The Impact of Public Participation Through Invited and Invented Spaces on Water Supply in Urban Informal Settlements

Abstract

Though public participation forms part of the foundation of the South African democracy, insufficient consideration has been paid to the processes of public participation at local government, particularly in the provision of water supply in informal settlement communities. Informal settlements and their leadership structures are continuously excluded and overlooked in decisions and plans around water supply for their designated communities by invited public participation platforms such as ward committees and ward councillors. As a result, this has negative implications on the settlements’ access to water supply. It is within this context that this article demonstrates how the exclusion of informal settlement communities and their leadership structures in water supply decision making processes at local government exacerbate and enforce water struggles in informal settlements. This paper uses a qualitative research approach. The data was collected using field observations, photographic images, in-depth household interviews, in-depth interviews with community leaders and key informants.

Introduction

Public participation is central to democracy and the delivery of basic services, including water. It allows citizens to give their inputs in local government matters with the aim of influencing the decisions that will impact their lives. In South Africa, apartheid—with its centralised and hierarchical system of government—deprived poor citizens of opportunities for public participation in government decision making processes. When the new government was elected into power, in 1994, it was clear that the prominent issue on the agenda was to redress the impact of many years of oppression caused by apartheid (Earle et al., 2005). This also included bringing government closer to communities including informal settlement communities that were mainly excluded from government matters. This saw public participation being entrenched in Section 152 of the South African Constitution of 1996. To expand on the constitutional obligation of public participation in South Africa, the Municipal Systems Act, No. 32 of 2000 and the Municipal Structures Act, No. 117 of 1998 were introduced.

Chapter 4 Section 16 of the Municipal Systems Act mandates municipalities to develop a culture of municipal governance that complements formal representative government with a system of participatory governance. In this regard the Municipal Systems Act obligates local government to contribute to building the capacity of local communities in order to enable them to participate in the affairs of the municipality. Furthermore, the Act claims that councillors and staff should ensure that public participation is adopted by giving communities the ability to participate. Councillors and staff are further obligated to use municipal resources and annually allocate funds from its budget to implement the provision of municipal services. Section 17 of the Municipal Systems Act clearly states that the engagements and feedback sessions should be held with community recognized organizations. Moreover, the Act notes that municipalities should take into account the special needs of sectors of the population that are disadvantaged, this includes informal settlements. This should be done with respect to all mechanisms, processes and procedures for community participation. Under Section 17, the Act further clearly states that participation by communities should be done through government created structures also referred to as invited public participation spaces in literature (Bénit-Gbaffou, 2020; Berry et al., 2019; Lamenski, 2017). These include spheres of representation at the ward level inclusive of ward committees and ward councillors for main category A and category B municipalities as outlined in the Municipal Structures Act. Part 4 of Chapter 4 of the Municipal Structures Act sets out the composition, election, framework for powers, functions and dissolution of ward committees.

Unfortunately, these invited spaces of public participation are criticised of hindering rather than encouraging public participation by silencing and ignoring poor citizens’ voices particularly the voices of informal settlements occupants (Dube et al., 2021; Lamenski, 2017). The lack of public participation through invited spaces in informal settlements is apparent on issues concerning water supply plans at the municipal level (Masiya et al., 2019; Nleya, 2011). Though South Africa has made some progress in the provision of water infrastructure, however, challenges related to the lack of public participation and involvement of informal settlements in water supply decision making processes at the municipal level, result in these services not reaching informal settlement communities (Bazaanah & Litabe, 2023). Access to clean water is one of the biggest challenges facing the majority of poor urban informal settlement occupants in South Africa, despite the United Nations’ declaration that access to safe water is a fundamental human right. Thus, the lack of public participation in water supply decision making by informal settlements at local government has resulted in the settlements feeling alienated and disconnected from decision making processes, and disempowered to influence municipalities, further negatively affecting their access to water supply (Masiya et al., 2019).

Due to these challenges, informal settlements invent their own structures that would represent them at local government. Patel et al. (2016) defines invented public participation spaces as spaces that are created by citizens with the aim of producing opportunities to influence the State. The main invented spaces found in informal settlements are informal settlements community leadership structures. Unlike the invited spaces that do not encourage public participation in informal settlements, informal settlement community leadership structures give the settlements an opportunity to voice out their concerns and opinions on service delivery matters at local government, with the aim of improving the settlements' access to services including water supply. Yet, invited spaces do not give invented spaces, such as community leadership structures as the settlements' representatives, the opportunity to participate in decision making processes at the municipal level (Miraftab, 2004; Sibanda & Lues, 2021; Tshoose, 2015).

As argued by Imparato and Ruster (2003) true public participation is not enforced, but citizens become willing participants in a process that will bring better living conditions and the delivery of basic services particularly in poor communities. This is the reason Davids (2005) claims that genuine public participation should entail participation in decision making, implementation, monitoring and evaluation, as well as sharing the benefits of governance and developmental outputs and outcomes. The scholar makes it clear that public participation should not be viewed separately but rather within a stream of connected acts. Furthermore, le Roux (2015) makes the emphasis that the process of public participation adopts a more democratic system of representation and decision making by taking into consideration the views of citizens and making decisions based not only on the opinions of the politically elected representatives. As a result, public participation at local government and in the delivery of water supply is effective when communities including the poorest of the poor know how to influence meaningful change and are aware of their ability to make meaningful judgements that will improve their access to water and living circumstances. Hence, there is a need for local government to involve informal settlement communities in the decision making processes regarding the type of water supply to be provided in the settlements.

Therefore, this paper aims to demonstrate how water supply struggles are enforced and exacerbated by inadequate public participation practices such as the disregard and exclusion of informal settlement communities and their invented spaces in water supply decision making processes at municipal level by invited spaces. To achieve this aim, this paper uses empirical evidence from Empolweni informal settlement, located in Khayelitsha, Cape Town. While literature debates on invented and invited spaces and water supply exist, but these factors have not been sufficiently studied within the context of informal settlements. By highlighting these issues within the context of informal settlement communities this study hopes to contribute to the body of knowledge around these issues. Furthermore, this study hopes to assist with the improvement of public participation and water supply within informal settlements by ensuring that the settlements are actively involved in plans and decisions around water supply in their areas, thus improving the settlements’ access to water.

