146
3 eThekwini’s Green and Ecological Infrastructure Policy Landscape
Although the preceding brief discussion of the philosophy and substance of CSR
focuses its attention on the link between corporations and the different governing
apparatuses of the state, such as local governments, it is not uncommon to find
non-state entities, like DUCT, promoting CSR (p. 123) (Balza and Radojicic 2004;
Spodarczyk and Szel˛ agowska-Rudzka 2015). After all, the various activities of NGOs
not only promote a respect for human rights, but also for the care of the environment
within the business world (Balza and Radojicic 2004).
Linked to the ethical credence of CSR, part of DUCT’s vision states that communities within the uMsunduzi and uMngeni River systems will ‘show respect for the
rivers and will take ownership and responsibility for the condition of the rivers,
seeking to preserve their natural function and beauty’ (DUCT 2020). Part of the
preservation function is the conservation of biological diversity. For the NGO,
government, business, the scientific community and civil society must cooperate
by providing resources for the effective management of river systems (DUCT 2020).
uMngeni Ecological Infrastructure Partnership
In February 2013, several organisations (see Respondent 7 in Table 3.4 for a list of
the entities) signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to formally establish
the UEIP (p. 5). At the time, these organisations were ‘…committed to finding
ways of integrating ecological infrastructure solutions to support built infrastructure
investments in addressing the challenges of water security in the uMngeni Catchment’
(SANBI 2020) (see Figs. 3.19 and 3.20). Currently, the UEIP consists of over 30
organisations that hail from local, provincial and national governments, business and
academic institutions, as well as civil society. As a co-founder of the UEIP, SANBI
has been central in coordinating the partnership since it was established (SANBI
2020). SANBI’s notion of an ecological infrastructure is the key for exploring the
role of this type of infrastructure and for improving the water security of the uMngeni
Catchment. For instance, Respondent 3 indicated that:
When the UEIP was established in [2013], Debra Roberts and I wrote an opinion piece on
the formation of the UEIP and took up the concept of an ecological infrastructure. So, it has
been framed like that for a long time because of SANBI’s influence…
This quote is interesting, in the sense that the establishment of a collaborative partnership between a few independent actors prompted the two researchers to define
an ecological infrastructure in relation to an institution’s epistemology and ontology
(see the SANBI (2019) definition on p. 5). The quote by Respondent 3 does not only
allude to a highly complex and interdependent relationship between several actors
within the UEIP structure, but also to an epistemic relationship between the collaborative partners and the epistemic function of the concept ‘ecological infrastructure’.
In this sense, the concept acts as a direction-finding beacon for the UEIP partnership
to anchor its work in an empirically formulated model. Furthermore, this shows that
the actors working on green or ecological infrastructures have acted in a ‘rational’
manner to adopt a realistically fashioned concept to formulate the configuration of
the UEIP. It is from these concepts that eThekwini has developed ‘rational’ policies
to systematically order its ecological infrastructure policy landscape.
3 eThekwini’s Green and Ecological Infrastructure Policy Landscape
Although the preceding brief discussion of the philosophy and substance of CSR
focuses its attention on the link between corporations and the different governing
apparatuses of the state, such as local governments, it is not uncommon to find
non-state entities, like DUCT, promoting CSR (p. 123) (Balza and Radojicic 2004;
Spodarczyk and Szel˛ agowska-Rudzka 2015). After all, the various activities of NGOs
not only promote a respect for human rights, but also for the care of the environment
within the business world (Balza and Radojicic 2004).
Linked to the ethical credence of CSR, part of DUCT’s vision states that communities within the uMsunduzi and uMngeni River systems will ‘show respect for the
rivers and will take ownership and responsibility for the condition of the rivers,
seeking to preserve their natural function and beauty’ (DUCT 2020). Part of the
preservation function is the conservation of biological diversity. For the NGO,
government, business, the scientific community and civil society must cooperate
by providing resources for the effective management of river systems (DUCT 2020).
uMngeni Ecological Infrastructure Partnership
In February 2013, several organisations (see Respondent 7 in Table 3.4 for a list of
the entities) signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to formally establish
the UEIP (p. 5). At the time, these organisations were ‘…committed to finding
ways of integrating ecological infrastructure solutions to support built infrastructure
investments in addressing the challenges of water security in the uMngeni Catchment’
(SANBI 2020) (see Figs. 3.19 and 3.20). Currently, the UEIP consists of over 30
organisations that hail from local, provincial and national governments, business and
academic institutions, as well as civil society. As a co-founder of the UEIP, SANBI
has been central in coordinating the partnership since it was established (SANBI
2020). SANBI’s notion of an ecological infrastructure is the key for exploring the
role of this type of infrastructure and for improving the water security of the uMngeni
Catchment. For instance, Respondent 3 indicated that:
When the UEIP was established in [2013], Debra Roberts and I wrote an opinion piece on
the formation of the UEIP and took up the concept of an ecological infrastructure. So, it has
been framed like that for a long time because of SANBI’s influence…
This quote is interesting, in the sense that the establishment of a collaborative partnership between a few independent actors prompted the two researchers to define
an ecological infrastructure in relation to an institution’s epistemology and ontology
(see the SANBI (2019) definition on p. 5). The quote by Respondent 3 does not only
allude to a highly complex and interdependent relationship between several actors
within the UEIP structure, but also to an epistemic relationship between the collaborative partners and the epistemic function of the concept ‘ecological infrastructure’.
In this sense, the concept acts as a direction-finding beacon for the UEIP partnership
to anchor its work in an empirically formulated model. Furthermore, this shows that
the actors working on green or ecological infrastructures have acted in a ‘rational’
manner to adopt a realistically fashioned concept to formulate the configuration of
the UEIP. It is from these concepts that eThekwini has developed ‘rational’ policies
to systematically order its ecological infrastructure policy landscape.