112
3 eThekwini’s Green and Ecological Infrastructure Policy Landscape
municipality. Such research would give policy-makers an explanation of how people
perceive green infrastructure projects. The public could then, through research that
is expressed as ‘truth’, convey their wishes for projects that benefit eThekwini’s residents directly. We see that his recommended action is to gain an increased knowledge of the benefits of green infrastructure initiatives by interpreting how individuals
that could benefit would perceive and interact (Lincoln et al. 2018) with municipal
officials, via the epistemic community.
3.4.2 Theories
The dominant theories expressed in the interviews are presented in Fig. 3.16. Two
perspectives, namely, the hydrosocial contract theory and neo-liberalism, had exceptionally high scores, with 316 and 289, respectively. Five theories followed, namely,
social constructivism, risk society, interactive governance, modernity and the social
learning and policy paradigms, with scores of 148, 147, 141, 140 and 128, respectively. A theory that stands out among the lower scored perspectives is the Regulatory International Political Economy (RIPE), with a score of 98. I will lump
together interactive governance, the RIPE, as well as the social learning and policy
paradigms, under neo-liberalism. Since these theories fall under neo-liberalism, I will
relabel them as liberal intuitionalism (more on this later). In the following section,
I will discuss the manifestation of these theories in the interviews and interpret the
significance of their presence.
Why did the hydrosocial contract theory receive such a high score? Is it because my
study focuses on green and ecological infrastructures in promoting water security, or
is it because water plays such a fundamental role in eThekwini’s green and ecological
infrastructure policy arena? I would say that it is a bit of both.
When I designed the study, my purpose was to investigate how green infrastructures contribute to Durban’s water security. The questions that I put to the respondents always revolved around the notion of green infrastructures and their link to
water security. This implies that the questions that had water security as their central
focus (p. 84), guided the respondents to think about the concept and ‘forced’ them
to talk about water security aspects within eThekwini’s green infrastructure policy
landscape.
Even though this was the case during the first two interviews, the respondents
mentioned the concept of an ecological infrastructure, which I had initially overlooked in the original design. During and after these face-to-face encounters, I started
asking the follow-up question concerning the difference between green and ecological infrastructures (p. 84). The value of an open-ended analysis shows itself here, in
that the researcher is not guiding the research along a certain path. The respondents
also played this role by way of their ontological awareness. Nevertheless, by asking
this follow-up question, I realised that although the main aim of a green infrastructure is not to promote water security, but biodiversity protection and climate
3 eThekwini’s Green and Ecological Infrastructure Policy Landscape
municipality. Such research would give policy-makers an explanation of how people
perceive green infrastructure projects. The public could then, through research that
is expressed as ‘truth’, convey their wishes for projects that benefit eThekwini’s residents directly. We see that his recommended action is to gain an increased knowledge of the benefits of green infrastructure initiatives by interpreting how individuals
that could benefit would perceive and interact (Lincoln et al. 2018) with municipal
officials, via the epistemic community.
3.4.2 Theories
The dominant theories expressed in the interviews are presented in Fig. 3.16. Two
perspectives, namely, the hydrosocial contract theory and neo-liberalism, had exceptionally high scores, with 316 and 289, respectively. Five theories followed, namely,
social constructivism, risk society, interactive governance, modernity and the social
learning and policy paradigms, with scores of 148, 147, 141, 140 and 128, respectively. A theory that stands out among the lower scored perspectives is the Regulatory International Political Economy (RIPE), with a score of 98. I will lump
together interactive governance, the RIPE, as well as the social learning and policy
paradigms, under neo-liberalism. Since these theories fall under neo-liberalism, I will
relabel them as liberal intuitionalism (more on this later). In the following section,
I will discuss the manifestation of these theories in the interviews and interpret the
significance of their presence.
Why did the hydrosocial contract theory receive such a high score? Is it because my
study focuses on green and ecological infrastructures in promoting water security, or
is it because water plays such a fundamental role in eThekwini’s green and ecological
infrastructure policy arena? I would say that it is a bit of both.
When I designed the study, my purpose was to investigate how green infrastructures contribute to Durban’s water security. The questions that I put to the respondents always revolved around the notion of green infrastructures and their link to
water security. This implies that the questions that had water security as their central
focus (p. 84), guided the respondents to think about the concept and ‘forced’ them
to talk about water security aspects within eThekwini’s green infrastructure policy
landscape.
Even though this was the case during the first two interviews, the respondents
mentioned the concept of an ecological infrastructure, which I had initially overlooked in the original design. During and after these face-to-face encounters, I started
asking the follow-up question concerning the difference between green and ecological infrastructures (p. 84). The value of an open-ended analysis shows itself here, in
that the researcher is not guiding the research along a certain path. The respondents
also played this role by way of their ontological awareness. Nevertheless, by asking
this follow-up question, I realised that although the main aim of a green infrastructure is not to promote water security, but biodiversity protection and climate