This article, therefore, begins with the introduction, where it sets the basis of the research in detail. The next section of the article gives discussions of the literature debates. Under this section the article gives an overview of the invited and invented public participation spaces in informal settlements as the first theoretical framework of this study. The paper goes on to discuss Arnstein’s ladder of participation in relations to water supply in informal settlements. The paper further gives a discussion of public participation through invited and invented spaces and their impact on water supply in South African informal settlements. Moreover, the paper goes on to explain the methodology adopted and the fieldwork experiences. Additionally, the paper zooms in on the Empolweni Informal Settlement case study, where an overview of the settlement, the water conditions, introduction to the invited and invented spaces in the settlement and the role of the invented and invited spaces on water supply in the settlement are outlined. The last two sections present the discussion, that is followed by the conclusion.

Literature Review

Invited and Invented Public Participation Platforms

At local government level invited and invented public participation platforms exist to promote public participation. Invited spaces as State-organised public participation platforms are meant to give citizens the opportunity to participate in the State’s deliberative processes (Aiyar, 2010). This view is further supported by Patel et al. (2016) who claim that invited spaces are spaces that represent participatory governance and gives citizens the opportunity to be makers and shapers of the services they receive and not only just the users of the services. These spaces are meant to lead to more efficient service delivery and to more accountability of government to the communities, especially given that decisions are supposed to be made with the involvement of communities (Berry et al., 2019). Lemanski (2017) claims that invited spaces have become normal platforms of governing urban areas. The author perceives such spaces as necessary platforms for the sharing of information and knowledge between citizens and governments. According to Patel et al. (2016), through invited spaces, there should be increased dialogue and consultation between the State and citizens which helps in ensuring that the communities’ service delivery needs are heard and better outcomes on the type of services needed are achieved. Thus, Aiyar (2010) argues that the reason behind having invited spaces is assuming that through public participation the government’s performance would significantly improve by making it more responsive and more accountable.

Given that invited spaces are State-organised, they operate under formalised legal procedures and frameworks. According to the National Policy for Public Participation (2007) having a legal framework helps in ensuring that public participation is done in an empowering manner and it is not used as an instrument of consultation or manipulation. The framework assists invited spaces with grassroot planning, to implement and monitor those plans using a range of working groups and Community Based Organisations (CBOs) in supporting community-based services (National Policy for Public Participation, 2007).

As highlighted in the Municipal Systems Act, the invited public participation spaces at local government in South Africa include municipal spheres of representation at the ward level inclusive of ward committees and ward councillors. Ward committees are meant to narrow the gap between local municipalities and communities, since ward committees have the knowledge and understanding of the citizens and communities they represent (Piper & Deacon, 2014). The ward councillor is the chairperson of the ward committee, and as such is an essential member of the committee. Paradza et al. (2010) describe ward councillors as the representatives of the communities that voted them into power. Hence, they owe their primary loyalty to the people and communities who voted for them no matter what their background or political views are (Joseph, 2002). Joseph (2002) further argues that it is the duty of ward councillors to act in the best interests of the residents and ensure that the credibility and integrity of the municipality are not compromised, always. Given the duty of ward councillors as invited spaces of engagement for communities, they have the responsibility of being watchdogs, by ensuring that the municipalities implement policies that address the basic service delivery needs including water services of informal settlement communities (Paradza et al., 2010). Jolobe (2014) emphasises that these invited spaces of public participation were introduced to ensure that citizens are able to reach their elected government and the structures are meant to make it easier for the flow of power from local government to national government. This would result in democracy to be extended to the larger citizenry (Jolobe, 2014). Thus, ward committees and ward councillors as the local government structures closest to communities on the ground are meant to be invited spaces of participation where informal settlements engage with their political representatives for the provision of basic services.

Unlike the invited spaces that are formally created by government, invented spaces are created by communities that have common concerns or pursuits (Cornwall, 2003). Invented spaces are spaces of leadership, representation and the voice of the community (Lamenski, 2017). According to Gaventa (2003) invented spaces are spaces that are created by those who do not have much power to represent their needs against those who hold power. In contrast to the invited spaces that are governed by legal frameworks there are no formal frameworks that govern invented spaces. While there are different invented spaces that exist, this research is interested in looking at invented spaces that mainly operate in informal settlements. It is within this context that this study introduces community leadership structures as the main invented spaces found in informal settlement communities. Informal settlement community leadership structures also referred to as community committees by informal settlements occupants, are individuals and groups that are selected by informal settlements occupants to serve the interests of the informal communities (Makwarela & Ebrahim, n.d). The appointment of leaders who serve in informal settlement community leadership structures mainly depends on the complex sets of social relations and cultural representations that constitute life in each informal settlement (Koster & de Vries, 2012). This makes community leadership structures diverse and adhering to the particular settlements’ set of rules. Though the individuals who serve in the structures are selected by the community but they voluntarily assume the leadership roles to advance the goals of the whole community.

Furthermore, Hendler and Fieuw (2018) argue that informal settlements community leadership structures are responsible for convening general meetings and identifying stakeholders that would like to work with the settlements. The structures serve as the voice of the informal settlement communities when engaging with key stakeholders including invited spaces (Koster & de Vries, 2012). Hence, Makwarela and Ebrahim (n.d) claim that these structures assist informal settlement communities by promoting community participation, through listening to the needs of the communities and taking them forward to invited spaces to improve the settlement’s living conditions and lack of access to basic services conditions.

Ladder of Participation

Arnstein’s (1969) ladder of participation is used in this article to highlight public participation and its implementation in the supply of water through invented and invited spaces in informal settlement communities. Arnstein (1969) describes participation as the means by which the marginalised population such as informal settlement occupants can encourage significant social reform, that allows them to share in the benefits of the affluent society. This mainly includes the redistribution of decision-making power to include the marginalised groups and give them the opportunity to shape and improve their future. The ladder of participation explains the ways in which institutional and political entities can either limit or enhance the ability of communities to act, thereby defining how public empowerment, control, and influence in governance can be strengthened (Arnstein, 1969). Figure 1 presents the ladder of participation.

Fig. 1

Ladder of participation (Arnstein, 1969, p. 217)

The ladder of participation views public participation as entailing eight stages. Using the concept of public participation through invited and invented spaces on water supply in informal settlements to explain Arstein’s ladder of participation, at the bottom of the ladder are stages 1 and 2 which are ‘manipulation’ and ‘therapy’. These two stages represent non-participation, when participation is at these stages the invited spaces fail to include the informal settlement community leadership structures, as the settlements’ representatives from participating in planning of the water projects but these stages allow the invited spaces to educate the settlements regarding the planned projects. As such, in non-participation the invited spaces and the municipalities make decisions on behalf of the informal settlements. Stages 3 and 4 are ‘informing’ and ‘consultation’, at these stages the invited spaces give the community leadership structures as the settlements' representatives the opportunity to voice out the settlements' opinions regarding the water supply projects. However, the informal settlement community leadership structures do not have the power to ensure that the communities' views will indeed be taken into consideration at the municipal level. When participation is at these stages the invited spaces do not provide feedback to the community leadership structures and the settlements regarding the projects and if the views of the settlements regarding the water supply projects will indeed be considered by the municipality.

