Cape Town Water Strategy

downloadDownload
  • Words 3049
  • Pages 7
Download PDF

Many kinds of ecosystems support urban life with essential ecosystem services. With over 50% of the human population now living in urbanized areas, these societies are fundamentally dependent on the health of our ecosystems. One of the challenges we face is that current worldviews disconnect human progress and economic growth from the biosphere, treating humans and nature as two separate parts. These views need to be altered if we are to achieve a sustainable future for humanity. A shift in perspective, where we recognize that humans and nature are part of an interdependent social-ecological system, will ensure human development that is congruent with the biosphere. We are however, seeing progress on this front, with integrated water resource management (IWRM) being increasingly implemented. This is a promising step, as this management paradigm simultaneously considers the economic efficiency, environmental sustainability and equity of the water resource (Seminar 6 4/5). However, there is still a long way to go in terms of implementation that keeps pace with increasing challenges.

Social-ecological systems are both dynamic and complex, making them highly susceptible to changes. These systems therefore require management strategies that build resilience, allowing them to absorb changes and adapt in such a way that allows them to retain their function, structure and feedbacks.

Click to get a unique essay

Our writers can write you a new plagiarism-free essay on any topic

Water has been hailed in the bloodstream of the biosphere (TASWF:23) due to its role as an essential ingredient for life and in regulating the stability of the Earth system (TASWF:16,17). We find ourselves in the Anthropocene era (REF), where human impact is a shaping force on a planetary-scale and is thus the dominant force shaping the global water cycle (TASWF 15). Direct human impacts are expected to continue to define patterns of water scarcity over the next decades, even despite the glooming presence of climate change (TASWF). Our Earth system is highly interconnected, and with a globalized economy, any water-related shocks can have far reaching consequences. This emphasizes the need for improved water management on a global scale, as the sustainability of this resource is the backbone of the human population.

South Africa, and specifically the city of Cape Town, has long struggled with water-related issues. The combination of a semi-arid climate, poor historical management and the increasing uncertainty associated with climate change has resulted in the need for immediate action. The 2015-2017 drought experienced in the Western Cape was a result of low rainfall. The combined rainfall for these years was lower than any other consecutive period of this length and was deemed a 1 in 590 year event. However, it could be argued that better historical management of water resources may have eliminated the need for the drastic water restrictions that resulted. These extreme water restrictions not only impacted the citizens of Cape Town, but significantly damaged the reputation of the city, the economic repercussions of which cannot yet be fully measured. The city has therefore developed a new water strategy to drought-proof the city of Cape Town. It outlines 5 basic commitments which comprise of safe access to water and sanitation, wise water use, sufficient and reliable water from diverse sources, shared benefits from regional water resources and a water sensitive city by 2040. It is argued that the strategy is progressive and visionary but will be hugely challenging to implement.

The progressive nature of this document is initially evident in its solution-oriented approach. Pahl-Wostl et al. (2013) explained that past research has focused on identifying problems and stressed the need for solution-oriented future research. Similarly, the strategy aims to adapt a collaborative approach in its implementation. The city intends to work together with stakeholders and partners to improve the analytical information-base for water resource management decisions, build relationships between key stakeholders, enhance the economic and social benefit of water, improve management approaches and practices to ensure resilient outcomes, to evolve institutional and governance arrangements between the users (urban and agriculture) and the Department of Water and Sanitation, and to ensure more robust and transparent management of water resources. This collaborative approach will allow for the co-production of knowledge which will subsequently ensure key policy relevance (Pahl-Wostl et al., 2013). However, the strategy acknowledges that collaboration is based on trust, which itself requires transparency, accountability and the definitive translation of intentions to actions. This is where gaps in the strategy begin to emerge.

The South African National Water Act (NWA) of 1998 was recognized internationally as one of the most progressive pieces of water legislation in the world. This was a major step towards implementing IWRM concepts in South Africa, however implementation has proved challenging and is, to date, incomplete. This failure in implementation was due to several factors, leadership changes resulting from transformation practices resulted in an outflow of experienced staff; the level of ambition meant the water department was overwhelmed with challenges and limited resources; accountability was hugely lacking with heads of regional offices receiving performance bonuses despite their failure to meet targets. In hindsight, it may have been better to develop legislation that was more suited to South Africa as a developing country, with its limited technological and human resource capacity. While we should always aim for the best possible legislation, we should not undermine the importance of getting the basics right. Maintaining water monitoring and infrastructure is crucial in the further development of our cities. The main lesson that we can draw from this is that we should focus on key challenges facing our water resources and avoid trying to do everything at once. Future legislation should still be ambitious, but also realistic, with its main aim to guide implementation (Schreiner). This lack of good governance has resulted in XXXXX. Hope this isn’t repeated in CT?

