufficient budget to buy the required materials. If the residents of Block Q11 wanted to extend the network, they therefore needed to cover the costs of the materials themselves. The residents of this block could not afford this. In 2014 they came up with the idea of unearthing old pipes from the surrounding lands and reuse them to extend the network by themselves. The pipes recycled by the residents of Block Q11 are made of high-density polyethylene, have a diameter of 63 mm and cover a length of approximately 250 m. In order to carry out the work, the residents gathered to manually remove the old pipes from the original location, while other neighbors in the meantime dug a trench where these pipes were to be installed. Once the pipes were in place, the chief of Block Q11 talked to the water utility staff and requested help to connect these pipes to the main branch of the existent network. They agreed on sending a technician to do the work, without complaining about the unauthorized works done by the residents of Block Q11. In the office of the water utility, the chief of Block Q11 received the list of additional materials such as the joints, they had to buy and the estimated costs. With this list, he requested money from the participating households, 50 MT (approximately USD 0.8) per household. Those households that refused or could not afford to pay for the installation costs were prohibited from installing private household connections to the pipe. Nowadays, households who wish to be connected to the pipe but who did not contribute to the installation of the pipe have to pay 500 MT. This money is collected by the chief of Block Q11 to be used in case they need to invest in repairs. In this way, the installation of the recycled pipeline created new rules that divided the neighborhood between households who have the right to use the water from the self-installed pipe and those who do not have this entitlement. Those excluded—and often poorer—households have to buy water from households that are connected to the pipe, leaving them on the mercy of their neighbors, or search of water elsewhere. Once water was flowing through the self-installed pipe, the residents of Block Q11 had to deal with leakages regularly. Initially, there were only three joints in this pipeline, bought in a local hardware store. Two residents of Block Q11 explained that Joint 1 (Figure7) burst at least four times, and the neighbors did not want to spend more money to replace this piece. The solution was to replace the original joint with an improvised handmade joint that the neighbors together fabricated. One pipe was heated with fire in order to make it soft and then they widened it at one end so that they could insert the other pipe. Once this was done, the neighbors proceeded to tie up the section in which the two Water 2019, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 12 of 17

7). Joint A and Joint B were bought and installed to replace one section of the pipe that frequently leaked because it is located under a busy street crossing and is only covered with approximately 10 cm of soil. Hence, passing cars cause the recurrent breakdowns of this shallowly buried pipe. The Waterinterviewees2019, 11, 1926 indicated that they used a similar unearthed high‐density polyethylene pipe to replace12 of 17 the damaged section (IN9, IN14, IN15, IN17, IN18, IN22, IN23). Early January 2018, the pipe broke again, and this time the water utility company provided a brand new piece of pipe to replace the pipes joined with a piece of rubber, recycled from an old tire. Then they used a piece of old wire to damaged one, but this pipe cracked again early in 2019. The continuous piecing together of secureinfrastructure the joint. becomes According clear to from the testimony the fact that of thethis neighbors pipeline of interviewed, circa 200 m is this currently handcrafted composed joint of has notseven generated pieces furtherheld together leakages by six (interviews joints. IN23; IN17: IN14; IN15).

FigureFigure 7. 7.Location Location of of joints joints in in the the pipe pipe installedinstalled by the neighbors in in Block Block Q11 Q11 (Map: (Map: Chitata, Chitata, 2019). 2019).