Stage 5 is ‘placation’ at this stage the communities and their leaders have some degree of influence. They are given the opportunity to offer some advice on the water supply projects, although the final decisions are taken by the invited spaces and the municipality. Stage 6 involves ‘partnership’ between the settlements and the invited spaces to negotiate the outcomes of the water supply projects. Stage 7 ‘delegated power’ and stage 8 ‘citizen control’ are the highest two stages, where the community leaders acting on behalf of the informal settlements have the majority say in decision making regarding the water supply projects that will be implemented in their settlements.

Thus, in this research Arnstein’s ladder of participation helps with the deeper insightful understanding of how public participation in relations to water supply is practiced through invited and invented spaces within informal settlements.

Public Participation Through Invited and Invented Spaces and the Impact on Water Supply in South African Informal Settlements

Though invited spaces exist to drive public participation at the community level, literature shows that in practice the functionality of ward committees and ward councillors as invited spaces of public participation have not worked as effectively as envisioned. Gaventa (2003) argues that while these spaces are meant to encourage participation, these spaces can be closed where decisions are made by political representatives without any inclusion of communities. This view is further supported by Bénit-Gbaffou (2020) who argues that though there is extensive implementation of invited spaces in urban areas, but there is general consensus that invited spaces are unsuccessful when it comes to involving communities in decision making that result in more fair and inclusive urban areas. The exclusion of communities by the invited spaces is worse in informal settlements, making invited participatory mechanisms of governance ineffective in bringing greater decision making and influence to citizens in such settlements including decisions around water supply projects that are often dire in such settlements (Lamenski, 2017).

While public participation in the water sector continues to be an important factor that is meant to ensure that government addresses the real needs of poor communities in the most appropriate way, however, the lack of public participation through ward committees and ward councillors has been reported as one of the main factors affecting water supply in South African informal settlements (Bazaanah & Litabe, 2023; Nleya, 2011). Masiya et al. (2019) emphasise that service delivery protests are a reflection of the level to which ward councillors have failed. This view is further shared by Bénit-Gbaffou (2008); Paradza et al. (2010) who argue that the majority of poor communities in South Africa report that their ward councillors do not encourage public participation, as such, they are part of the key causes of mass urban services delivery protests including water in informal settlement communities. Akinboade et al. (2013) also add to this argument by stating that service delivery dissatisfaction and protests that are mainly linked to water supply at the local level are a consequence of local government inefficiencies to provide adequate service delivery in poor communities, which can in many instances be explained by a lack of effective public participation. Hence, Bazaanah and Litabe (2023) argue that decision making around water supply is dominated by a group of individuals with political and economic power and influence. As a result, informal settlements are often excluded from water supply decision making processes. This has led in decisions that benefit certain groups while informal settlement communities are left with minimal to no access to water supply.

Due to these conditions, informal settlements are made up of highly diverse improved and unimproved water supply arrangements that intensify water access challenges (Ahlers et al., 2014). According to SERI (2018) generally the improved water supply arrangements in urban informal settlements are limited to communal water standpipes that are placed in inconvenient sections of the settlement that are either unsafe or too far from households. These sources often do not meet the water access standards and levels as outlined in the Free Basic Water Implementation Strategy (2007). The Free Basic Water Implementation Strategy (2007) claims that in informal settlements communal water sources such as standpipes are to be placed within 200m from every home. However, these communal sources are usually placed more than 200m away from the dwellings, along road servitudes and often in inconvenient locations on the perimeters of the informal settlement (SERI, 2018). Furthermore, the unimproved water supply arrangements include water tanks, water trucks, illegal water connections, buying or stealing water from neighbouring areas that have taps or buying water from private vendors and collecting water from streams. All these water arrangements provide irregular and unpredictable water supply levels creating barriers to access for informal settlement occupants (Khatri & Vairavamoorthy, 2007; SERI, 2018).

Given the inadequate public participation through invited spaces and its negative implication on water supply in informal settlements, invented platforms such as informal settlement community leadership structures have become prominent vehicles for addressing complex public issues including the delivery of basic water supply in the settlements (Nowell et al., 2016). Informal settlement community leadership structures give informal settlements the opportunity to participate in decision making processes that are often closed off by invited spaces at local government. This is not an easy task for these invented spaces as they are seen as threats by the invited spaces, since they exist with the hope of bringing societal change by influencing policy and resisting the dominant power by government that exist in invited spaces (Miraftab, 2004). These conditions result in resistance from invited spaces who feel that they are themselves more legitimate shapers of policy than unelected community representatives such as informal settlement community leadership structures (Bénit-Gbaffou & Katsuara, 2014). The invited spaces become territorial as formally recognised public participation platforms and to protect their territory from informal community leadership structures, the invited spaces act as gatekeepers and controllers of information dissemination and resources allocation in informal settlement communities (Tshoose, 2015). As a result, ward councillors are known for ignoring public inputs, being arrogant, insensitive and overlook informal settlement community leaders in decision making processes (Masiya et al., 2019). Invited spaces are further “accused of being either unwilling or unable to share the decision making power with the informal settlement community leaders as the settlements’ representatives, especially in relation to projects identification” (Tshoose, 2015, p.18). Thus, informal settlements and their community leaders are often excluded from participating in decision making processes that have a direct impact on their lives including decisions around water supply projects that are often dire in such settlements. Hence, invited spaces are ineffective in informal settlements.