The City of Cape Town has developed this water strategy independently. However, while the city has nailed the key concepts for a successful water future, trust and transparency are still lacking. In terms of transparency, there are major gaps in water quality monitoring. The last time an audit was done on our urban waterways was in 2005, creating a huge void in terms of available data on the health our urban infrastructure. Unless the monitoring practices of the city improves, we will not be able to effectively manage our urban waterways or realize the goal of collaboration. In order to recognize sustainable practices and determine if we are meeting sustainability goals, we need to ensure that there are satisfactory measuring systems in place. (Wostl) again emphasizes the importance of this. In terms of trust, the drought and subsequent restrictions caused citizens to lose faith in the city’s management of our water resources, compounding this is the failure of the city to previously engage with the public. Rebuilding the trust of communities may prove challenging, this is of major importance given the heavy reliance of the city on active public participation to reach their sustainable water goals. The key flaw in the social dimension is that the strategy fails to mention how the city plans to guarantee and maintain effective collaboration and trust. Expressing more concrete plans on how they will achieve this may have been beneficial given the need for support from public and private sectors. However, we must acknowledge that the call for public comment is a step in the right direction in involving the public in urban water management – granted that the views are fully considered. A reassuring point is that the city emphasizes their intention to translate their commitments into action, another essential ingredient for the next decade of water research – focus on knowledge to concrete action (Wostl).

Moving on from the social challenges associated with the water strategy, several operational challenges also exist which may contribute to the expected difficulty in implementation. Many of these challenges are grounded on their highly ambitious nature, which is reminiscent of the 1998 NWA. One of the aims of the document is to reduce water supplied by rainfed dams from 95% to 75% in 10 years. Such a claim seems extremely ambitious, especially given the amplified cost of alternative water sources and the arguably insufficient budget. One of these alternative sources is desalination. This implementation will prove extremely expensive, especially considering the amount of water it will supply – the first phase, which will be operational in 2026, is only expected to produce 18 million kl/annum with an operating cost of R9/kl, compared to water reuse strategies which will produce 26 million kl/annum at an operating cost of only R5/kl. In addition to this, desalination is heavily reliant on large amounts of energy, this will increase carbon emissions and place increased stress on South Africa’s already crippling energy sector. Bloomberg stated, in his 2017 book Climate of Hope, that “Most of the things that make cities better, cleaner, healthier, and more economically productive places also reduce carbon emissions.” While desalination has proved hugely successful in other cities, we must consider the developing nature of South Africa and its economic situation to avoid investing billions before we can afford it. The strategy further mentions that while this infrastructure may not always be utilised, it will not be a wasted investment. While this is a positive on the emissions front, we must consider if we can justify the costs of desalination under such circumstances. To support their views, the strategy mentions the city of Sydney and the benefits of their desalination infrastructure, despite its irregular use. It seems irresponsible to compare two cities with such large wealth disparities to justify an issue of cost. Unless the city can significantly increase the percentage of water supplied from desalination, especially given the significant start up and shut down costs, the economic state of South Africa may render this project unfeasible. We must also consider that we may, as with the NWA, be attempting to do too much too soon. There is limited time to develop alternative sources if we are to meet Cape Town’s water needs in the near future, all scenarios outlined in the strategy show that we will rely on these alternative sources as early as 2020. Focusing on implementing too much at once may result in the failure to adequately implement any of these strategies. Our time, limited resources and skills may be better spent on correctly developing and implementing a few alternative water sources on larger scales.

Another reservation about the strategy is that it does not fully address the risks of climate change. A recent study has shown that climate change has trebled drought risk in Cape Town. The strategy clearly states that should there be a step change climate stress (as opposed to gradual stress), even if water demand remains low after the drought, the planned program will only be able to meet the city’s basic needs in the early years – requiring significant restrictions. Such a situation would have drastic effects on the city and economy. This introduces the need for the call to decrease water demand, the city was consuming 220l/person/day in 2014, following the drought this dropped to 138 l in 2018, however we cannot afford for the demand to return to pre-drought levels. The vague mention of wise water use is not sufficient in this situation. This is especially important given the statement that the city will require the help of the people. While this can be viewed as both a weakness and a strength, it will undoubtedly be the key to the strategies success and this should not be taken lightly. We require a significant social transformation. This even further emphasizes the need for the city to rebuild the trust that is lacking, the public needs to acknowledge their major role. “In the future, the implementation of commitments and actions will require a ‘whole of society’ approach in which there is city-wide collaboration built on trust, transparency and mutual accountability.”

Heavy reliance on citizens – The city did come together well during the drought – but it was only half the population and it was also only under extreme pressure – the question is whether we can do this when the threat is not immediately evident. “A city that safeguards itself against water risks is characterised by shared accountability. We have a long way to go.”

