Water Scarcity and Water Use
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
SOCIAL WATER SCARCITY AND WATER USE Report to the Water Research Commission by Barbara Nompumelelo Tapela African Centre for Water Research (ACWR) WRC Report No. 1940/1/11 ISBN 978-1-4312-0178-5 February 2012 Obtainable from Water Research Commission Private Bag X03 Gezina, 0031 [email protected] or download from www.wrc.org.za DISCLAIMER This report has been reviewed by the Water Research Commission (WRC) and approved for publication. Approval does not signify that the contents necessarily reflect the views and policies of the WRC, nor does mention of trade names or commercial products constitute endorsement or recommendation for use. © WATER RESEARCH COMMISSION ii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A working definition by this report is that ‘social’ scarcity of water refers to a social construct of ‘resource management’, which is determined by political, economic and social power dynamics underpinning the institutions that provide structure to social relations, security of access to bases of social power and productive wealth, and stability to the social organization of human societies. Since secure access to water is an integral part of people’s multi-faceted livelihoods, manifestations of social water scarcity become most evident at the micro-levels of social organization namely, communities and households at the local level. People at these micro-levels often perceive social water scarcity to be inadequacy of the quality and quantity of available water to meet their multiple-use requirements, which affects their capabilities to secure and enhance existing livelihood asset ‘portfolios’ against vulnerability to risks and hazards within their given contexts. As such, narratives over social water scarcity often allude to people’s unmet expectations for water services, on the one hand, and ‘wasteful’ water use, on the other hand. By contrast, narratives over social water security are often closely linked to narratives over livelihood sustainability. Such narratives are imbued with power dynamics underlying discourses over meanings and the structure of institutions governing social relations in organized society. The report surmises that local people are often aware of these power dynamics and therefore see social water scarcity as largely an end-product of dominance by the more powerful political, economic and social interests. The latter tend to define and dominate discourses over meaning, the structure of resource allocation and relations between themselves and water services institutions and institutional actors. Where such meanings, institutions and relations are perceived to be sub-optimal, local communities and households will exercise their agency to adopt a range of livelihood strategies to safeguard themselves against vulnerability to risks. They mobilize their individual and collective livelihood assets such as financial resources, human labour, social networks and socio- political platforms, to cope with water insecurity and/or to engage with institutions on the need for change. Outcomes of these coping and engagement strategies depend on, on one hand, capabilities entitlements and claim-making power of affected communities and households. On the other hand, such outcomes also depend on the ‘legitimacy’, ‘accountability’, ‘effectiveness’, ‘preparedness’ and ‘robustness’ of water services institutions. Chapter 2 presents a review of literature on water scarcity as well as linkages between multiple-use of water and water services planning. Particular attention is given to social dimensions of water scarcity and ‘water security’. Multiple-use of water is seen as resonant with people’s multi-faceted livelihoods. ‘Institutions’ are seen as a critical aspect of social water scarcity and water use at local community and household levels and, in essence, a key determinant of whether or not water security is attained at these levels. Chapter 3 presents a review of literature on the dynamics between water scarcity and socio- political stability. In light of a “paucity of theory” in the water sector to explain and predict iii the critical elements of social stability (Turton & Ohlsson, 1999), the review attempts to strengthen the rigour of analysis by cross-referencing South Africa-specific empirical and anecdotal evidence with theoretical works put forward by social and political scientists, such as Gurr (1970 in Gurr, 1985), Tilly (1977 in Gurr, 1985), Diener (1994), Deicbmann & Lall (2003) and Blanchflower & Oswald (2003). Ground-breaking theory-building efforts by South African scholarly works (Turton & Ohlsson, 1999; Ohlsson & Turton, 1999; Turton & Meissner, 2002; Turton, 2008) are also critiqued. The review finds that although the post-apartheid South African government has broadened access to water services by historically disadvantaged individuals (HDIs), many people living in informal urban and rural parts of the country still lack adequate and safe drinking water. Inequitable access to water has since 2004 become juxtaposed with an exponential increase in social protests. However, understandings on the extent to which water services issues contribute to protest action remain limited. Evidence also reveals a more complex interplay of causal factors, which at times contradicts the water “service delivery hypothesis”. The exponential increase in 2009 in the frequency of violent protests has raised questions over implications of rampant protest action on national socio-political stability. However, the extent to which protests indicate a trend towards socio-political instability remains subject to debate. This report points out that social protests and socio-political stability in the South African context should be seen in light of Section 17 of the national Constitution, which states that ‘everyone has the right, peacefully and unarmed, to assemble, to demonstrate, to picket and to present petitions’. Hence, although protests might appear to be an organized and consolidated expression of anger against government, they are also a manifestation of awareness by South African citizenry of the democratic right to freedom of expression. Chapter 4 presents empirical findings on people’s water sources, uses, adaptation and coping strategies, aspirations and expectations for service delivery. Such findings are cross- referenced, where possible, with findings on institutional responses vis-à-vis water services planning and implementation towards meeting people’s water access and use requirements. The chapter is based primarily on rapid appraisals of case studies in selected rural and urban ‘water scarce’ contexts namely, Sannieshof, Khayelitsha, Cala, Mbuzini and Muyexe. Findings from all five study sites suggest that, irrespective of socio-economic status, people in local communities and households expect government to provide ‘acceptable’ levels of water services. Findings also confirm and strengthen literature review findings that social water scarcity is closely linked to livelihoods. In urban informal settlements, such as those of Sannieshof in the North West Province, perception was generally that water scarcity and water use problems were largely due to institutional ineptitude, which left communities and households particularly vulnerable to risks associated with water contamination and pollution. Local responses to water insecurity, however, were mostly split along racial, socio-economic and political cleavages. By contrast, within urban informal settlements in Khayelitsha township of Cape Town, formalization and marginalization issues featured strongly in the linkage between water scarcity and societal expectations and/or aspirations for water services. A rift had developed between recently formalized property owners and neighbourhood informal dwellers, whereby the former no longer tolerated hitherto shared informal access (including “illegal” connections) to infrastructure within their property. The excluded were well-aware of iv constraints to water access imposed by servitudes that applied to the land they occupied, but nonetheless were aggrieved by perceptions of relative deprivation and marginalization. Such grievances were strongly linked to expectations and aspirations by mostly newly- settled migrants from the Eastern Cape. Findings from Khayelitsha were also that the linkage between water services and protests is largely mediated through the type of housing residents live in. The type of house – informal settlements and formal housing – is a good proxy for the level of service delivery. Formal houses tend to have internal or yard taps and toilets as well as electricity while informal settlements are generally lacking of toilets and electricity and rely on communal stand pipes for water supplies. It can be said that water scarcity, unsatisfactory delivery of services and dissatisfaction with governance all play important roles in the generation of protests in Khayelitsha. These variables interplay with other factors, such as poverty, inequality, unemployment, poor quality of life, perceptions of relative deprivation, rights-based struggles, power politics and unmet aspirations and expectations. Beyond the centre-stage of amplified grievances, rural people of Muyexe, Mbuzini and Cala (Chapter 4) continue to devise strategies to cope with long-protracted water scarcity and insecurity. Respondents often alluded to discrepancies between gendered water use requirements and institutional responses (and/or lack thereof). Expectations for water services delivery were linked to livelihood strategies and aspirations, while perceptions