To try and deal with these challenges the Effective Public Participation Guideline for Enhancing Public Participation was introduced in 2013. The Guideline proposes a number of mechanisms, some of these mechanisms include the focus on the effective operation of ward committees, with particular focus on the governance model, a model for accountability and the resourcing thereof. The other mechanism is the proposal of a new public participation policy that needs to be developed. As stated by the Effective Public Participation Guideline for Enhancing Public Participation (2013), the policy should be discussed at ward level and must be communicated through the media to ensure that adequate inputs are provided. Once the policy is developed it should be made accessible to residents in order for them to understand their public participation rights. Furthermore, the Guideline calls for the representation of interests groups and civil society groups at the ward level. Other mechanisms on the Guideline speak to issues of municipal feedback to and from communities, where the municipality is encouraged to use different platforms including but not limited to ward councillors to communicate with the communities. The guideline further states that municipalities should ensure that there are mechanisms which residents can use to directly engage with the municipality and municipalities are urged to use the most effective tools to communicate with the communities in their jurisdictions. In the case of informal settlements, community leadership structures form part of the key tools that local government is encouraged to use to communicate with informal communities. Though, the South African public participation legislative framework permits public participation to be practiced through invited spaces, but the Guideline encourages municipalities to design mechanisms that facilitate the inclusion of marginalised groups in municipal decision making processes. This includes informal settlement communities and their community leaders as they have unique circumstances and special arrangements that require municipalities to provide at least a limited range of services (Effective Public Participation Guideline for Enhancing Public Participation, 2013).

However, while these issues are dealt with on paper in the form of a local government Effective Public Participation Guideline for Enhancing Public Participation, there has been failure in its effective implementation. This is shown by how the informal settlements community leadership structures as the settlements’ representatives and communication mechanisms that are provided for in the Guideline are continuously undermined and have their legitimacy questioned due to their informal nature by the invited spaces (Bénit-Gbaffou & Katsuara, 2014). These situations are concerning especially given that invited spaces are meant to encourage public participation by allowing all communities, including informal settlements community leadership structures as the representatives of the settlements, to be involved in decision making process at the municipal level. These conditions highlight Dube et al’s. (2021) view that invited spaces fail to achieve their purpose in practice as they often tend to hinder rather than encourage local democracy by undermining and reducing poor citizens’ voices. Therefore, though much is expected from invited public participation spaces, but the constant effort to prove their legitimacy as shapers of policy than informal settlement community leadership structures, have made invited spaces ineffective and lacking the necessary requirements for equitable participation and voice in informal settlements. Cloete (2012) argues that invited spaces may be broadly bounded to permit limited citizen influence, excluding the poor, colonizing interaction and restrict disagreements during interactions. As a result, informal settlement occupants have been deprived of opportunities to influence decisions pertaining to water supply and the development of their own areas and to participate meaningfully in local governance (Ngamlana & Mathoho, 2012).

The exclusion and disregard of the informal settlement community leadership structures as invented spaces in water supply decision making process that directly impact the informal communities they represent, forces them to continuously use different forms of engagement when they engage with the invited spaces, to ensure that the water supply needs of the settlements are adhered to. According to Miraftab (2004) the choice of engagement they use depends on what forms of mobilisation would be effective in getting the desired outcome during that particular period. Moreover, Miraftab (2004) claims that the forms of mobilisation do not follow a particular pattern, sometimes these invented spaces use formal channels such as courts of law or try to approach the invited spaces to get to a common understanding and other times they use informal channels such as protest demonstrations or rallies. Koster and de Vries (2012) further add to this argument by stating that community leadership structures negotiate and apply pressure in the right places on the community’s behalf with the aim of obtaining resources, including water supply, from the government. The leaders in the structures further use their local knowledge and understanding of how the municipal systems work to negotiate for the settlements' water supply (Vivier & Sanchez-Betancourt, 2020).

Additionally, the exclusion and disregard of informal settlement community leaders by the invited spaces result in the leaders forming and joining civic movements as a strategy to drive the services needs of their settlements that are often neglected by invited spaces. Given that in invited spaces government holds more power, this power is used to exclude the informal settlements community leadership structures. According to Sibanda and Lues (2021) it is easy for invited public participation platforms to exclude community leaders due to the leaders’ lack of resources, voice or legitimacy. As argued by Koster and de Vries (2012) to gain their power the community leaders become presidents of local grassroots organizations, representatives in local consultative bodies, or spokespersons of social movements. Being part of civic organisations strengthens these invented spaces’ bargaining power, it allows them to be advocates for the settlement’s water supply and they are able to fight for greater transparency and accountability of invited spaces towards the communities (Gaventa, 2006). Hence, the UN-Habitat (2016) claims that in order to drive efforts of improving access to services delivery in informal settlements, it is important to enable the active participation of community leadership structures in services delivery decision making at the municipal level. This is possible if the invited spaces embrace these structures by working together with them and including them in decision making processes and planning around water projects instead of perceiving them as threats.

Methodology and Fieldwork Experiences

This paper is part of a postdoctoral research that is funded by the National Institute for the Humanities and Social Sciences. Ethical clearance was obtained through the Department of Political Studies at the University of Cape Town. The research approach used in this study is the qualitative research approach. The data was collected using field observations, photographic images and a total of twenty-three in-depth face to face interviews with community members and leaders from the Empolweni community committee. Out of the twenty-three interviews, fifteen were conducted with the community members and eight were conducted with the community committee leaders. Further, an in-depth interview on Microsoft Teams was conducted with the City of Cape Town Municipality (CoCT) official responsible for the provision of water services in Empolweni and the last in-depth face to face interview was conducted with the Ward 95 councillor which is the ward that Empolweni falls under.

Empolweni was selected among several informal settlements, after receiving assistance through multiple engagements with NGOs, other academics and conducting a literature review on informal settlements that are struggling with water services and were communicating with the CoCT to have the services implemented in their areas. Empolweni Informal Settlement is a suitable case study as it is located in Khayelitsha, Cape Town which is an area with the highest number of informal settlements in the CoCT. The settlement was further selected due to its water services challenges and the planned water services project for the area.

Furthermore, there were a few challenges that were experienced during the research. One of the challenges was getting hold of the suitable municipal officials to be interviewed for the research. This prolonged the data collection process. When the suitable official was allocated, the interview took place on Microsoft Teams, due to the official’s busy schedule and limited time he had to participate in the research.

At the community level, the initial research design was aimed at conducting two focus group discussions with Empolweni community members which would have been attained from attending some of the community meetings. However, during the field observations and engaging with some of the community members safety concerns were raised. The first concern was that the community members were not willing to participate in the research if they were to participate in a focus group discussion. They felt that they would be victimised in the community if other community members would be present while they offer their views and experiences regarding the community leaders, CoCT and the ward councillor. The second concern was around the safety of the researcher. Empolweni is reported by the community and ward councillor to have criminal activities such as house break-ins, physical attacks and robberies. The research assistant and the community leaders voiced out that the community meetings that were planned to be attended by the researcher to recruit focus group participants, took place on Fridays after 5 pm when most community members and some of the community leaders were back from work. This would have increased the chances of the researcher being attacked as an outsider that would have been working late in the settlement. As a result, changes on the initial research design were made from using focus groups to using household interviews as one of the primary data collection methods. Conducting in-depth interviews with the households was also a challenge as some members refused to participate in the research and others were at work during the day. Hence, there were fifteen household participants interviewed.

