Cape Town
-
SECOND CARNEGIE INQUIRY INTO POVERTY AND DEVELOPMENT IN SOUTHERN AFRICA
A a:rnparison of O::Jrestic water u&e between black
am
white o:mnunities in the Eastern Capeby Arrlrew Stone
CaJ:negie Conference Paper No.147
13 - 19 April 1984
ISBN 0 7992 0879 5
-
..-Second Carnegie Inquiry into Poverty and Development in Southern Africa
A COMPARISON OF DOMESTIC WATER USE BETWEEN BLACK AND WHITE COMMUNITIES IN THE EASTERN CAPE
Andrew Stone - Department of Geography - Rhodes University April 1984
The International Drinking Water Supply and Sanitation Decade was inaugurated by the United Nations General Assembly in 1981. The s.tated objective is that by 1990 every person in the world should have access to clean drinking water and organised sanitation. To achieve such a far- reaching goal would require that a new 500 000 people be supplied every single day ~Falkenmark 1981). The official Decade aims in reality to focus attention on the vital role of water in the ma~imisation of welfare of the people of the world. At the present time, (1984) probably over 70% of the
worl~s population do not have access to safe water, a proportion which is
li~~IY .to ~ncrease because of the ever increasing water demands of an increasing world population.
Per capita consumption qf water varies tremendo~sly between. and within countries. The variation is per capita consumption for domestic purposes is not simply explained in terms of water availability or cost. Social and economic infrastructure determine the accessability of particular
communities to water with a well established relationship occurring betwe~n
the amount of water used per capita in a particular community and its standard of living.
- 2 -
Water is the most widespread object of individual choice. No other decision affecting mans dealings with his natural environment is as simple, repeated, universal and independent. Decisions made about water become part of the rhythm of daily life (White et ai, 1972, p.4). The basic need for water as outlined by White is supported by a recent statement by the British Overseas Development Administration' ... people living at the lowest of subsistence
levels when asked what they consider to be the first priority for the services their government should provide respond by saying "water'" (BODA 1983). page W7.
Shuval et al. (1981) have shown that there is a relationship between sanitation level, health status and socioeconomic status. Socioeconomic status refers to the social and economic environment of a community with the particular status level influencing the type and extent of water and
sanitation projects that a community can successfully adopt (Warner 19B4).
The socioeconomic status of a community is not a function of ,its per capita consumption of water, but without the a va i 1 ab iii ty of the resource or the infrastructure for its distribution a community is unable to progress towards the advancement of socioeconomic conditions.
Two major considerations arise with respect to increased water supply provision. The first consideration is hydrological, and requires that water as a physical commodity be available. The assessment of water resources is considered by the World Meteorological Organisation to be the determination of the source's extent, dependability and quality characteristics on which is based an evaluation of the possibilities of its utilization and control (WMO 1980). The second consideration with respect to increasing water supplies is political. The provision of a water distribution infrastructure involves cost and hence the allocation of financial resources from the total local, regional or national budget. The allocation of funds for the' provision and improvement of water supplies requires a political decision of priorities within the total responsibilities of the local regional or national government. A second tier of political decision with respect to water provision is the allocation of 'slices of the water cake' to sectors of the, community. The broad sectors of demand may be considered as
[
'" ",,", f I
- 3 -
agricultural, industrial and domestic, but within the domestic demand category a distinction may be made in the South African context between the demands of different population group communities.
Water provision data for various urban communities in the Eastern Cape have been obtained and are presented to illustrate the present pattern of domestic water resource allocation. Data on domestic water consumption are not easy to obtain because bulk supplies are not always metered and the basis of recording_inforynation varies from town to town. The information for the Eastern Cape were obtained from a questionnaire sent to Town Clerks requesting data on population numbers and the volumes of water supplied to their communities. In the case of water distribution to black communities, the East Cape Administration board has the responsibility for the
distribution of water and data were supplied by the Administration board listing the amount of water purchased for distribution to each township.
Table 1 summarises data for those townships occurring within the former Albany Region administration area.
The population figures in Table 1 are those supplied by the Administration Board for the number of people for whom water supply provision is made. The statistics in some instances differ slightly from the data supplied by the municipalities. The second column of data refers to the number of people per tap and is derived from data of taps, taps in houses, standpipes and supply tanks. For calculation purposes all water pOints have been added together, for example. Cookhouse has '489 taps in yards, 3 standpipes and 261 taps in houses', the figure used in calculation was 753. No data were collected to calculate the distance from dwelling to water pOints although clearly the figure of number of people per tap is an approximate index. The distance walked to fetch water provides an indication of the status cf_
supply provision and In many instances in rural areas considerable time and energy is expended in obtaining water (Stone 1984).
- 4 -
TABLE 1: WATER CONSUMPTION IN BLACK TOWNSHIPS IN THE FORMER ALBANY REGION OF THE EAST CAPE ADMINISTRATION BOARD
TOWN POPULATION PEOPLE PER TAP WATER CONSUMPTION (Iitres/head/day)
Alexandria 3 011 143 15
Adelaide 7 500 250 23
Alicedale 4 500 13 19
Bathurst 2 416 120
Bedford 5 200 346 11
Cookhouse 3 900 5 32
Cradock 14 000 100 35
Fort Beaufort 15 000 272 10
Grahamstown 48 370 158 16
Glenmore 4 340 76
Kenton-On-Sea 1 576 775 5
Paterson 3 000 250 10
Port AI fred 14 041 146 6.6
Somerset East 6 650 12 20
Total Population Average number of people Average per capita 133 504 per tap - 190 consumption - 18,58i/day.
