From a policy point of view, it is desirable to know the extent to which water supply is adequate and where it requires development. Where water supply is adequate, the issues are those of maintenance and operation to ensure that water supply interruptions are minimised and that the quality of water does not endanger health. Where development is needed, capital expenditure is required, the nature and extent of which will depend on context.
Rational policy requires an information system. There is no system which furnishes all the relevant information, but there are four data sources which supply some of it. They are:
The relevant information in each source is summarized in the Appendix.
Adequacy of water supply is a normative issue. One may approach it by considering government specifications[1].
The basic water standard has the following components:
Requirement 3 of at least a yard connection is relatively new. The older standard was that the source should be piped water within 200 metres of the dwelling. The new standard is referred to here as the ‘basic standard’ and the older standard will be called the ‘RDP standard’. Existing measurement still uses the RDP standard.
This specification needs unpacking, and some parts of it are unclear, especially when it comes to the type of supply and identity of the supplier. For instance, what is a yard connection? It may often be to a municipal water supply. But does the definition extend to connection to community water schemes, or own sources on the property, such as boreholes and rain water tanks? Further issues arise when the access standard is that water should be available within 200 metres of the dwelling. Here piped water to a community stand would be eligible, but this could be supplied by a municipality or a community water scheme. Is access to a neighbour’s tap within 200 metres adequate?
Similarly, the SANS 241 requirements are complex. It identifies three categories of risk:
Water consumers are likely to perceive the quality of water supply as poor on aesthetic grounds, or whether consumption causes acute health problems. But some health risks are undetectable by consumers, and not all aesthetic risks are health risks. Operational risks are essentially diagnostic for suppliers of water through treatment plans, and they indicate a need for attention to operational procedures.
Health risks can be divided into the following subcategories:
Aesthetic risks include colour, total dissolved solids, turbidity, pH (acidity or alkalinity), sulphates, ammonia, chloride, sodium, zinc, iron, manganese and phenols. Operational problems are indicated by turbidity, pH and a high concentration of aluminium.
Charles Simkins
Head of Research
charles@hsf.org.za
In all cases, the household rather than the individual is regarded as the consumption entity.
The dates for which items of information are indicated in square brackets.
1. The Water Services Knowledge System.
WSKS provides tables of the following variables by Water Service Authority:
2. The National Integrated Water Information System.
NIWIS provides tables of the following variables by Water Service Authority:
3. The Integrated Regulatory Information System
IRIS provides data on water quality at a number of points within each Water Service Authority
4. The Community Survey 2016
The following variables are reported within the household file:
[1] The most recent specification of standards is contained in Department of Water Affairs, National Water Act (36/1998): National Norms and Standards for Domestic Water and Sanitation Service, Government Gazette 41100, 8 September 2017