Moreover, the Empolweni Community Committee is divided into two groups there is the top six main structure and there are nine additional members. Getting views from the top six was important for the purpose of this research, since each of the leaders performed different duties according to the leadership positions they held, and they were regarded as the main community committee leaders. The additional members assisted only when one of the leaders in the top six was unavailable. Additionally, securing interviews with all the community leaders was a challenge. During the fieldwork some of the leaders would postpone the interview to a later date and time from the initial agreed time and date and others were not available to participate in the study due to work priorities. Though it was difficult to interview all the leaders, but it was important to prioritise interviews with the majority of the top six. Therefore, interviews were conducted with five leaders from the top six, which makes up the majority of the main structure, and three additional members.

Empolweni Case Study

Background and Water Supply Conditions

Empolweni informal settlement (translated to a refreshing place in English) is a relatively new informal settlement that was created in 2019 during the Covid 19 pandemic by a group of backyarders from different sections of Khayelitsha one of the biggest townships in Cape Town (Lali, 2020). Khayelitsha is located approximately 20 km from Cape Town on the Cape Flats (McKenzie et al., 2004). The population of Khayelitsha has rapidly grown over the years with half of the population living in informal settlements (Seekings, 2013). Khayelitsha has the largest single concentration of informal settlements in the CoCT, with majority of the settlements being situated on unsuitable land for residential purposes (Sikhula Sonke, 2023). The settlements lack access to basic services, including water. A significant number of residents continue to rely on communal, and generally unsatisfactory facilities (Seekings, 2013). These issues were also highlighted in a study conducted by Brown University (n.d.) the study showed that informal settlements in Khayelitsha lacked water supply with majority of the residents relying on communal unreliable sources. Rodina (2014) further argues that due to the lack of water access in informal settlements in Khayelitsha, informal settlement occupants face further challenges of not being allowed to access water by residents in formal areas which have private taps. The scholar claims that this has the potential to worsen the relative marginalization of informal settlement occupants as it deprives them from alternative forms of water access when communal taps are unavailable or out of commission (Rodina, 2014).

Empolweni informal settlement is located in the northern parts of Khayelitsha known as Site B. The land on which Empolweni is located is owned by the CoCT. Unlike many informal settlements that are dense and overcrowded, Empolweni is spacious with majority of the shacks built inside fenced yards. The fences are built with a mix of wood, zinc and wire material. The sizes of the shacks depend on what each household can afford to build. The study respondents shared that they ensure that there is plenty of space between dwellings, in order to prevent the burning of multiple shacks when there are fire incidences in the area, hence, majority of the dwellings have fenced yards. Figure 2 is an illustration of the spacious fenced yards found in Empolweni.

Fig. 2

Spacious fenced yard

The road around the settlement is also big and open to ensure that emergency vehicles are able to drive in and out of the settlement with ease when there are reported emergencies. Figure 3 shows how big and spacious the roads are around Empolweni.

Fig. 3

Big and spacious open road

Just like majority of informal settlements that are found in Khayelitsha, Empolweni also faces severe challenges of water supply levels without any form of improved water sources. The settlement is solely dependent on unimproved water sources such as; illegal connections, asking and buying water from other neighbourhoods and truck municipal provided water.

The field observations revealed that the majority of the residents use illegal water connections. This finding was further supported by the community leaders and household study respondents who agreed that illegal water connections from Zweledinga informal settlement and 31 Section formal residential area are the common water access methods used by the residents. The types of illegal water connections in Empolweni are connections inside the yard, connections inside the dwelling and communal shared connections. The residents who have connected the water inside their yards and dwellings claim that they used their last money to buy pipes and paid R100 to Zweledinga and 31 Section residents to allow them to illegally connect from their infrastructure. Each household in Zweledinga and 31 Section has its own private tap where the Empolweni residents illegally connect from. As a result, the terms and conditions of the illegal connections agreement are set by the owners of the infrastructure.

As shared by one of the household respondents in Empolweni:

I raised money and bought pipes and I asked one of the residents in Zweledinga to allow me to connect water from his dwelling. Luckily the person was nice enough to allow me to connect without expecting any payment in return, because majority of the residents ask a certain fee for one to connect and others refuse when we ask to connect and tell us that we mess up their infrastructure (Empolweni Respondent 5, personal communication, 29/09/2023).

The residents who use the communal shared water access point claimed that money was collected from individuals who were able to contribute money towards the purchasing of the pipes and a tap, those who could not afford to contribute are also allowed to use the communal water access point. Currently the communal access point has no tap the tap was stolen by drug users, the water is accessed through a plastic pipe. Figure 4 is an illustration of the illegally connected brown pipe used as a communal shared water access point.

Fig. 4

Communal shared illegal water connection

Moreover, the residents who reside far from the communal access point and cannot afford illegal connections claim that they beg for a bucket of water daily from Zweledinga informal settlement households. Other residents use truck water that is provided by the municipality. While doing field observation the researcher noticed a Jojo Tank, which she assumed was another access point. However, the community leaders and household respondents shared that the tank was no longer operational. The interviewed CoCT official revealed that the CoCT is doing away with tank provided water due to the hygiene issues it presents for those who consume the water. Hence, the municipality stopped filling the tank in Empolweni with water. The official further shared that the municipality cannot remove the water tank from the settlement as it belongs to Lindiwe Sisulu. She provided the settlement with the tank in 2019 when she served as the Minister of Human Settlements, Water and Sanitation. After the municipality stopped filling the communal Jojo tank it started providing the settlement with truck water. The truck provided water is the only municipality provided water source in the settlement. Additionally, the community leaders and household respondents shared that all the water supply sources present water access level challenges for the residents of Empolweni. Residents that use illegal connections complained of low water pressure and frequent water cuts especially during weekends when majority of the residents are using water to do their household chores. The residents that use communal illegal connections further shared that there is only one water access point and they have to stand in long queues for water, this is worsened by the low water pressure during the weekends. Figure 5 shows the containers that are queuing to be filled with water at the shared illegally connected communal access point.