NotThese only acts the of joints tinkering leak butby water also sectionsusers do of not the only pipe have in between technical the implications joints regularly in the sense burst. of To dealmodifying with this, the residents infrastructure had to itself install but three also othershape joints relations to replace between broken actors pieces as well of as the between pipe (Figure actors7 ). Jointand A the and infrastructure. Joint B were For bought instance, and installed early January to replace 2018 the one pipeline section ofbetween the pipe “Joint that A” frequently and “Joint leaked B” becauseruptured it is again. located It took under fifteen a busy days street before crossing the pipe and was is only fixed. covered Noticing with the approximately leak for the first 10 time, cm of the soil. Hence,neighbors passing did carsnot causenotify thethe recurrentwater utility breakdowns because they of this knew shallowly that if they buried did pipe. so, the The utility interviewees would indicatedsend their that staff they to usedclose athe similar valve unearthedso that no water high-density would flow polyethylene to the pipe pipe in order to replace to avoid the wasting damaged sectionwater. (IN9, Moreover, IN14, IN15,they realized IN17, IN18, that IN22, repairing IN23). the Early pipe Januarymeant investing 2018, the labor pipe brokeand possibly again, and other this resources, and organizing the collective action needed to this task required time and efforts to time the water utility company provided a brand new piece of pipe to replace the damaged one, but mobilize the neighborhood. this pipe cracked again early in 2019. The continuous piecing together of infrastructure becomes clear A few days later, the operators noticed the leak and they indeed stopped the water flow towards from the fact that this pipeline of circa 200 m is currently composed of seven pieces held together by this section of the pipe without taking any measures to fix the crack. They argued that because the six joints. pipe was not the property of the water utility, they needed permission from the collective of water These acts of tinkering by water users do not only have technical implications in the sense of users to intervene in this part of the system (IN37, IN33, IN47). Taking into account the water users modifyingconnected the to infrastructurethis pipe are nowadays itself but formal also shape clients relations of the utility between with actors signed as contracts well as between and monthly actors andpayments the infrastructure. of the water For bills, instance, it could early be argued January that, 2018 in theorder pipeline to better between serve its “Joint clients, A” andit might “Joint be B” rupturedreasonable again. for the It took water fifteen utility days to replace before the the self pipe‐installed was fixed. pipe entirely Noticing with the a brand leak for new the pipe. first The time, thefact neighbors the water did utility not notify does thenot wateract in utilitythis way because is interesting they knew because that if it they shows did how so, the the utility perceived would sendownership their sta offf thisto close self‐ theinstalled valve pipe so that is different no water from would the pipes flow toinstalled the pipe by in the order water to utility, avoid wastingwhich water.makes Moreover, the roles and they the realized responsibilities that repairing for maintenance the pipe of meant this pipe investing more blurred labor andthan possibly elsewhere other in resources,Moamba. and Nevertheless, organizing thethe collective water users action initially needed also to thishad task no requiredincentive time to fix and the eff ortspipe to as mobilize most thehouseholds neighborhood. store water in drums and barrels. Only when their water reservoirs ran dry, they started coordinatingA few days among later, thethemselves operators and noticed with the the utility leak and company they indeed to agree stopped on the the date water to carry flow out towards the thisrepair section works. of the As pipe a condition without takingto repair any the measures pipe, the to water fix the utility crack. demanded They argued investment that because labor the and pipe wasmaterials not the from property the water of the users water as utility,proof of they their needed commitment permission to keep from the theinfrastructure collective ofin watera good users state. to intervene in this part of the system (IN37, IN33, IN47). Taking into account the water users connected to this pipe are nowadays formal clients of the utility with signed contracts and monthly payments of the water bills, it could be argued that, in order to better serve its clients, it might be reasonable for the water utility to replace the self-installed pipe entirely with a brand new pipe. The fact the water utility does not act in this way is interesting because it shows how the perceived ownership Water 2019, 11, 1926 13 of 17 of this self-installed pipe is different from the pipes installed by the water utility, which makes the roles and the responsibilities for maintenance of this pipe more blurred than elsewhere in Moamba. Nevertheless, the water users initially also had no incentive to fix the pipe as most households store water in drums and barrels. Only when their water reservoirs ran dry, they started coordinating among themselves and with the utility company to agree on the date to carry out the repair works. As a condition to repair the pipe, the water utility demanded investment labor and materials from the water users as proof of their commitment to keep the infrastructure in a good state. On the day of the repair works, fifteen residents of Block Q11, representing 60% of the households connected to the pipeline, gathered to assist with excavation. The neighbors started digging in the morning and after a few hours two plumbers from the utility company arrived with a brand new 63 mm diameter high density polyethylene pipe to replace the damaged section. The plumbers were in charge of directing and supervising the whole process of removing the damaged pipe and installing the new one. The water users that were present during these repair works actively participated. In a sort of performative act, they were eager to demonstrate that they did their fair share of the work, both towards the staff of the water utility and towards each other. In this sense being seen doing the work became as important as doing the work itself because is a way to avoid the risk of being perceived as a free-rider by the others who did contribute to the repair works. Being considered as free-rider might jeopardize the rights to use the piped water and can lead to social sanctions, such as public accusations and gossips, giving rise to conflicts that affect other spheres of the social life of those affected (see also [14]). Households that could not provide labor also felt the need to contribute to the repair works, resulting in some of these households providing the sand required to cover the pipe as a measure to protect the pipe against rocks in the soil. This example shows the complex relationships between the actors involved and the ambiguous hydraulic property relations that emerge from it, which require to periodically invest labor and resources by different actors to reconfirm and reinforce their relations vis-à-vis the pipe and ensure their access to water (see also [15–17].

