Integrated Catchment Management as a people oriented management process

Humans and ecosystems share the same water. In social systems, water has fundamental societal functions for human life-support. These functions include food production, energy production, acting as a transport medium, as a mobile dissolvent, as a microclimate moderator and even as a global-scale energy carrier amongst others (Falkenmark, 2003). It is a matter of fact that basic societal needs for water cannot be met without causing unavoidable impacts on local ecosystems.

At the same time there are some impacts on ecosystems that are principally avoidable in a sense that they are due to different forms of mismanagement. Examples of this include irrigation mismanagement, waste flows and leaching of agricultural chemicals and other contaminants amongst others. Given this inextricable link between human needs for water and the multiple impacts that they will have on ecosystems, it is of primary importance that any form of management of the water resource will make this a matter of careful consideration. Human needs for water must be met in such a way that will minimize the negative impacts on local ecosystems. In order for this to be accomplished human agency needs to be well organized.

16 According to Ashton (1998), in practice, effective implementation of ideal ICM requires appropriate overarching, statutory provisions which direct attention towards the achievement of sustainable resource use. The activities of various bodies that can affect or influence water resource utilization and protection must be coordinated in such a way that all water and associated land based resources can be managed in harmony so as to gain the full benefits of multipurpose use (Rogers et al., 2000). Rowntree (2006) argues however that the potential of ICM lies not in legislation, but in reality through grassroots movements that promote public stewardship of land and water. In line with this view, Ashton (1998) suggests that in viewing ICM as a people-oriented process, it is necessary to recognize the importance of involving individual citizens and land owners as well as government agencies in a participatory process to define all decisions around conservation and use of natural resources. Macleod et al, (2007) stress that different stakeholders need to work in partnership and determine common objectives;

it is imperative that the roles, responsibilities and accountabilities of each participating agency and individual in the decision making process need to be clearly defined.

The aforementioned partnership of different stakeholders which must be unified by common objectives can be understood as integration. This is viewed as a precondition for ICM (Swatuk, 2005; Macleod et al, 2007). Motteux and Pollard (2001) suggest that integration is about behavior changes which are sought through social processes that is to say through participation.

These two preconditions for ICM namely integration and participation are intimately linked in that integration requires participation which in turn requires knowledge of and judgments regarding risk-value systems (Falkenmark et al, 2004). In light of this understanding, it can be gathered that in order to effect behavior changes participants do not only need to develop a common set of objectives but they also need to understand the status quo, its problems and challenges from multiple perspectives. Pollard (2002) highlights the point that people-oriented processes are time consuming but in the longer term more likely to lead to sustainability. It is thus beneficial for any effort towards ICM to be managed as a people oriented process in order to achieve the most desirable outcome, that being sustainable management of land and water resources as stipulated in the definition of ICM derived for the current study.

17 2.3.3 Integrated Catchment Management as a conceptual framework: the sustainable development context

Falkenmark (2004) argues that ICM should be viewed as a conceptual framework rather than a mere approach to addressing water problems and concerns. In light of this view, literature reveals that some researchers have subscribed to the notion of ICM as falling within the context of sustainability and sustainable development (Bellamy et al., 2001; Mog, 2004; Macleod et al., 2007). The concepts of Sustainable Development (SD) and sustainability have gained widespread popularity on the international agenda from the time that they supposedly emerged in the 1970s to the present day and they are now key goals for environmental management. The link between these concepts and goals for environmental management presents a premise from which the implementation of ICM can be understood.

There are numerous definitions of SD that exist as there has been much debate around the ambiguity of its meaning. This dilemma is summarized in Steyn‟s (2002:15) expression that

“Sustainable development is notoriously difficult to define in unambiguous terms”. One of the most well-known definitions that exist is that published in the Brundtland Report of 1987 which came about as a product of the United Nations Commission on Environment and Development (Bell and Cheung, 2002).The Brundtland Report provides a definition for SD which has generally been viewed as a standard definition due to the frequency of its citation. According to this definition, SD is defined as: “Development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs” (WCED, 1987:43).

Despite the contention with regard to definition, a broad consensus exists amongst academic commentators about the virtue of intergenerational equity (Castells, 2000). The same academic commentators also agree over the so called „three pillar‟ approach encapsulated within this definition. In light of this three pillar approach, SD draws together environmental,economic and social objectives in an integrated fashion (Vitalis, 2001). These are the only areas of accepted common agreement.

The notion of SD was established as a key development concept against the backdrop of the particular growth and development path of humanity. This is typified by general environmental degradation, increasing loss of bio-diversity and natural habitats, as well as famine, poverty,

18 social inequality and distributive injustice (Reid, 1995). According to Kates et al. (2005) it is in response to a concern expressed under the broad banners of peace, freedom, development and environment that characterized the late 1960s and early 1970s that the concept of SD was born.

This concern was proliferated through successive milestones such as the 1977 United Nations conference on the Human Environment (Stockholm) and the 1981World Conservation Strategy of the World Conservation Union (USNRC, 1999). With the considerable popularity that SD has gained since its inception as a key development concept to date, SD is to a large extent institutionalized in development thinking, policy and planning practice (Koning, 2001).

It is important to understand that sustainability and SD are not the same though they are often used as if they were. Barrow (2006:35) explains sustainability as being “the ongoing function of an ecosystem or use of a resource. It is the quantification of status and progress whether it be environmental or social, and the ultimate goal of the sustainable development process.” In the context of water resources as they relate to ICM, Ashton (1998) suggests that the concept of sustainable resource use is one where with effective management, the rate of resource withdrawal, use, consumption, or depletion should always be balanced, or preferably exceeded by the rate of resource replenishment. In the process, the selected or agreed characteristics of the resource, for example water quality, biological diversity, degree of resilience to external change etcetera should also be maintained. If these objectives are not achieved the end result will be a collapse in the resource base. If sustainability is to be understood as the ongoing function of an ecosystem or use of a resource as Barrow (2006) suggests, then the concept of sustainable resource use outlined by Ashton (1998) can be understood as being characteristic of sustainability. The implementation of ICM can thus be understood within the context of sustainability. Since sustainability is viewed as the ultimate goal of SD, effective implementation of ICM can also be viewed as being synonymous with SD.