Fig. 5

Water containers queuing for water at the communal illegal water connection access point

The residents that ask for water from other areas complained that the owners sell them the water or refuse to give them water. Moreover, the residents that access water through the municipal truck shared that they are often told to only fill one container by the municipal employees. Given that the water is used for bathing, cooking, doing household chores and some dwellings have multiple household members, one container of water is not enough. Moreover, the household respondents who use truck water further shared that the truck comes once a week or skips the whole week in some instances. This results in residents having to find other means to obtain water.

According to one of the household respondents:

The water issue in this settlement is really painful, especially for people like me who suffer from physical health challenges that do not allow me to carry heavy containers and walk long distances. I have become a burden to my neighbours , because I depend on them to assist me with getting water from the truck. Please tell me why are we even voting for these useless politicians who only care about themselves? (Empolweni Respondent 10, personal communication, 3/10/2023)

The other household respondent claimed:

The people who drive that truck are rude they often tell us that the truck was never even meant to serve Empolweni residents, it was meant for other areas. So they are just doing us a favour by coming here and we should be grateful for even filling up the one water container (Empolweni Respondent 5, personal communication, 29/09/2023).

Accessing water through communal sources such as the communal illegal water connection and the truck provided water also present safety challenges for the residents. The household respondents who use these sources claimed that they are robbed off their phones and other personal belongings when they go to collect water. The unsafe nature of the settlement was also highlighted by the interviewed CoCT official who shared that their truck was robbed on multiple occasions when it delivered water to the settlement.

Introducing the public participation platforms in Empolweni

The invented public participation platform that exist in Empolweni is the Empolweni Community Committee. The invited spaces that are present in the settlement are the ward committee and councillor. The community committee is a community leadership structure that was created in 2019 after the community experienced evictions from the CoCT. According to the community leaders and household study participants, the leadership structure was originally created to assist the community with solutions of blocking the evictions. Currently the community leadership structure assists with ensuring that there is order in the settlement and the structure represents the settlement when engaging with key stakeholders who have an interest in assisting the settlement with improving its living conditions including acquiring water services. The structure is made up of a total of fifteen members and it is further divided into two groups. The first group is referred to as the top six, it consists of the chairperson, deputy chairperson, secretary, deputy secretary, treasurer and the organiser. The second group is made of nine members who are referred to as additional members. The additional members are responsible for taking up the tasks and responsibilities of an absent or unavailable top six member.

Furthermore, the South African National Civic Organisation (SANCO) is a third player which plays the role of intermediary between the invented and invited spaces in Empolweni. SANCO is a civic movement that was established in 1992 by the residents of South Africa. According to its Constitution, SANCO was founded on the basic needs, aspirations and expectations of the masses of the people and the organisation pledges to ensure it commits to a unified, democratic, non-sexist, non-racist, non-exploitative South Africa based on the rights and values enshrined in the Bill of Rights of the Constitution of the RSA (South African National Civic Organisation, 2001). Furthermore, the Constitution of SANCO clearly states that SANCO is a non-political organisation as such it is an independent organisation that is not politically affiliated (South African National Civic Organisation, 2001), however, reports show that SANCO is one of the main alliances of the African National Congress (ANC) Political Party (Seekings, 1997; Zuern, 2004; Stadler, 1997). While the ward councillor denied these claims, arguing that SANCO is not politically affiliated and it represents the needs of all people without any political discrimination but some of the community leaders in Empolweni described SANCO as an organisation that is under the ANC, hence, the residents in the settlement had to become members of SANCO given that Empolweni falls under Ward 95 which is an ANC led ward. SANCO has lost many of its leaders to the ANC, the leaders were promised government positions and they were used to eliminate all possible opposition to the ANC within SANCO (Fakude, 2008). Many SANCO members have climbed the political ladder and became ward councillors in ANC led wards and others sit in parliament as part of the ANC. Concerns of SANCO being an alliance of the ANC have been raised especially when the organisation would have to mobilise citizens to protest against the unjust political system in ANC led wards (Zuern, 2004).

In Empolweni SANCO assists the settlement with the formation and operation of the community leadership structure. According to the community leaders and household respondents, to create the leadership structure SANCO calls a general meeting every year where all community members are present. In the meeting the community members are given the opportunity to select leaders among themselves. After the new leaders have been selected SANCO holds a separate meeting with the new structure where it verbally communicates with the members regarding what each of the different leadership positions entail. The leaders in the Empolweni Community Committee communicated that they are more accountable to SANCO than the community. SANCO is described as the organisation that ensures that the leaders in the community leadership structure uphold their moral principles when representing the community.

As shared by one of the Empolweni Community Committee leaders:

We are accountable to SANCO. SANCO is above all community leadership structures in informal settlements. If any of the community committee members behave in a corrupt manner SANCO calls them in a meeting and dismisses them from their leadership position (Empolweni Leadership Organiser, personal communication, 18/09/2023).

Furthermore, the community leaders shared that when they need to report the water supply needs and other community grievances to the invited public participation platforms, they first liaise with SANCO, they are not allowed to go direct to the invited public participation platforms.

According to one of the community leaders:

We cannot just go to the ward councillor without going to SANCO first. If we do that the ward councillor will ask us if we have reported the issue to SANCO before going to him, if not he will tell us to follow protocol by reporting the matter to SANCO and not him (Empolweni Additional Member, personal communication, 28/09/2023).

SANCO on behalf of the community leaders reports the grievances to the ward committee and ward councillor.

This view collaborated the ward councillor’s view who claimed that when comparing the communication hierarchy, he first considers SANCO’s views before communicating with the informal settlement leaders. In this instance SANCO plays an intermediary role between the invented and invited spaces in informal settlements.

Furthermore, the Ward 95 councillor working together with the ward committee in Empolweni are responsible for ensuring that the settlement has access to basic services including water services. These local government public participation platforms communicate with SANCO regarding the settlement’s grievances and reports the grievances to the CoCT. The CoCT municipality as per its Constitutional obligation and the Water Services Act 108, has the responsibility of ensuring that all the people under its area of jurisdiction have access to basic water services. Within its by-laws the CoCT states that it is responsible to ensure that at least one tap should be provided to 25 families within a range of 100 m.