6. Conclusions and Discussion By shifting the focus of research from formal designs and official rules of operation to the detailed documentation of everyday practices of tinkering with water infrastructure, we show that Moamba’s water infrastructure is constantly in-the-making. Just like other researchers who engage with everyday practices to show how actors exercise agency to (re)produce disparate access to water (see amongst others [6–9,18]), our findings reveal how water infrastructure itself co-constitutes social processes. As pointed out in this paper, the physical environment, in which infrastructure is constructed, is never fully known nor knowable as it constantly changes due to human interventions as well as natural processes. This does not only mean that during construction, to speak in engineering jargon, ‘in situ’ deviations from design need to be made to make the infrastructure fit its environment, and later on further modifications are done as part of the everyday operation and maintenance practices, but also that its functioning can never be fully predicted nor apprehended by the engineers who designed it (see also [8,11,19–21]). This inherently emerging and—at least partly—obscure nature of water infrastructure means that everyday interventions are needed to make it function. These are, to a great extent, governed by a logic of trial and error. As the various examples described in this paper show, every undesired performance of the infrastructure requires further calibration, adjustments, and corrections, making infrastructural development an essentially experimental process [2]. Acknowledging this prompts a re-thinking of what engineers are and do: instead of merely following blueprint designs, much of their actual job consists of improvisations needed to steer capricious flows of water (see also [1,22]). As the case of Moamba’s water supply system shows, different kinds of actors tinker with the form and materiality of the infrastructure in attempts to make the water flow. Engineers, construction workers, operators, and water users are thus all involved, at least to some extent, in the continuous process of making and remaking the infrastructure. Through these acts of tinkering, they also experiment with (parts of) the system, in the process acquiring know-how on its intricate behavior (see Water 2019, 11, 1926 14 of 17 also [5,23]). De facto, the involvement of users and operators in changing the layout and functioning of pipes thus implies a re-distribution of expertise, to some extent challenging formal hierarchies between engineers and operators and between water utilities and water users [24]. It also entails shifts in how roles and responsibilities are defined and distributed in water provisioning. It reveals that operators, plumbers, and water users have much more agency than is usually assumed or granted to them. Acknowledging that this is so has important social-political implications; the need for continuous tinkering with infrastructure rips open spaces for a range of actors to get involved, (re)negotiate and establish hydraulic property rights, spaces to claim access to water potentially even for actors with less formal powers and rights like the residents in Bairro Central. We like to end this paper with a plea for more ethnographic research to document the everyday practices of tinkering with (water) infrastructure in various contexts. As shown in this case study, attention to sociotechnical tinkering provides an interesting provocation to accepted ideas about how water provisioning works (or should work). It sheds light on how actual water flows—at least partly—escape formal plans and official designs as the result of the contingent coming together of different people, water(s), infrastructure, and much else (see also [2,11,12]. This prompts modesty in terms of the central controllability of water and creates a much-needed appreciation for how conveying and distributing water always requires many creative collaborations—between engineers, operators, and users. As our anecdotes suggest, these collaborations also shed a refreshing light on why people invest labor and money in water provisioning, showing that it is about much more than money or rational economic motives. Collaborations are anchored in friendships and neighborliness between users and rest on the professional pride of operators who are keen to help to provide water to all. Also, methodologically, attention to sociotechnical tinkering provides an attractive empirical entry point to study water service provision, and water governance processes in general, because acts of tinkering with infrastructure are visible and traceable rallying points of wider water politics, marking people’s attempts and struggles to access and claim water. Documenting these acts, therefore provides new impetus for understanding water politics, as well as the relations between power and infrastructure.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, methodology, formal analysis, investigation, and writing, L.M.S.-N.S.; Validation, writing—review and editing, and supervision, J.S.K.-S. and M.Z. Funding: This research was funded by the Dutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs through the DGIS IHE Delft Programmatic Cooperation 2016–2020 (DUPC2) through the research SMALL project on water supply and sanitation in small towns on the urban-rural intersection. Acknowledgments: Fieldwork was supported by Eduardo Mondlane University and Collins. Our special gratitude goes to Pedro Cardoso, Taurai Tomossene, Jorge Tomé Vicente, Herculano Francisco, Alfredo Jorge Chauque, Rojasse A. Macamo, Cremildo Alfredo Lampeão, Remígio Castro João, and Eugenia Inacio for facilitating and participating in this research. We would like to thank the residents of Moamba, and Bairro Central in particular, for sharing their views and experiences with us as it forms the core of this research. We thank Tavengwa Chitata for the support provided with the figures and the anonymous reviewers of this journal for their valuable comments and suggestions to improve an earlier version of this manuscript. Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest. Water 2019, 11, 1926 15 of 17

