Water governance challenges in rural South Africa: exploring institutional coordination in drought management

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Standard

Water governance challenges in rural South Africa : exploring institutional coordination in drought management. / Makaya, Eugine; Rohse, Melanie; Day, Rosie; Vogel, Coleen ; Mehta, Lyla; McEwen, Lindsey; Rangecroft, Sally; Van Loon, Anne.

In: Water Policy, Vol. 22, No. 4, 01.08.2020, p. 519–540.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Harvard

APA

Vancouver

Author

Bibtex

@article{3d597f2c66524d4f9b7d837fbcbe1ea4,
title = "Water governance challenges in rural South Africa: exploring institutional coordination in drought management",
abstract = "Droughts have severe direct impacts on the livelihoods of rural populations. Thus, the management of water for communal agriculture and water supply should be well coordinated to enhance drought resilience. Notwithstanding the interrelations among water management institutions in South Africa, there are complexities in the way these institutions work together, both in preparation for, and during drought times. In this article, we examine the governance of water resources in South Africa with a view to understanding institutional coordination in drought management at different operational scales. Using a qualitative approach, the roles and relationships between water actors at the local and regional level were analyzed for their adequacy in building local level drought resilience in a village in the Limpopo province, South Africa. Key informant interviews conducted revealed operational drought management challenges that emanate from communication barriers, coordination inconsistences, and undefined, unclear actor roles and responsibilities during disasters. The top-down approach to disaster management, while of some value, currently constrains the effectiveness of the local-level institutions implementing local drought risk reduction efforts. Achieving more successful water and drought governance endeavors could be enhanced by greater and wider engagement with community-based actors and water management institutions.",
keywords = "Disaster management, Drought management, Drought risk reduction, Institutional coordination, South Africa, Water governance",
author = "Eugine Makaya and Melanie Rohse and Rosie Day and Coleen Vogel and Lyla Mehta and Lindsey McEwen and Sally Rangecroft and {Van Loon}, Anne",
year = "2020",
month = aug,
day = "1",
doi = "10.2166/wp.2020.234",
language = "English",
volume = "22",
pages = "519–540",
journal = "Water Policy",
issn = "1366-7017",
publisher = "IWA Publishing",
number = "4",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Water governance challenges in rural South Africa

T2 - exploring institutional coordination in drought management

AU - Makaya, Eugine

AU - Rohse, Melanie

AU - Day, Rosie

AU - Vogel, Coleen

AU - Mehta, Lyla

AU - McEwen, Lindsey

AU - Rangecroft, Sally

AU - Van Loon, Anne

PY - 2020/8/1

Y1 - 2020/8/1

N2 - Droughts have severe direct impacts on the livelihoods of rural populations. Thus, the management of water for communal agriculture and water supply should be well coordinated to enhance drought resilience. Notwithstanding the interrelations among water management institutions in South Africa, there are complexities in the way these institutions work together, both in preparation for, and during drought times. In this article, we examine the governance of water resources in South Africa with a view to understanding institutional coordination in drought management at different operational scales. Using a qualitative approach, the roles and relationships between water actors at the local and regional level were analyzed for their adequacy in building local level drought resilience in a village in the Limpopo province, South Africa. Key informant interviews conducted revealed operational drought management challenges that emanate from communication barriers, coordination inconsistences, and undefined, unclear actor roles and responsibilities during disasters. The top-down approach to disaster management, while of some value, currently constrains the effectiveness of the local-level institutions implementing local drought risk reduction efforts. Achieving more successful water and drought governance endeavors could be enhanced by greater and wider engagement with community-based actors and water management institutions.

AB - Droughts have severe direct impacts on the livelihoods of rural populations. Thus, the management of water for communal agriculture and water supply should be well coordinated to enhance drought resilience. Notwithstanding the interrelations among water management institutions in South Africa, there are complexities in the way these institutions work together, both in preparation for, and during drought times. In this article, we examine the governance of water resources in South Africa with a view to understanding institutional coordination in drought management at different operational scales. Using a qualitative approach, the roles and relationships between water actors at the local and regional level were analyzed for their adequacy in building local level drought resilience in a village in the Limpopo province, South Africa. Key informant interviews conducted revealed operational drought management challenges that emanate from communication barriers, coordination inconsistences, and undefined, unclear actor roles and responsibilities during disasters. The top-down approach to disaster management, while of some value, currently constrains the effectiveness of the local-level institutions implementing local drought risk reduction efforts. Achieving more successful water and drought governance endeavors could be enhanced by greater and wider engagement with community-based actors and water management institutions.

KW - Disaster management

KW - Drought management

KW - Drought risk reduction

KW - Institutional coordination

KW - South Africa

KW - Water governance

U2 - 10.2166/wp.2020.234

DO - 10.2166/wp.2020.234

M3 - Article

VL - 22

SP - 519

EP - 540

JO - Water Policy

JF - Water Policy

SN - 1366-7017

IS - 4

ER -