About a decade ago, at a meeting of South African mayors convened by then-South African minister of water and environmental affairs Lindiwe Hendricks, we predicted that an unprecedented water crisis would hit one of the nation’s main cities within 15 years, unless water-management practices were improved significantly.
That prediction has come true, with Cape Town facing a shutdown of its piped water network. The question now is whether African leaders will allow our other projection — that, within the next 25 to 30 years, many more of the continent’s cities will be facing similar crises — to materialize.
Africa has long struggled with urban water and wastewater management. As the continent’s population has swelled — from about 285 million in 1960 to nearly 1.3 billion today — and urbanization has progressed, the challenge has become increasingly acute. Moreover, these trends are set to intensify: By 2050, the continent’s total population is expected to exceed 2.5 billion, with 55 percent living in urban environments.
The challenge African countries face may not be unique, but it is, in some ways, unprecedented. After all, in Western countries, urbanization took place over a much longer period and against a background of steadily improving economic conditions. In building effective systems for water and wastewater management, cities had adequate investment funds and the relevant expertise.
OVERWHELMED
In Africa, cities’ financial and management capacities are already overwhelmed. As a result, water and wastewater management has often fallen by the wayside, with policymakers focusing on water-related issues only when droughts and floods occur.
The Third World Centre for Water Management estimates that only about 10 to 12 percent of Africa’s population has access to adequate domestic and industrial wastewater collection, treatment and disposal.
Given that the construction of the infrastructure and systems required to meet African cities’ water needs is likely to take about 20 to 30 years, governments’ sustained commitment is essential. A key imperative is the development of more environmentally friendly systems for wastewater disposal, as is cleaning bodies of water within and around urban centers that are already heavily contaminated.
Such an effort must be based on a comprehensive approach to assessing water quality that covers a wide range of pollutants — far more than the 10 to 40 that most African utilities now monitor — with the expectation that new pollutants will be added as they emerge. Cities like Singapore regularly monitor 336 water quality parameters to ensure water safety. To that end, Africa will need access to the relevant expertise, adequate funding and well-run laboratories — all of which are in short supply.
Funding such efforts will not be easy. For one thing, official corruption has long undermined investment in the planning, design and construction of water infrastructure, as well as the effective management of existing infrastructure. For another, the social value of water — including its central role in many African religions — has long limited governments’ ability to create a viable funding model for water utilities.
Though countries are often eager to trade resources like oil, gas, minerals, timber and agricultural products, no country in the world sells its water to other countries. Canada approved the North American Free Trade Agreement only after its parliament confirmed that the agreement would not apply to water in its natural state. In federal countries like India and Pakistan, even individual provinces refuse to consider giving water to their neighbors.
Countries do not make much money from water domestically, either. In 2001, South Africa introduced a “Free Basic Water Policy,” according to which all households, regardless of size or income, receive six kiloliters of water per month at no cost.
One might argue that this is because water is necessary for survival, but so is food, and while both water and food are guaranteed in South Africa’s constitution, only water is provided for free.
NO ANOMALY
Moreover, South Africa is no anomaly. In most urban centers worldwide, water is free or highly subsidized, and politicians are reluctant to change that. Singapore’s water price did not rise at all from 2000 to 2016, and Hong Kong’s water prices have not changed since 1996, even as the price of everything else has risen.
While water obviously should not become an expensive luxury good, governments’ reluctance to charge appropriately for it has undermined their ability to invest in water utilities, including proper wastewater collection and treatment. Far from leveling the playing field, this has made urban water management in most cities less equitable, because the state is unable to provide the necessary services in an efficient, sustainable or comprehensive way.
When Cape Town’s water network is shut down because reservoirs have become dangerously low — probably on July 9 — residents will have to stand in line at one of 200 water-collection points, to collect 25 liters per person per day. That task will be particularly hard on poor and otherwise vulnerable people.
As South Africa’s politicians and media debate the causes of this crisis, they often focus on climate change — a culprit that cannot talk back. However, the dismal state of urban water management — exemplified by the fact that 36 percent of the water in South African cities is either lost due to leakage or not paid for, compared with 3.7 percent in Tokyo and 8 percent in Phnom Penh — remains a leading reason for the shutdown.
Managing urban water is not rocket science. Solutions have been well known for decades, and the needed technology, expertise and even funds are available. What has been missing is political will, sustained public demand and continuous media scrutiny. Cape Town’s crisis should serve as a wake-up call for all of Africa. Unfortunately, like Africa’s water resources, it is most likely to be wasted.
Cecilia Tortajada is a senior research fellow at the Institute of Water Policy at the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy at the National University of Singapore. Asit K Biswas is distinguished visiting professor at the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy, cofounder of the Third World Center for Water Management and a founder of the International Water Resources Association and World Water Council.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing
A group of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers led by the party’s legislative caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (?) are to visit Beijing for four days this week, but some have questioned the timing and purpose of the visit, which demonstrates the KMT caucus’ increasing arrogance. Fu on Wednesday last week confirmed that following an invitation by Beijing, he would lead a group of lawmakers to China from Thursday to Sunday to discuss tourism and agricultural exports, but he refused to say whether they would meet with Chinese officials. That the visit is taking place during the legislative session and in the aftermath