The legacies of colonialism and apartheid means that Black communities – who make up 81.4% of South Africa’s population – still do not have the same water access as white communities.

As a sociologist who investigates the politics of water (hydropolitics), and social inequality, I’ve examined the roots of “invented” water scarcity in South Africa. Invented water scarcity refers to scarcity resulting from human actions, policies or practices – not natural factors. It comes from the way water is allocated and managed, and water infrastructure is developed, and from policies that give more to some groups than to others.

My research examines water governance during colonialism and apartheid. It is crucial to understand the history of South Africa’s water governance to know how to fix the water problems the country has today. Access to water is a constitutional right and fundamental to human dignity. Ensuring that everyone has access to water equitably is critical for reducing poverty and inequality.

Three-million people or about 5% of South Africa still do not have access to clean running water and 14-million have no waterborne sanitation (flush toilets).

Current problems like corruption and maladministration in the water sector are significant. But their impact cannot be fully addressed without acknowledging the centuries of exclusion and their legacy. Black people and people of colour in South Africa currently hold only 1.4% of individual water use rights, while white people hold a staggering 98.6%.

Therefore, it is critical that laws and legislation are grounded in the lived realities of people, ensuring they address both historical injustices and present-day challenges.

Water laws need to dismantle the disparities that still affect South Africa’s most vulnerable populations. But without understanding South Africa’s water history, current and future water laws will not be well positioned to focus on delivering water to all.

Colonial water theft

Colonial water politics was based on the principle of riparian access. Landowners whose properties bordered a river were granted exclusive rights to use the river water. This legal framework favoured European settlers and landowners and disadvantaged the people who originally occupied the land, who were being forcibly removed. This deepened social and economic inequalities between the races, solidifying colonial dominance.

Indigenous communities’ water management practices were often communal. Finding their access to water becoming dependent on land ownership was alien to their traditions.

In 1906, the Cape Colony introduced the Irrigation Act, also based on the riparian principle. The act laid the groundwork for water governance following the formation of the Union of South Africa in 1910 (when four colonies were combined to form one country with legislative restrictions placed on Black people).

The Irrigation and Conservation of Water Act of 1912 was designed to encourage agricultural development through the construction of dams, canals and reservoirs. These again mainly served European settlers and large-scale farmers. This law’s focus on white-owned agriculture neglected the essential needs of Black people for drinking water, sanitation and water for irrigating smaller farms.

The 1913 Natives Land Act formally initiated land dispossession from Black people. It restricted Black people to reserves that accounted for only about 7% of South Africa’s total surface area. It also limited Black people’s access to water.

Apartheid’s whites-only water

With the National Party’s rise to power in 1948, its apartheid policies and laws made racial segregation and inequality much worse. Water governance was designed to reinforce apartheid segregation.

The 1956 National Water Act claimed to want “equitable distribution” of water resources. But this law mainly benefited white-owned agriculture, mining and industry. The government prioritised delivery of water to areas designated under segregation as “whites only”.

Government funding was directed towards water systems in white areas. In contrast, many Black communities were not even provided with one tap per household or with waterborne sanitation. This was the case in both urban areas and rural areas (“Bantustans” or “homelands”) that the apartheid government had set aside for specific Black ethnic groups.

Urban settlements like Soweto were established on the outskirts of cities, often on undesirable land. Overcrowding and substandard public services were the norm. By 1976, 93% of households in Soweto still had no access to running water.

In the Bantustans, water service was provided predominantly through unreliable boreholes. These were often located far from settlements, requiring several people to operate them.

In the agricultural and mining sectors, Black labourers faced severe limitations in accessing water. Farms and mines typically had segregated water supplies for white and Black staff. Black workers often had to rely on rudimentary and contaminated sources.

Overall, withholding essential services like water was used as a means to control and subjugate Black labour.

South Africa has failed to deliver water to the Black majority

By 1994, colonial and apartheid water politics had led to approximately 14-million people being without a safe water supply. This was about one third of South Africa’s population at that time. At that time, more than 21-million people had no proper sanitation.

This skewed access to water based on race became a central challenge that the post-apartheid South African government had to confront.

Thirty years after the advent of democracy, South Africa continues to struggle to deliver safe water and provide adequate sanitation for millions. Contemporary challenges such as corruption, maladministration in the water sector and municipalities play a part. Poor planning and water infrastructure that was not maintained for years and finally collapsed have also contributed to today’s water problems.

Recognising the connection between the legacy of colonialism and apartheid and current troubles would be the first step toward meaningful change.

Written by Anthony Kaziboni, Senior Researcher, Centre for Social Development in Africa (CSDA), University of Johannesburg

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.