However, the lack of accountability and capability of the government just reinforces the need for it to be the job of the whole nation. In this way the document recognizes its flaws and addresses them simultaneously.

In South Africa, 56% of waste water treatment plants are not fully operational. This limits its ability to deliver on the future promises outlined in the City of Cape Town strategy document.

The city of Singapore has succeeded in creating a robust, sustainable and affordable water supply. As with Cape Town, Singapore is a water stressed city that is vulnerable to disruptions in water supply and has previously experienced high levels of water restrictions. The Singapore water strategy acknowledges that water security and sustainability is essential for the survival and economic growth of the city – an example of its integrated approach. Both cities emphasize the need for public accountability and responsible use as the key determinant of the sustainability of the water resource. Wise water use is clearly more evident in Singapore, with their peak levels of water use at a reasonable 165 litres per person per day in 2003 further decreasing to 148 litres per person per day in 2016 – with the goal of reaching 140 litres per person per day. This demonstrates that the city of Cape Town would be well within reason to enforce the need for sustained low levels of demand, and should make a clear point in this regard. Singapore’s water is supplied from four sources – stormwater, imported water, used water (NEWater) and desalination – the city stresses that this diversification of sources is the key to strengthening its water supply. Of note is that 65% of Singapore’s water supply is met through NEWater (40%) and desalination (25%), both sources are weather-resilient and therefore less susceptible to climate-induced changes, the city aims to increase this to 85% by 2060, with NEWater and desalination contributing 55% and 30% respectively. In this way, the city has adequately prepared to cope with the uncertainties of climate change, a stark contrast to Cape Town in this regard. Singapore considers water to not only be a resource but an economic asset, subsequently massive sums of funding have been invested in water research, this has been the key in developing sustainable practices. In line with the aims of the city of Cape Town, Singapore has ensured the co-production of knowledge through collaboration between researchers, industry, government and policy makers. The future aims of the city are to maintain and expand urban waterways and reduce the energy demand associated with all water production and treatment. Singapore is currently exploring the possibility of utilising solar energy to power their desalination plants – adopting this in Cape Town could significantly increase the feasibility of the proposed desalination project. One major difference between these cities is reflected in the pricing structure of water – while Singapore’s water pricing encourages wise use, Cape Town XXXXXXX. Water pricing in Singapore reflects the full costs of production and supply and includes a water conservation tax, this ensures that the value of water is fully appreciated by all citizens. The price of water also encourages citizens to invest in water saving appliances and fittings, these are easily identified as water efficiency labels are required for the sale of all water related equipment, this practice is beneficial to both the citizens and the environment. The Cape Town water strategy has highlighted the aim to make Cape Town a water sensitive city by 2040, Singapore has largely achieved this through its use of urban waterways as recreational areas. The city acknowledges that citizens are more likely to protect something they care about and therefore the public appreciation of water, through public recreational areas, will increase the sustainability of the water resource. This integrated urban environment will be a draw for people and investments, and thus positively influence the economy and environmental sustainability.

The city has implemented policies on new developments that require on site measures to cope with stormwater. Encourage water conservation practices, through water efficiency awards.

Copenhagen, the capital of Denmark, is one of the most sustainable water cities in the world. While there are big differences between Cape Town and Copenhagen, such as the main water sources. There are a few key lessons we can learn from their water management practices. The city obtains all of its water from a single source, groundwater. The city stresses the importance of strict monitoring practices – something that Cape Town is urged to improve upon. In addition, the city is painfully conscious of their carbon footprint in water supply – something that both Cape Town and Singapore need to consider – for each litre of tap water in Copenhagen, only 0.0002 kg of CO2 is emitted, making the city carbon neutral. Given the threat of climate change, ensuring that our water use places little stress on the atmosphere is of vital importance if we are to develop in line with the biosphere. The city also places importance on protecting groundwater – for both environmental and drinking purposes – through restrictions on fertilisers and the planting of trees in extraction sites – this even further reduces CO2. Like both Cape Town and Singapore, the city explains the important role of citizens in the co-creation of their future vision. Goal of 100l/day is another thing CT can learn from. They also invest heavily in stormwater management, both to protect the city from climate change and recharge aquifers. The city also has strong leadership. Also consider collaboration and transparency to be essential.

Both cities have proved to be successful in their water use but are aiming for further progress. The strong similarities between the key values indicate that the city of cape towns water strategy is both progressive and has all the right ingredients for a successful water future for the city. If we can succeed at implementation, sustainability and resilience of our water resources is well within reach.

A significant part of the challenge is to make the work of our water resources visible in society – in human actions and in financial and economic transactions – without doing this, people will not see the need for their input and effort.

image

We use cookies to give you the best experience possible. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy.