3.4 Analysis
107
benefits. Therefore, the future benefitial outcomes of the implemented project are
uncertain.
The way in which Respondent 10 frames her understanding of the concept ‘green
infrastructure’ falls within the postpositivist paradigm, as can be seen by her answer:
They [green and ecological infrastructures] don’t necessarily mean the same thing. A green
infrastructure generally refers to an artificially created infrastructure, for example, artificial
wetlands that are not naturally occurring features. My understanding is that their definition
includes largely natural systems. However, I think you can view an ecological infrastructure
as having a green infrastructure component, but not the other way around. An ecological
infrastructure could potentially incorporate a green infrastructure, but it is not explicit in the
SANBI definition of an ecological infrastructure.
The statement by Respondent 10 that ‘[a] green infrastructure generally refers
to…’, that ‘an ecological infrastructure could potentially incorporate a green infrastructure’ and that the SANBI definition ‘is not explicit’ about this incorporation,
suggests a probabilistic and/or imperfectly apprehensible reality about the separation of green and ecological infrastructures. It also suggests that we will never fully
understand the differences between green and ecological infrastructures, and that
where the one ends, the next one begins. This is also evident from the discussion
on the various elements contained in the two definitions. In the next section, I will
elaborate further on the recommended actions that are expressed by the interviewees
and how they are framed, from a paradigmatic point of view.
3.4.1.2 Recommended Actions
When the respondents spoke about recommended actions, they also framed these in
positivist terms. The positivist paradigm received the highest score of 202, followed
by interpretivism/constructivism, with a score of 32. Since the score for postpositivism was too low, I will only discuss positivism and interpretivism/constructivism.
From a positivist perspective, Respondent 5 spoke about the education of communities with regard to the importance and rationale of having green infrastructure
projects that eradicate alien vegetation and rainwater harvesting. She said that the
municipality does not ‘educate people on the importance of why we need to clear alien
invasives’. Furthermore, she indicated that it is important to educate the community
about ‘[t]heir impact, as well as water security and how they use JoJo tanks. People
also need to become aware of the strategies and practices that are used to save water,
which is, in my opinion, a bit lacking’.
Respondent 7 also alluded to more research to highlight the economic costs and
social benefits that green infrastructure initiatives could have for communities and
the wider public:
For me, it is an under-researched area because the impact of these projects is poorly understood. So, whilst you and other institutions might have a good understanding of the initiatives,
I don’t think that there is enough communication or a sufficient amount of feedback to the
affected people that have benefited from the projects. Therefore, if you clean up the Msunduzi River, for example, there are many communities that will benefit from this. I am not just
107
benefits. Therefore, the future benefitial outcomes of the implemented project are
uncertain.
The way in which Respondent 10 frames her understanding of the concept ‘green
infrastructure’ falls within the postpositivist paradigm, as can be seen by her answer:
They [green and ecological infrastructures] don’t necessarily mean the same thing. A green
infrastructure generally refers to an artificially created infrastructure, for example, artificial
wetlands that are not naturally occurring features. My understanding is that their definition
includes largely natural systems. However, I think you can view an ecological infrastructure
as having a green infrastructure component, but not the other way around. An ecological
infrastructure could potentially incorporate a green infrastructure, but it is not explicit in the
SANBI definition of an ecological infrastructure.
The statement by Respondent 10 that ‘[a] green infrastructure generally refers
to…’, that ‘an ecological infrastructure could potentially incorporate a green infrastructure’ and that the SANBI definition ‘is not explicit’ about this incorporation,
suggests a probabilistic and/or imperfectly apprehensible reality about the separation of green and ecological infrastructures. It also suggests that we will never fully
understand the differences between green and ecological infrastructures, and that
where the one ends, the next one begins. This is also evident from the discussion
on the various elements contained in the two definitions. In the next section, I will
elaborate further on the recommended actions that are expressed by the interviewees
and how they are framed, from a paradigmatic point of view.
3.4.1.2 Recommended Actions
When the respondents spoke about recommended actions, they also framed these in
positivist terms. The positivist paradigm received the highest score of 202, followed
by interpretivism/constructivism, with a score of 32. Since the score for postpositivism was too low, I will only discuss positivism and interpretivism/constructivism.
From a positivist perspective, Respondent 5 spoke about the education of communities with regard to the importance and rationale of having green infrastructure
projects that eradicate alien vegetation and rainwater harvesting. She said that the
municipality does not ‘educate people on the importance of why we need to clear alien
invasives’. Furthermore, she indicated that it is important to educate the community
about ‘[t]heir impact, as well as water security and how they use JoJo tanks. People
also need to become aware of the strategies and practices that are used to save water,
which is, in my opinion, a bit lacking’.
Respondent 7 also alluded to more research to highlight the economic costs and
social benefits that green infrastructure initiatives could have for communities and
the wider public:
For me, it is an under-researched area because the impact of these projects is poorly understood. So, whilst you and other institutions might have a good understanding of the initiatives,
I don’t think that there is enough communication or a sufficient amount of feedback to the
affected people that have benefited from the projects. Therefore, if you clean up the Msunduzi River, for example, there are many communities that will benefit from this. I am not just