Appendix A

Table A1. Components of the piped water supply infrastructure of Moamba.

Components Sub-Components Functioning Collection well, infiltration chamber, and The electric pumps in the intake well work suction chamber. separately and alternately. Two submersible pumps 160 m3/h Intake building with two surface The electric pumps propel the water from the Intake station electric pumps. transition tank to the water treatment plant. Serves as a buffer between the submersible 80 m3 transition tank and the superficial pumps. It connects the catchment station with the PVC pipeline 250 mm diameter. ETA for about 3.5 km. Tank and injector of aluminium sulphite. Two 50 m3 sedimentation tanks. Tank and injector of aluminium sulphite and Water treatment capacity of 3000 m3/day, calcium hypochlorite. Water treatment plant whose treatment sequence consists of Six 45 m3/h capacity filters connected to three flocculation, sedimentation, filtration and electric pumps with a maximum flow rate of chlorine disinfection process. 80 m3/h. Tank and injector of chlorine. Two treated water reservoirs of 500 m3 and 3 By gravity the water goes from these elevated another of 150 m . reservoirs to the water distribution network Two elevated reservoirs of 150 m3 and 80 m3. of Moamba. Two sets of pumps for the 150 m3 elevated Four electric pumps. reservoir and two sets of pumps for the 80 m3 elevated reservoir. Water distribution Water distribution network composed by centre pipes with the following characteristics: PVC, PN9, D = 50 mm, 2480 m PVC, PN9, D = 75 mm, 4880 m PVC, PN9, D = 90 mm, 4520 m PVC, PN9, D = 110 mm, 2545 m PVC, PN9, D = 125 mm, PVC, PN9, D = 140 mm PVC, PN9, D = 200 mm Water 2019, 11, 1926 16 of 17 Water 2019, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 16 of 17 Appendix B Appendix B

FigureFigure A1. A1.DesignDesign map map of ofMoamba’s Moamba’s water water distribution network network 2012. 2012. Source: Source: Collins Collins Sistemas Sistemas de de AguaAgua Lda. Lda.

ReferencesReferences 1. Kemerink-Seyoum, J.S.; Chitata, T.; Domínguez Guzmán, C.; Novoa-Sanchez, L.M.; Zwarteveen, M.Z. 1. Kemerink‐Seyoum, J.S.; Chitata, T.; Domínguez Guzmán, C.; Novoa‐Sanchez, L.M.; Zwarteveen, M.Z. Attention to sociotechnical tinkering of irrigation infrastructure as a way to rethink water governance. Water Attention2019, 11to, 1670.sociotechnical [CrossRef] tinkering of irrigation infrastructure as a way to rethink water governance. 2.WaterJensen, 2019, C.B.;11, 1670, Morita, doi:10.3390/w11081670. A. Infrastructures as Ontological Experiments. Ethnos J. Anthropol. 2016, 82. [CrossRef] 2. 3.Jensen,Harvey, C.B.; P.; Morita, Jensen, C.B.; A. Morita,Infrastructures A. Introduction. as Ontological Infrastructural Experiments. complications. Ethnos In Infrastructures J. Anthropol. and Social2016, 82, doi:10.1080/00141844.2015.1107607.Complexity. A companion; Harvey, P., Jensen, C.B., Morita, A., Eds.; Routledge: New York, NY, USA, 2017; 3. Harvey,p. 423. P.; Jensen, C.B.; Morita, A. Introduction. Infrastructural complications. In Infrastructures and Social 4.Complexity.Van der A Zaag, companion P. Chicanery; Harvey, at the P., Canal:Jensen, Changing C.B., Morita, Practice A., in Eds.; Irrigation Routledge: Management New inYork, Western NY, MexicoUSA, ;2017; p. 423.Latin America Studies, 65; CEDLA: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 1992; p. 267. 5. Graham, S.; Thrift, N. Out of order: Understanding repair and maintenance. Theory Culture Soc. 2007, 24, 4. Van der Zaag, P. Chicanery at the Canal: Changing Practice in Irrigation Management in Western Mexico; Latin 1–25. [CrossRef] America Studies, 65; CEDLA: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 1992; p. 267. 6. Anand, N. PRESSURE: The PoliTechnics of Water Supply in Mumbai. Cult. Anthropol. 2011, 26, 542–564. 5. Graham, S.; Thrift, N. Out of order: Understanding repair and maintenance. Theory Culture Soc. 2007, 24, 1– [CrossRef][PubMed] 7.25, doi:10.1177/0263276407075954.Anand, N.; O’Neill, B. Municipal disconnect: On abject water and its urban infrastructures. Ethnography 6. Anand,2012 N., 13 PRESSURE:, 487–509. [CrossRef The PoliTechnics] of Water Supply in Mumbai. Cult. Anthropol. 2011, 26, 542–564, 8.doi:10.1111/j.1548Björkman, L. Un‐1360.2011.01111.x./known Waters: Navigating Everyday Risks of Infrastructural Breakdown in Mumbai. 7. Anand,Comp. N.; Stud. O’Neill, South B. Asia Municipal Afr. Middle disconnect: East 2014, 34 On, 497–517. abject [waterCrossRef and] its urban infrastructures. Ethnography 9.2012,Alda-Vidal, 13, 487–509, C.; doi:10.1177/1466138111435743 Kooy, M.; Rusca, M. Mapping operation and maintenance: An everyday urbanism analysis 8. Björkman,of inequalities L. Un/known within piped Waters: water Navigating supply in Lilongwe, Everyday Malawi. Risks Urbanof Infrastructural Geogr. 2017, 39 Breakdown, 104–121. [CrossRef in Mumbai.] 10.Comp.Furlong, Stud. South K.; Kooy, Asia M.Afr. Worlding Middle East Water 2014 Supply:, 34, 497–517, Thinking doi:10.1215/1089201X Beyond the Network‐ in2826061. Jakarta. Int. J. Urban Reg. Res. 2017, 41, 888–903. [CrossRef] 9. Alda‐Vidal, C.; Kooy, M.; Rusca, M. Mapping operation and maintenance: An everyday urbanism analysis 11. Jensen, C.B. Pipe Dreams: Sewage Infrastructure and Activity Trails in Phnom Penh. Ethnos 2017, 82, 627–647. of inequalities within piped water supply in Lilongwe, Malawi. Urban Geogr. 2017, 39, 104–121, [CrossRef] doi:10.1080/02723638.2017.1292664. 10. Furlong, K.; Kooy, M. Worlding Water Supply: Thinking Beyond the Network in Jakarta. Int. J. Urban Reg. Res. 2017, 41, 888–903, doi:10.1111/1468‐2427.12582. 11. Jensen, C.B. Pipe Dreams: Sewage Infrastructure and Activity Trails in Phnom Penh. Ethnos 2017, 82, 627– 647, doi:10.1080/00141844.2015.1107608. 12. Dwiartama, A.; Rosin, C. Exploring agency beyond humans: The compatibility of Actor‐Network Theory (ANT) and resilience thinking. Ecol. Soc. 2014, 19, 10.

