206
C. H. Vhumbunu
Mamre, Kranshoek, Rietpoort, Pniel, Suurbraak, Saron, Zoar and Slangrivier had no financial capacity to crowd fund the repair and maintenance of their water infrastructure whenever
they broke down. In such instances they would wait for long periods of time after reporting
the cases to their municipalities whilst the municipalities “raise resources” for repair. In
other cases, very minor faults on the boreholes or hand pumps would leave communities
with no water supply just because there were no skilled residents to attend to them.
The above and other challenges such as lack of adequate support from municipalities and community NGOs, absence of effective norms for dispute resolution,
increasing pressure, and demand for water, non-existence of written rules on water use
and access to water supply points, among others were highlighted in most responses
(over 80%).
11.5.3 Stakeholder Perceptions on the Effectiveness
of Community-Based Water Management Strategies
The perceptions of stakeholders covered by the research on the effectiveness
of community-based water management strategies were divergent. However, the
majority (70%) were of the view that the adopted community-based water management strategies within their areas of jurisdiction were effective for various reasons.
The main reason why those who agreed that the adopted community-based water
management strategies were effective was that these managed to allow for efficiency,
equity, and sustainability in water usage. The predominantly urban municipalities
were of the view that the reduction in water usage in 2017/2018 is a reliable indicator
of the effectiveness of community-based water management strategies. A respondent
from the University of Stellenbosch stated;
There hasn’t been much rains since 2017 except occasional storms and dam levels across
the Province have been low with a gradual increase recorded. However, water use habits
changed. Community based water management strategies in urban areas helped to ensure
compliance with restrictions on water use whilst those in rural areas were effective to some
extent in that despite the huge demand for water especially for irrigated farming, there was
no case of Day Zero.
The argument submitted by an academic from the University of Stellenbosch
augurs well with the factual reality on the ground. However, there was a due acknowledgment that the success of community-based water management strategies should
not be considered in isolation as they were complemented by the efforts made at all
spheres of Government, that is National, Provincial and Local Government spheres.
This was confirmed by a respondent from the City of Cape Town;
Community based water management strategies were, and are still, helpful. Out municipality
has around 5 million residents. But we managed to reduce water use by 50% between 2016
and 2018. Water demand reduced exponentially, and as we speak, four municipalities are
applying Level 1 Restrictions, two municipalities are applying Level 2 Restrictions, two
municipalities are applying Level 2B Restrictions, eight municipalities are applying Level
3 Restrictions, five municipalities are applying Level 4 Restrictions, and two municipalities
are applying Level 5 Restrictions.
C. H. Vhumbunu
Mamre, Kranshoek, Rietpoort, Pniel, Suurbraak, Saron, Zoar and Slangrivier had no financial capacity to crowd fund the repair and maintenance of their water infrastructure whenever
they broke down. In such instances they would wait for long periods of time after reporting
the cases to their municipalities whilst the municipalities “raise resources” for repair. In
other cases, very minor faults on the boreholes or hand pumps would leave communities
with no water supply just because there were no skilled residents to attend to them.
The above and other challenges such as lack of adequate support from municipalities and community NGOs, absence of effective norms for dispute resolution,
increasing pressure, and demand for water, non-existence of written rules on water use
and access to water supply points, among others were highlighted in most responses
(over 80%).
11.5.3 Stakeholder Perceptions on the Effectiveness
of Community-Based Water Management Strategies
The perceptions of stakeholders covered by the research on the effectiveness
of community-based water management strategies were divergent. However, the
majority (70%) were of the view that the adopted community-based water management strategies within their areas of jurisdiction were effective for various reasons.
The main reason why those who agreed that the adopted community-based water
management strategies were effective was that these managed to allow for efficiency,
equity, and sustainability in water usage. The predominantly urban municipalities
were of the view that the reduction in water usage in 2017/2018 is a reliable indicator
of the effectiveness of community-based water management strategies. A respondent
from the University of Stellenbosch stated;
There hasn’t been much rains since 2017 except occasional storms and dam levels across
the Province have been low with a gradual increase recorded. However, water use habits
changed. Community based water management strategies in urban areas helped to ensure
compliance with restrictions on water use whilst those in rural areas were effective to some
extent in that despite the huge demand for water especially for irrigated farming, there was
no case of Day Zero.
The argument submitted by an academic from the University of Stellenbosch
augurs well with the factual reality on the ground. However, there was a due acknowledgment that the success of community-based water management strategies should
not be considered in isolation as they were complemented by the efforts made at all
spheres of Government, that is National, Provincial and Local Government spheres.
This was confirmed by a respondent from the City of Cape Town;
Community based water management strategies were, and are still, helpful. Out municipality
has around 5 million residents. But we managed to reduce water use by 50% between 2016
and 2018. Water demand reduced exponentially, and as we speak, four municipalities are
applying Level 1 Restrictions, two municipalities are applying Level 2 Restrictions, two
municipalities are applying Level 2B Restrictions, eight municipalities are applying Level
3 Restrictions, five municipalities are applying Level 4 Restrictions, and two municipalities
are applying Level 5 Restrictions.