Role of Invited and Invented Public Participation Platforms on Water Supply in Empolweni

The dire water conditions in Empolweni has resulted in the community being highly dependent on its community committee as the community representative to assist it with acquiring improved water services. According to the household respondents the community committee gets its mandate from the community. The community leaders constantly hold community meetings every Friday to provide feedback on issues that were discussed in previous meetings and listen to the needs of the community that are to be communicated to the ward committee and ward councillor as invited spaces. The community leaders communicate with the invited spaces through SANCO as the intermediary, with the aim of improving the living conditions in the settlement. As shared by the leaders that in every community meeting water challenges are at the top of the agenda. They have engaged with SANCO to report their water grievances to the ward councillor. The community leaders feel that going through SANCO before communicating with the ward councillor creates delays in getting responses and in having their water grievances addressed. The other challenge that emerges from going through SANCO before reaching the ward councillor is the issue of miscommunication when the settlement’s grievances are reported to the ward councillor and the CoCT.

As argued by one of the community leaders:

This thing of having to go through SANCO when we want to engage with the ward councillor is a waste of time and it delays the whole process of us receiving what we need. Just imagine we report to SANCO, SANCO goes to the ward councillor, the ward councillor goes to the CoCT. By the time the message reaches the CoCT the community is already impatient and asking us as leaders, when will the matter be resolved. To create more problems, sometimes the message received by the ward councillor from SANCO is miscommunicated. This results in further delays, as the CoCT would be busy finding solutions for the wrong issue (Empolweni Chairperson, personal communication, 21/09/2023).

These challenges have resulted in the community committee having to use different forms of engagement to try and acquire water supply for the settlement. The engagements used by the community committee varies from having meetings with the invited structures of participation to mobilising the community to protest, with the aim of capturing the attention of government institutions and any other institutions that can assist the settlement with the provision of water. By using the different forms of engagement the leaders hope that these engagements will speed up the process of water provision in the settlement.

According to one of the community committee leaders:

Fighting for the water needs of the community is not easy. The minimal response regarding our water issues from the ward councillor and the CoCT enforce us to become creative in order for them to take us seriously. We have spoken to SANCO and the ward councillor on multiple occasions regarding our water struggles, in 2019 we decided to mobilise the community and protest with the aim of capturing the attention of government and show them that we are serious about getting water access (Empolweni Deputy Secretary, personal communication, 21/09/2023).

The role played by Empolweni community committee in acquiring water supply for the settlement was further highlighted by the CoCT official that was interviewed in this study and the Ward 95 councillor. The interviewed municipal official described how the community leaders do not only assist the municipality in identifying the settlement’s service delivery needs, they further ensure the safety of the CoCT employees when the municipal truck goes to deliver water to the settlement.

As argued by the CoCT official:

Our members have been robbed multiple times when they go to supply water in Empolweni. This resulted in the municipality having to pay private security companies to escort the water truck when it goes to deliver water. We have started to work closely with the community committee in Empolweni and to be honest they have been really helpful. They have identified safer spots around the settlement where the water truck can stop and fill people’s water containers. Ever since then we have not had any challenges of being robbed. The leaders even warn us when there is a planned protest in the area so that the truck does not get attacked (City of Cape Town Official, Microsoft Teams communication, 28/09/2023).

The ward councillor claimed that informal settlement leadership structures make his job easier and bearable, especially given that he is in charge of ensuring that the basic needs of multiple communities that fall under Ward 95 are met. This translates to him having limited time to ensure that each community’s needs are met. The ward councillor further shared that whatever urgent service delivery related information that needs to be communicated to the settlement, he is able to go direct to the community committee without going through SANCO and he trusts that the leaders in the committee portrays the information correctly to the community on his behalf. As a result, he describes informal settlement leaders as his ears and voice on the ground.

Furthermore, the community committee leaders shared that the different types of engagements they have used to acquire water supply for the settlement have yield some level of success. The protest demonstration in 2019 resulted in the provision of a Jojo tank for the settlement by Lindiwe Sisulu who was the Minster of Human Settlements, Water and Sanitation at the time. The constant communication held with SANCO and the ward councillor resulted in the CoCT providing the settlement with truck water and having officials visit the settlement between March–April 2023 to tell the residents that there was a water supply project planned for the area. The water project would include an installation of communal standpipes in seven identified spots in the settlement. The project was planned to be implemented in 2023. However, the project has not yet been implemented instead in September 2023 the CoCT changed the number of identified spots where the standpipes would be installed from seven to four.

Regarding the water project the community leaders and household respondents shared that as much as they appreciate the planned project but the invited spaces fail to engage with the settlement on the type of water supply they will receive, if the identified spots are safe, the cause of the decrease from seven spots to four spots and what has been causing delays in the implementation of the project. According to the household respondents when the ward councillor and the CoCT officials went to the settlement to present the water services project the decisions were already made without the inputs of the settlement. These views were also supported by the community committee leaders.

According to one of the community leaders:

No, the leadership and the community was not involved in the decision making process around the type of water supply infrastructure and where it would be located. The City officials came and told us in a community meeting that there is a water project planned for the area and we accepted everything because we are desperate we need water access (Empolweni Additional Member, personal communication, 28/09/2023).

The community leaders further shared that the lack of communication and clarity regarding the water project from the ward councillor and CoCT has caused some tensions between the leadership structure and the community. Instead of blaming the ward councillor and the CoCT for the lack of communication the community blames the community leaders as the community representatives. This was further revealed by the study observations during the household interviews. Though the households shared their frustrations towards the invited public participation platforms, but they portrayed emotions of anger and disappointment towards the community committee as their leaders. The respondents voiced out that the community committee should be at the forefront pushing the CoCT to start with the implementation of the water project. The respondents further felt that the leaders should be part of the decision making process regarding the water project as representatives of the settlement and they should be aware of the exact time-frames and any changes around the water project.

According to one of the household respondents:

If you know how dedicated these leaders were in the beginning when there were evictions here, we trusted them but look where that got us. When we ask the leaders about the water project they should be able to give us a clear response. We as the community feel like the community committee leaders are misleading us, they know what is happening with the project but they want to be the only ones who benefit from it (Empolweni Household Respondent 3, personal communication, 29/09/2023).

However, the community leaders feel that the anger of the community is misplaced and they feel that the CoCT and the ward councillor do not care about the damage they are causing between the community and the community committee.

As argued by one of the community committee leaders:

We are also not sure what is causing the delays and when we ask SANCO to ask the ward councillor on our behalf we never get any response. The way that this issue is being handled can result in us as the leaders being attacked by the community, we are even labelled as liars because of this water project issue (Empolweni Additional Member, personal communication, 21/09/2023).