Water 2019, 11, 1926 17 of 17

12. Dwiartama, A.; Rosin, C. Exploring agency beyond humans: The compatibility of Actor-Network Theory (ANT) and resilience thinking. Ecol. Soc. 2014, 19, 10. [CrossRef] 13. Project Water Supply and Sanitation in Small Towns; Relatório De Água E Saneamento (Versão Final-Volume I); Universidade Eduardo Mondlane: Mabdo, Mozambique, 2017; p. 61. 14. Trawick, P. Comedy and Tragedy in the Andean Commons. J. Polit. Ecol. 2002, 9, 35–68. [CrossRef] 15. Boelens, R.; Vos, J. Legal pluralism, hydraulic property creation and sustainability: The materialized nature of water rights in user-managed systems. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. 2014, 11, 55–62. [CrossRef] 16. Coward, E.W. Direct or Indirect Alternative for Irrigation Investment and the Creation of Property. Irrigation Investment, Technology, and Management Strategies for Development. Studies in Water Policy and Management, No. 9; Westview Press: Boulder, CO, USA; London, UK, 1986; pp. 225–244. 17. Sijbrandij, P.; van der Zaag, P. Canal maintenance: A key to restructuring irrigation management: A case of farmer participation and turnover from Mexico. Irrig. Drain. Syst. 1993, 7, 189–204. [CrossRef] 18. Boakye-Ansah, A.S.; Ferrero, G.; Rusca, M.; Van Der Zaag, P. Inequalities in microbial contamination of drinking water supplies in urban areas: The case of Lilongwe, Malawi. J. Water Health 2016, 14, 851–863. [CrossRef][PubMed] 19. Pickering, A. The Mangle of Practice: Agency and Emergence in the Sociology of Science. Am. J. Soc. 1993, 99, 559–589. [CrossRef] 20. Barnes, J. Pumping possibility: Agricultural expansion through desert reclamation in Egypt. Soc. Stud. Sci. 2012, 42, 517–538. [CrossRef] 21. Bouleau, G. The co-production of science and waterscapes: The case of the Seine and the Rhône Rivers, France. Geoforum 2014, 57, 248–257. [CrossRef] 22. Rap, E.; van der Zaag, P. The pivotal role of canal operators in irrigation schemes. The case of the canalero. Irrig. Drain. 2012, 61, 436–448. 23. Zwarteveen, M. Decentering the technology: Explaining the drip irrigation paradox. In Drip Irrigation for Agriculture: Untold Stories of Eﬃciency, Innovation and Development; Venot, J.P.K., Zwarteveen, M., Eds.; Routledge: London, UK, 2017; pp. 54–67. 24. Karpouzoglou, T.; Zimmer, A. Ways of knowing the wastewaterscape: Urban political ecology and the politics of wastewater in Delhi, India. Habitat Int. 2016, 54, 150–160. [CrossRef]

© 2019 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).