Search

This study investigates whether increased use of the Ostrom design principles could improve groundwater governance research. The principles relate to self-organizing governance systems of common-pool resources, which are more likely to be sustainable if all eight design principles—e.g. clear resource and user boundaries, collective-choice arrangements, monitoring, sanctions, conflict-resolution mechanisms—are present. Empirical studies have proven the relevance and effectiveness of the Ostrom design principles for a range of common-pool resources. However, the application of the design principles to groundwater has been limited. The South African institutional landscape was therefore chosen as a case study to investigate the relevance of the design principles. The case study involved (1) comparing the design principles with established global governance benchmarking criteria, (2) assessing how implementable the design principles would be in South Africa, and (3) comparing the aims of the design principles and the broad aims of groundwater governance in South Africa. It was found that the Ostrom design principles provide researchers with a common ‘language’ for learning about the specific issues of a particular setting, learning from experiments in that setting, and learning from the experience of others. The Ostrom design principles and associated adaptive management, social learning, use of the diagnostic approach, and more specific hydrogeological principles are not mutually exclusive and can be complimentary. The implementation of groundwater governance in South Africa has been poor and few Ostrom design principles have been adopted. More use of the Ostrom design principles could improve groundwater governance in South Africa and globally.

In 1998, South Africa promulgated a Water Act that is widely regarded as one of the most progressive and enabling pieces of environmental legislation in the world. The environmental aspects of the Water Act are commonly referred to as “resource-directed measures.” These measures attempt to find the right balance between (1) leaving water in the resource (“nonconsumptive use”) to provide ecological goods and services for society and (2) taking the water out of the system for “consumptive” human use. These measures also attempt to ensure that both nonconsumptive and consumptive use is sustainable. This article discusses some of the challenges faced in using the measures to achieve environmentally sustainable ground water use. A major challenge is that misunderstanding still abounds regarding the environmental aims of this legislation. Other major challenges identified included a severe shortage of technical capacity, an inordinately long water use license application process, incorporating adaptive management to deal with uncertainty, incorporating the public participation process, and revising policy implementation processes to accommodate highly localized aquifers. Selecting appropriate scientific methodology—neither too simplistic nor too involved—is a recurring challenge. It is suggested that an important part of addressing these and the other challenges identified is a period of reflection and dialogue between the various sectors involved.

The purpose of this paper is to review the case for using ‘capture\' rather than recharge as the conceptual basis for sustainable groundwater use in South Africa. Capture refers to the sum of the increase in recharge and decrease in discharge brought about by pumping. Definitions of sustainability are reviewed, and the capture process is outlined. Implications for using the capture principle in the implementation of the NWA are discussed, and adaptive management is proposed as an appropriate management approach. Implications for groundwater monitoring are also discussed. Case studies are described that support the need for adaptive management and the application of the capture principle. Water SA Vol.32 (4) 2006: pp.473-482