The findings from this reveal a plethora of water-related issues and challenges that the participants from eMdubezweni rural community faced. First, the findings indicate the extent of neglect that this community experienced. As the results illustrate, politicians and other people in government only visited the community during and around elections. Community neglect was disturbing given that these political campaigners did access the community and distributed political party T-shirts during elections. However, post-elections, politicians neglected the community and abandoned their promise and commitment to providing quality services in the community. Therefore, this suggests that rural communities experience neglect and are forgotten immediately after elections. This level of desertion demonstrates historical and current systems’ failures to rectify the persistent inequality that has come to signify the South African society. As the study's theoretical framework implied, rural communities have inherited a legacy of exclusion from the national agenda; a legacy rooted in the country’s long history of racial, political, and socioeconomic inequality. However, even in the post-democratic
120
period, it seems the ‘powers-that-be’ have consistently neglected and marginalised rural communities, only to remember their existence during convenient periods such as the elections.
In other words, these findings reveal that political parties (and their T-shirts by extension) can reach communities where services are often not delivered adequately.
Second, and tied to government neglect, the findings reveal the extent of water infrastructural and rural livelihood neglect. The participants illustrated the debilitating state of their water infrastructure through the photographs they produced and subsequent group and individual discussions. Reports of leaking water tanks, broken or empty water pumps and a general breakdown of installed water infrastructure dominated some of the data generation sessions.
Notably, the participants reported that their local leaders never took measures to address the state of water infrastructure in their community. Instead, the community’s infrastructural needs were neglected. The debilitated infrastructure further limited the participants’ chances of accessing water. As an alternative, they collected and used water from unsafe sources. These actions had implications for the participants’ health and wellbeing, including consistent backaches, headaches, and a sense of hopelessness.
Third, the findings reveal victimisation and bad customer service against the adult participants in this study. Within this context, the participants were victimised in several ways. They experienced neglect for living in a resource-poor rural community, where essential and basic services were hardly available. In instances where services were available, the participants were treated with disdain by the people who were supposed to protect them (i.e., the water truck driver and their ward councillor). Indeed, even when the participants reported bad customer service, no actions were taken to address or stop these behaviours. Instead, as the participants reported, they were forced into silence about their experiences, which further violated their constitutional rights.
Finally, the findings reveal several daily challenges that the participants experienced. These included collecting and storing water (which was often collected from unsafe sources), using water under grossly inhumane conditions, and having limited water to perform daily duties.
The participants suggested that their experiences were dehumanising, undignified, and violated their rights and freedom. Having limited access to safely managed water was cited as a cause for conflict among people living in eMdubezweni. Thus, the participants described negative experiences that were located in historical neglect, marginalisation, and the ostracism of rural
121
communities from essential water services. Further, the findings show the extent to which rural communities, and the people who occupy them, are placed at the bottom of the national basic needs’ hierarchy.
According to Nozick’s (1974) entitlement theory, human dignity includes the guarantee that people have an equal and just opportunity for receiving sufficient access to basic services.
Moreover, the state and its agencies must protect the dignity, wellbeing, and freedoms of their citizens. Likewise, and located within the entitlement theory, the state has the mandate to compensate its people for past violations (i.e., those experienced during apartheid in South Africa) (Maphela & Cloete, 2020; SALII, 2014). Yet, as the findings in this chapter reveal, rural communities are cast aside. The participants felt neglected, with their photographs illustrating a significant burden on their livelihoods and wellbeing. In other words, the community of eMdubezweni experienced what the entitlement theory considers as a violation of their freedom; a violation that is rooted in a legacy of rural isolation from national life. In Chapter Seven, I reflect on both the findings from the study and their implications. In the next chapter, I provide a discussion of findings that addressed the second research question: Do men and women in this rural community report different experiences and views about having limited access to safely managed water?
122
CHAPTER SIX
GENDERED PERSPECTIVES ABOUT CHALLENGES ASSOCIATED WITH LIMITED ACCESS TO SAFELY MANAGED WATER IN A
RESOURCE-POOR RURAL COMMUNITY
6.1 Introduction
Gender plays a significant role in experiences associated with living in a community with limited access to safely managed water (Gomez, Perdiguero & Sanz, 2019; Van Houweling, 2016). At the core of these experiences are gender inequality and socialisation. The literature suggests that women are more prone to challenges relating to water insecurity when compared to men (Choudhary et al., 2020; Dickin, Segnestam & Sou Dakouré, 2020). However, not enough literature exists that illustrates the gendered experiences of adults living in a resource- poor rural community with limited access to safely managed water. Therefore, this chapter reports on the perspectives of adult men and women in the eMdubezweni rural community within the context of limited access to water. In particular, the chapter addresses the second research question: Do men and women in this rural community report different experiences and views about having limited access to safely managed water? The data analysed in this chapter was generated by using one-on-one interviews and focus group discussions (FDG).
Data were analysed using thematic analysis. The discussion of the findings in this chapter is organized around four key themes, namely: 1) men’s sentiments about water access and use;
2) ruling patriarchy in the context of limited access to safely managed water; 3) women at the centre of the struggle for access to safely managed water; and, 4) women’s compromised health and wellbeing.