20
1 Green and Ecological Infrastructures and Water Security …
Photos of the aftermath of the devastating storm in April 2019 show that Durban’s
rivers and streams are not only a blessing, in terms of eco-system services, but that
they can also be a means by which the municipal solid waste can be transported
(Naidoo et al. 2015). It must be noted that it is not the rivers and streams that
are at fault, but that it is human behaviour, such as littering, that is predominantly
responsible. It is here where we see the direct relationship between the functioning
of green and ecological infrastructures, as ecosystem services, and water security, as
an aspiration and association between the environment and humans.
When one considers the normative function of positioning water security on the
agenda, it is possible that the issue of municipal solid waste washing up on Durban’s
beaches and in the port could become a political priority. At this stage, it is unknown
how municipal solid waste relates to water security. However, it is possible that,
should proponents frame the issue, in terms of environmental, human and water
security, it could become more urgent on the political agenda of the municipality.
The scientific community could also play an important part in this, together with
interest groups like Plastics SA, and the public. A topic of investigation for the
epistemic community could be how green and ecological infrastructures can play a
role in alleviating the concern regarding municipal solid waste.
In Chap. 2, I will discuss the nature and function of research paradigms and theories on which I have based the PULSE
3 analytical framework. Using this analytical
framework, I will analyse the content of 16 semi-structured and face-to-face interviews that I conducted with stakeholders in Durban and Pietermaritzburg in August
2018. These stakeholders are involved in eThekwini’s green and ecological infrastructure policy landscape. I will present the results of my analysis in Chap. 3, before
ending with a discussion and conclusion in Chap. 4.
References
Barichievy K, Piper L, Parker B (2005) Assessing ‘participatory governance’ in local government:
a case study of two South African cities. Politeia 24(3):370–393
Beall J, Crankshaw O, Parnell S (2000) Local government, poverty reduction and inequality in
Johannesburg. Environ Urban 12(1):107–122
Benedict MA, McMahon ET (2002) Green infrastructure: smart conservation for the 21st century.
Sprawl Watch Clearinghouse, Washington D.C.
Bocardi J, Spring UO, Brauch HG (2016) Water security: past, present and future of a controversial
concept. In: Pahl-Wostl C, Bhaduri A, Gupta J (eds) Handbook on water security. Edward Elgar,
Northampton, MA
Boelens R, Vos J (2012) The danger of naturalizing water policy concepts: water productivity and
efficiency discourses from field irrigation to virtual water trade. Agric Water Manag 108:16–26
Cameron RW, Blanuša T, Taylor JE, Salisbury A, Halstead AJ, Henricot B, Thopmpson K (2012)
The domestic garden—its contribution to urban green infrastructure. Urban Forest Urban Green
11:129–137
Cook C, Bakker K (2012) Water security: debating and emerging paradigm. Glob Environ Change
22(1):94–102
Cousins JJ (2017) Structuring hydro-social relations in urban water governance. Ann Am Assoc
Geogr 107(5):1144–1161
Précédent

- 35/299

Suivant