3.4 Analysis
117
[I] saw that one may reach the conclusions of great usefulness in life, an[d] discover a
practical philosophy [the natural sciences]…which would show us the energy and action of
fire, air, and stars, the heavens, and all other bodies in our environment and [we] could apply
them…and thus make ourselves masters an[d] owners of nature. (Anscombe and Geach
1954: 46, cited in Turton and Meissner 2002)
The norm of controlling nature is still relevant in the natural sciences today and,
in the case of the hydraulic mission, it is manifested in hydraulic engineering (Turton
and Meissner 2002). As already mentioned in Chap. 2, this philosophical foundation
influences the way in which scientists construct knowledge and, in turn, it has a
bearing on the way in which we interpret information (Turton and Meissner 2002;
Meissner 2017). Robinson (1934: 236) sums up the special place of engineering and
the engineer in the following way:
In our control of physical nature we are served by a special class of men called engineers, who
are rigorously trained, not only in the practical tricks that can be used in the harnessing of
physical forces, but also in the mathematical and experimental sciences necessary for straight
thinking about the physical world. Within their own sphere of activity the engineers constitute, in the finest sense, an élite. It is generally accepted that the outstanding peculiarities of
present-day western civilization are principally the contributions of the engineer.
As a response to dynamics, such as drought and pollution, which result in a scarcity
of water, water conservation, through the construction of reservoirs and irrigation
schemes, becomes an act that takes water from a water body and supplies it to areas in
need (Turton and Meissner 2002). This first transition, therefore, constitutes adaptive
behaviour through engineering solutions, or a coping strategy to control the natural
environment (Turton and Ohlsson 1999).
As mentioned above, the first transition characterises a Hobbesian-like contract,
which is manifested in a bipolar arrangement between government and society
(Warner 2000a, b). Power relations creep into water management. The state and engineers take the responsibility of supplying water through engineering projects, like the
Inanda Dam (Fig. 3.13), which grants the engineer a privileged position (Robinson
1934). The contract gives the government a mandate to assume and execute its
responsibility, and acts as the foundation for the development of institutional arrangements, such as government departments and catchment management agencies. The
contract also indicates to the public what fair and legitimate practices are like, for
example, sustainable development. Politicians and engineers, therefore, dominate
the first transition, with the government being the custodian of water resources and
engineers determining the sanctioned discourse. Social instability could result if the
state cannot deliver on its promise; the state can either ignore society’s plea for water
provisioning, due to capacity constraints or corruption, or it may supply water to a
select few, as was the case during Apartheid (Turton and Ohlsson 1999).
Second transition
The second transition occurs when water deficits become visible, in the face of
engineering solutions (Turton and Meissner 2002). The result of this transition is a
Lockean type of hydrosocial contract, which is characterised by a triangular configuration between the government, the public and interest groups, or other elements in
117
[I] saw that one may reach the conclusions of great usefulness in life, an[d] discover a
practical philosophy [the natural sciences]…which would show us the energy and action of
fire, air, and stars, the heavens, and all other bodies in our environment and [we] could apply
them…and thus make ourselves masters an[d] owners of nature. (Anscombe and Geach
1954: 46, cited in Turton and Meissner 2002)
The norm of controlling nature is still relevant in the natural sciences today and,
in the case of the hydraulic mission, it is manifested in hydraulic engineering (Turton
and Meissner 2002). As already mentioned in Chap. 2, this philosophical foundation
influences the way in which scientists construct knowledge and, in turn, it has a
bearing on the way in which we interpret information (Turton and Meissner 2002;
Meissner 2017). Robinson (1934: 236) sums up the special place of engineering and
the engineer in the following way:
In our control of physical nature we are served by a special class of men called engineers, who
are rigorously trained, not only in the practical tricks that can be used in the harnessing of
physical forces, but also in the mathematical and experimental sciences necessary for straight
thinking about the physical world. Within their own sphere of activity the engineers constitute, in the finest sense, an élite. It is generally accepted that the outstanding peculiarities of
present-day western civilization are principally the contributions of the engineer.
As a response to dynamics, such as drought and pollution, which result in a scarcity
of water, water conservation, through the construction of reservoirs and irrigation
schemes, becomes an act that takes water from a water body and supplies it to areas in
need (Turton and Meissner 2002). This first transition, therefore, constitutes adaptive
behaviour through engineering solutions, or a coping strategy to control the natural
environment (Turton and Ohlsson 1999).
As mentioned above, the first transition characterises a Hobbesian-like contract,
which is manifested in a bipolar arrangement between government and society
(Warner 2000a, b). Power relations creep into water management. The state and engineers take the responsibility of supplying water through engineering projects, like the
Inanda Dam (Fig. 3.13), which grants the engineer a privileged position (Robinson
1934). The contract gives the government a mandate to assume and execute its
responsibility, and acts as the foundation for the development of institutional arrangements, such as government departments and catchment management agencies. The
contract also indicates to the public what fair and legitimate practices are like, for
example, sustainable development. Politicians and engineers, therefore, dominate
the first transition, with the government being the custodian of water resources and
engineers determining the sanctioned discourse. Social instability could result if the
state cannot deliver on its promise; the state can either ignore society’s plea for water
provisioning, due to capacity constraints or corruption, or it may supply water to a
select few, as was the case during Apartheid (Turton and Ohlsson 1999).
Second transition
The second transition occurs when water deficits become visible, in the face of
engineering solutions (Turton and Meissner 2002). The result of this transition is a
Lockean type of hydrosocial contract, which is characterised by a triangular configuration between the government, the public and interest groups, or other elements in