Working for Water

Working for Water
Name	Working for Water
Formation	1995
Founder	Nelson Mandela
Type	Government programme
Purpose	Invasive species removal, ecological restoration, employment creation
Headquarters	Cape Town
Region served	South Africa
Parent organization	Department of Environmental Affairs

Working for Water is a South African environmental programme launched in 1995 to remove invasive alien plants, restore riparian ecosystems, and provide labor-based employment. It links conservation objectives with social development by employing informal workers in land management, integrating with national initiatives and international conservation frameworks. The programme operates across provinces including Western Cape, Eastern Cape, KwaZulu-Natal, and Mpumalanga, collaborating with research institutions and civic organizations.

Background and objectives

The initiative was established during the post-apartheid transition by leaders such as Nelson Mandela and policymakers in the Department of Environmental Affairs to address ecological degradation from species like Pinus radiata, Eucalyptus, and Acacia saligna. Objectives included restoring water yield in catchments affecting the Orange River, Vaal River, and Berg River basins, conserving biodiversity in regions like the Fynbos and Albany thicket, and aligning with international accords such as the Convention on Biological Diversity and the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. The programme also sought to reduce pressure on services in urban centers like Johannesburg and Cape Town by creating work opportunities tied to national strategies like the Expanded Public Works Programme.

Program structure and governance

Administration was coordinated through national branches of the Department of Environmental Affairs with provincial implementation by entities in Western Cape DEAP, KZN DEDTEA, and local municipal partners such as the City of Cape Town. Academic partners included University of Cape Town, Stellenbosch University, and University of KwaZulu-Natal for monitoring and research. Funding and oversight involved interactions with the National Treasury of South Africa, international funders like the Global Environment Facility, and non-governmental organizations such as World Wide Fund for Nature and Conservation South Africa.

Activities and methods

Field operations combined manual clearing, mechanical removal, biological control, and follow-up restoration. Teams used hand-pulling and chainsaws for trees like Pinus radiata and chemical methods regulated by standards from the South African Bureau of Standards. Biological control agents sourced from research at institutes like the CSIR and Agricultural Research Council targeted species such as Rhinocyllus conicus-type weevils for thistles in controlled trials. Restoration included replanting indigenous species from Proteaceae and Restio families to rehabilitate Fynbos and riparian corridors near the Gariep River. Monitoring protocols were developed with South African National Biodiversity Institute and incorporated remote sensing from satellites such as Landsat for landscape-scale change detection.

Environmental and social impacts

Ecologically, the programme contributed to recovery of native habitats in hotspots like the Cape Floristic Region and improved streamflow regimes in catchments feeding the Vaal Dam and Theewaterskloof Dam. It supported conservation of endemic taxa by facilitating rehabilitation in Kogelberg Nature Reserve and corridors connected to Kruger National Park. Socially, it provided temporary employment, skills training, and capacity building for marginalized workers from townships such as Khayelitsha and Alexandra, linking to welfare measures under the South African Social Security Agency. Collaborations with organizations like Environmental Monitoring Group and GroundWork documented community benefits, while linkages to the International Labour Organization frameworks addressed labor rights and safety.

Funding and economic aspects

Primary funding sources included allocations from the National Treasury of South Africa and budget lines within the Department of Environmental Affairs, supplemented by grants from entities such as the Global Environment Facility, bilateral donors like Department for International Development (DFID), and partnerships with conservation NGOs including World Wide Fund for Nature. Economic analyses by researchers at Stellenbosch University and University of Cape Town assessed cost-benefit for water yield improvements in basins like the Berg River compared with expenditures on removal and maintenance. Employment figures were reported in national planning documents and tied to programs such as the Expanded Public Works Programme to maximize poverty-alleviation outcomes.

Criticism and controversies

Critiques emerged from academics, NGOs, and policymakers over effectiveness, opportunity cost, and labor conditions. Scholars from University of Cape Town and Rhodes University questioned long-term hydrological gains, citing complex interactions in the Cape Floristic Region. Labor activists and unions such as the Congress of South African Trade Unions raised concerns about wages and job security relative to standards promoted by the International Labour Organization. Environmentalists debated the use of chemical herbicides and non-native biological control agents, referencing case studies in the Fynbos and controversies similar to those documented in New Zealand and Australia. Governance critiques addressed coordination across agencies like the Department of Water and Sanitation (South Africa) and local municipalities, highlighting disputes over prioritization in catchments such as the Olifants River catchment.

Category:Environmental programs in South Africa