Limpopo Case Study

    After exploring the legislative basis for modern South African water politics, in this post I want to look at a case study that shows a more concrete example of those broader trends. I will summarise a research article, focusing on access to water in the Limpopo region of South Africa: a majority (97%) Black, rural province in the north of the country.

Limpopo Population Density, image via https://www.slideshare.net/cpwfbfp/limpopo-basin-focal-project

    The disproportionate distribution of water for predominantly poor, black rural areas in comparison to wealthy white areas is a persistent issue, onset by decades of racial segregation and the prioritization of infrastructure building in white communities. These trends have left black, rural areas with inadequate water supplies, as they have been disregarded and marginalized since colonizers first arrived. Recent water initiatives in South Africa, such as those instituted under the NWA of 1998, have been specifically targeted towards lessening those disparities, now prioritizing previously underrepresented areas. The article, Assessing rural small community water supply in Limpopo, South Africa: Water service benchmarks and reliability, by Majuru, Jagals and Hunter, takes an in-depth look at one such program, aimed at upgrading water supply systems in rural South Africa.

    The authors of the study emphasize a clear dissonance between national statistics and how they are experienced in-situ. They cite the Department of Water Affairs, who in 2010 claimed that 97% of the population had access to basic water supply infrastructure. Majuru et al. critique this statistic, elaborating that "presence of water supply infrastructure does not always indicate that people have access to safe water, as these technologies do not always work. All too often, providing new water supply infrastructure takes precedence over ensuring continued access to water" (Majuru et al.). The small community water pumps used by many rural communities can be very rudimentary, if a community even has one accessible. The study looked at household water usage during and after a water service upgrade, measuring access, availability and potability. Results demonstrated:

"improvements in the three main indicators; shorter distances to water sources, increased water consumption and improved water quality. However, when assessed against the enhanced benchmarks for communities with basic supply, only distance met the specified benchmark of maximum 200 m; per capita water consumption was below the 25 l and E. coli was detected in over 33% of water samples from the households. Water consumption reduced by 5 lcd during non-operational periods in the basic service, when households collected water from sources 639 m farther".

    These findings greatly delegitimize the previously quoted 97% water supply infrastructure from the central government. Projects to improve water in the area did not meet targets the way they were purported to, as even 'improved' sources may be contaminated or otherwise unsafe. The authors of the Limpopo study recommend that "While providing safe water supplies to the millions that are still unreached is imperative, it is equally important that those have already been reached continue to have water". In the context of Water and Politics, the findings from this study affirm that governments, in particular the South African Federal government, do not have an adequate perception of water issues in marginalized communities. Under the NWA, water improvement projects have disregarded communities that already have documented water infrastructure, without regard to whether the water is safe or not. Political actors at the state-level have a crucial role in responsible water provisioning, which has not been thoroughly fulfilled.