CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW
2.10 International perspectives of complexity in water governance
In discussing the international perspectives of complexity in water governance, the researcher is aware that the challenges that countries face are different when dealing with this issue. In developed countries, the issues could be more advanced than South African issues, as the interest in projects could emanate from a vastly different perspective than that of South African and KZN issues. The researcher was able to find out from the literature that internationally it emphasises issues relating to authority, norms or normative frameworks, and the impacts of different perspectives or definitions as the source of complexity for water governance.
Secondly, it draws empirical evidence of the perspectives from two river basin organisations (local scales), and it demonstrate the conditions in which challenges are perceived to be complex and the implications for the authority, norms and normative frameworks described in the literature. Wallis and Ison (2011) described the complexity of water governance as involving uncertainty and interconnectivity with other issues, as well as a range of perspectives, including traditional methodologies in problem-solving and technological advancement. This research seems to agree with this perspective based on the researcher’s experience with the management of projects at Umgeni Water. Moore (2013) also emphasised that complexity arises from the dynamic relationship between people and situations and not within situations in themselves. Hirsch (2006) referred to the multiple scales, stakeholders’ interests, and competing agendas as contributing to the complexity.
27
In a South African context, this agenda is informed by the political and social issues that are not only affecting water projects, but cut across all infrastructure projects that are implemented by the national, provincial and local governments. Given that the portrayal of complexity in water governance lacks analytical specificity, and that multiple scales exist in water governance that may perceive this complexity either similarly or differently, a clearer characterisation of the challenges deemed complex in water governance is needed (Moore, 2013). While in South Africa the focus of public participation is on how to reach the poor and marginalised sectors of society, the very same society has different needs and expectations about projects that get implemented in rural areas.
Water has historically been acknowledged as a developmental and scarce resource, whose management has been largely directed by engineers with an emphasis on technical approaches to its supply (Barraqué et al., 2008). As a result, policy formulation, funding and practical research has focused on water infrastructure development that is channelled towards providing services for domestic, irrigation and industrial use. Researchers Molle et al. (2009) refer to this typology as the hydraulic mission. It is contended by some authors that the approach adopted in the development of infrastructure like pipelines, dams and water pumps is still very influenced by the hydraulic mission to this day (Molle et al., 2009).
Another view from the global perspective is that large infrastructure projects have been viewed as opportunities by politicians to gain votes as they provide for employment opportunities and tangible benefits that are visible and thus can entice the public, whilst also creating business opportunities for certain governmental departments and the private sector.
It is important to note that all systems possess some form of hierarchies. Production processes in global organisations form part of bigger systems called the operations, which includes engineering.
The operations system is but a part of yet another larger system known as the business division. The business division is part of an even larger system called the corporation (Dettmer, 2007).
In the case of Umgeni Water, as with any other projects, there are constituent stakeholders including consultants, contractors and internal departments that are involved, and who are subjected to such hierarchies that make the situation complex. Even though there has been wide criticism by some authors of the hydraulic mission (Wester et al., 2009), the need for a supply of clean water for human consumption has great reliance on this technical approach for water provision. The determinant of whether or not to change this approach relies greatly on the realisation of a desired outcome.
28
According to some authors there is some degree of resistance to change created by reliance on the technical solutions provided by the hydraulic mission (Butler and Goldstein, 2010) thus creating a rigidity trap for developing countries. Such action denies innovative approaches that could emerge to bring about solutions to the complex problem of water. Some scholars have in the recent past attempted to raise awareness regarding the consequences of the scientific views on water governance and policy, advocating for knowledge sharing in order to influence or enable change in how water provision is approached in the future (Steyeart and Ollivier, 2007).
Another element identified in the global governance of water is that of ignoring the need to better understand socio-political and institutional dimensions to decision making about water (Franks and Cleaver, 2007). Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM) is arguably one of the more recent approaches that advocates expert knowledge in the promotion of efficiency, equity and environmental sustainability (Molle et al., 2009).
The understanding and addressing of the multiple dimensions of any water governance challenge requires more than expert knowledge, and more than an assumption that all actors involved in decisions about water will tend towards altruistic cooperation with others. Instead, working towards these aims demands that the underlying competition for water as a scarce resource needs to be addressed (Mollinga, 2009). Global research is lacking in terms of the type of power, authority, and legitimacy that different actors may have in the water sector that may affect issues of efficiency, equity and sustainability (Franks and Cleaver, 2007).
Without substantive research and theorisation, it is difficult to find suitable frameworks and analytical tools to describe and address the social-political-ecological challenges in water governance that are considered the most complex (Moore, 2013). The confusion and uncertainty created by severe ecological issues lead people to struggle to make sense of their circumstances.
Faced with this situation what becomes important is leadership, thus leaders should find out if the society at large agrees that the effects are negative with respect to its presumed goal, critical factors, or necessary conditions. It becomes easy if from the start of the project, parties agree to high level goals, critical success factors and/or necessary conditions to meeting the set goal (Moore, 2013).
Based on the above, it is clear that one needs to find leverage in order to solve the so-called complex system problems. They are complex because they have many factors, organisations and individuals
29
involved, not because they are impossible to resolve. Partnership theory also needs to be explored to find out its approach to resolving complex problems.