- 5 -
The amount of water used per capita will be influenced by the difficulty with which it is obtained and by the difficulty of disposing of waste water.
In townships supplied by the Administration Board cost of water in financial terms is not a consideration for the users; the variation in per capita consumption must therefore relate to the human cost of collecting water.
There have been instances in the drought of 1983 where actual drying. up of water sources limited consumption, for example in Port Alfred, but in those circumstances the Administration Board organised tankers to bring water to the townships. The 'worst and the best' provided townships in terms of tap provision are Kenton and Cookhouse. These townships serve to illustrate the relationship between access and consumption, with per capita consumption in Cookhouse of the order of 30~/head/day (5 persons per tap) and Kenton 5£/head/day (775 persons per tap). The extremes oversimplify the position and 'distance to tap' information is required to more precisely establish the relationship.
The average per capita consumption for the townships is calculated as 18,58£/day, a figure which is double that calculated for rural communities (Stone 1984) but a figure which is far below the consumption of water for townships in metropolitan areas. Table 2 summarises data for Port
Elizabeth whose townships 'enjoy' both reticulated supply to most dwellings and water borne sewage disposal.
TABLE 2: PORT ELIZABETH WATER SUPPLY PROVISION:
POPULATION GROUP WHITE BLACK COLOURED ASIAN
NUMBER SUPPLl ED 144 200 259 480 121 640 6 820
DAILY. PER CAPITA CONSUMPTION 200
80 150 150
- 6 -
TABLE 3: URBAN AREAS OF THE EASTERN CAPE:
POPULATION NUMBERS AND PER CAPITA DAILY WATER CONSUMPTION OF WHITE COMMUNITIES
TOWN WHITE POPULATION
Adelaide 523
Alexandria 850
Cathcart 000
Cookhouse 732
Cradock 6 000
Despatch 15 000
East London 66 000
Elliot 950
Graaff-Reinet 6 000
Grahamstown 12 210
Humansdorp 2 600
King Wi II iams Town 8 880
Port Alfred 3 500
Port Elizabeth 144 200
Somerset East 1 900
Steytlervi lie 420
Uitenhage 29 500
Average per capita daily consumption - 314£.
WATER CONSUMPTION (£!HEAD/DAy)
333 295 266 233 442 201 442 478 445 202 461 348 95 200 578 158 176
NOTE: Not all urban areas have been included. In some cases small Asian and Coloured communities are included in the figures.
- 7 -
The figure of 200£!head/day for the white population of Port Elizabeth ·is lower than that calculated for some other urban areas of the Eastern Cape.
Table 3 summarises average consumption for the white population of Eastern Cape towns. The figures are based on data supplied by town clerks and town engineers. The differences betwe"en values results becausesonie are based on water suppl ied and others on water sold. For example water used for parks.
gardens and playing fields" is 'supplied' but not 'sold' • .The" overall figure - ,
. .
of average per capita daily consumption by the"white urban. population is calculated as 314 I itres.
, " , ...
The water supply prOVision problems for the future may be considered in terms of arithmetic.
.
.'.
The average per capita consumption of water by black communities is less than 20£lday where"as that of white communities' is around 3001lday. -.If there is to be an equalisation of amenities such that urbanised non-Whites may enjoy the same levels of water supply as the urban white communities ,then the provision of water in terms of both finding and exploiting sources and in terms of providing a distribution infrastructure must receive the highest priority for th~ allocation Of financial resources of local. regional and national government.
- 8 -
REFERENCES:
(BODA). British Overseas Development Administration. World Water '83 Conference Preview. World Water. June (1983).
Falkenmark. M. Integrated View of Land and Water. Geografiska Annaler.
, 63A (1981) 3-4.
Shuval. H.I •• Tilden. R.L •• Perry. B.H. and Grosse. R.N. Effect of Investment in water supply and sanitation on health status.
Bull. World Health Org. (W.H.O.). 59. (1981).
Stone. A.W. A case study of water sources and water quality of the Chalumna/Hamburg Area of Ciskei. Second Carnegie Inquiry into Poverty and Development in Southern Africa. Cape Town (1984).
Warner. D.B. Rural water supply and sanitation planning. The Use of socioeconomic preconditions in project identification. Journal of Hydrology. 68. (1984).
resources.
'White. G.F .• Bradley, D.J. and White, A.U. Drawers of Water.
University of Chicago Press. Chicago (1972).
These papers constitute the preliminary findings of the Second Carnegie Inquiry into Poverty and Develop- ment in Southern Africa, and were prepared for presen- tation at a Conference at the University of Cape Town from 13-19 April, 1984.
The Second Carnegie Inquiry into Poverty and Develop- ment in Southern Africa was launched in April 1982, and is scheduled to run until June 1985.
Quoting (in context) from these preliminary papers with due acknowledgement is of course allowed, but for permission to reprint any material, or for further infor- matton about the Inquiry, please write to:
SALDRU
School of Economics Robert Leslie Building University of Cape Town Rondebosch 7700
Edina-Griffiths
o
.'y
),
"
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ~~ _ A'