Majority of the leaders felt that if they communicated directly with the municipality, there would be clarity on what is causing the delays in the implementation of the project. However, the CoCT only listens to community grievances that are communicated through the ward councillor as per the public participation legislative framework.

As shared by one of the leaders:

If we would be acknowledged by the municipality as one of the public participation platforms, it would be easier for us to go directly to the municipality and get clear information on what is causing delays in the implementation of the water project. Now the challenge is that we go through SANCO and the ward councillor, yet, both structures are not giving us a clear answer to report back to the community (Empolweni Additional Member, personal communication, 21/09/2023).

The ward councillor also supported the view of having the community leadership structures acknowledged at the municipal level. However, his support emerges from the lack of knowledge the different leaders have regarding their leadership roles. According to the ward councillor if the leaders were to be acknowledged at the municipal level it would be mandatory for them to get training of what each leadership position entails. This would then make his job as the ward councillor more easier when communicating with the different leaders regarding their designated duties.

Discussion of the Results

The case of Empolweni highlights multiple important factors associated with how the inadequate public participation practices in the form of exclusion and disregard of informal settlement communities and their invented spaces, by invited public participation platforms enforced and exacerbated water struggles in the settlement. The first factor concerns the role of SANCO in the settlement. Though SANCO seems to play a good role in assisting the settlement with creating the leadership structure and ensuring that the structure is held accountable, but SANCO’s role as an additional structure that connects the settlement with the ward representatives is impractical. As highlighted in the findings that this creates delays in the delivery of services and it can also result in miscommunication further shifting the CoCT’s attention from focusing on the urgent reported community grievances to focus on other insignificant factors.

Furthermore, the statement made by the ward councillor that he listens to the views of SANCO more than those of the Empolweni Community Committee, further shows the weaknesses on how public participation is implemented and practiced by the invited spaces in the settlement. While the South African public participation framework states that ward committees and ward councillors are the legitimate invited spaces at local government which communities should liaise with, informal settlement community leadership structures as public participation platforms are catered for within the Effective Public Participation Guideline for Enhancing Public Participation (2013). The Guideline calls for the representation of interest groups such as informal settlement community leadership structures that are formed to influence public policy around the needs of informal settlement communities, at the ward level. The Guideline further encourages that together with ward committees and ward councillors municipalities should include other effective modes of communication between informal settlements and the municipality. In the case of Empolweni, the community has selected its community committee as its representative with which the ward councillor should liaise concerning the settlement’s water provision matters and not SANCO. Thus, preventing the community leadership structure as the chosen community representative to go directly to the ward councillor to report the settlement’s grievances is an infringement of Section 152 of the Constitution.

Additionally, prioritizing the views of SANCO over those of the settlement and the community committee by the Ward 95 councillor, who is aligned with the ANC administration further confirms that indeed SANCO is an ANC alliance (Seekings, 1997; Zuern, 2004; Stadler, 1997). Utilizing SANCO an ANC alliance, as an intermediary benefits the ward councillor by giving him control over the information disseminated to the community and the manner in which it is communicated. However, this works against the settlement as shown in the findings that SANCO as an intermediary serves as a hindrance for the community committee when it comes to providing information regarding the water supply project plans and it creates a distance between the settlement and its political representatives. This further highlights the argument made by Bénit-Gbaffou and Katsuara (2014) that invited spaces in informal settlements feel that they are themselves more legitimate shapers of policy than unelected community representatives such as informal settlement community leadership structures. This results in the invited spaces being territorial as the legitimate public participation platforms and to protect their territory from informal settlement community leadership structures, the invited spaces act as gatekeepers and controllers of information dissemination and resources allocation in informal settlement communities (Tshoose, 2015). In the case of Empolweni to protect its territory the ward councillor, as an ANC councillor, would rather overlook the community leaders and the community that voted it into power and work with SANCO as an ANC alliance. In this regard the case of Empolweni shows that the territorial nature and use of political affiliation by the ward councillor to govern on the ground has negative implications on how public participation is practiced in the settlement and it further has daunting implications on the settlement’s water supply. Additionally, having a civic organisation such as SANCO being indorsed and accommodated than the informal settlement leaders by the invited spaces, show the reasons why informal settlement community leaders join and form civic organisations as a strategy to drive the service delivery needs of their settlements (Koster & de Vries, 2012).

The other factor highlighted by the findings relates to the invited spaces making water supply decisions on behalf of Empolweni without engaging with the settlement. Although the ward councillor and CoCT official recognize the importance of the community committee, their acknowledgement seems to stem primarily from the support and assistance provided by the community committee to them. As stated by the ward councillor, the community committee serves as his voice to the settlement, significantly easing his workload as he manages several areas. The CoCT official sees the importance of the community committee when it comes to protecting the CoCT employees when delivering water to the settlement. As a result, the invited spaces in Empolweni overlook the committee as a public participation platform. This is revealed by the exclusion of the committee as the settlement’s representative when important water infrastructural decisions are made. The invited spaces failed to consult and involve the community committee in the planned water project’s decision making process. When the ward councillor and the CoCT went to address Empolweni, decisions regarding the type of water infrastructure that would be installed and where it be would located in the settlement were already taken by the invited public participation platforms without the inputs of the community. Though the CoCT has been providing the settlement with unimproved levels of water through truck water supply, however, it is apparent that the invited public participation platforms fail to ensure that the settlement is offered an opportunity to participate in local government matters including the type of water supply planned for the area. The case of Empolweni highlight Bazaanah and Litabe’s (2023) argument that decision making around water supply is dominated by a group of individuals with political and economic power and influence, thus, resulting in the exclusion of the powerless informal settlement communities from water supply decision making processes that directly impact their lives. The lack of public participation in Empolweni translated in the community being forced to accept decisions and plans that were made on its behalf.

Given the safety challenges in the settlement, which were also experienced by the CoCT when its truck went to deliver water in Empolweni, it would have been sensible for the ward councillor to include the settlement regarding the water project planned for the area. As argued by le Roux (2015) that public participation is a democratic decision making process that takes into consideration the views of citizens and makes decisions based not only on the opinions of the politically elected representatives. As previously stated that the Effective Public Participation Guideline for Enhancing Public Participation (2013) accommodates the inclusion of informal settlements communication channels such as community leadership structures at the municipal and ward level. Thus, the inclusion of Empolweni and its community committee regarding the settlement’s water supply matters would have ensured that issues of safety and distance to the access points and any other factors that would hinder water access would be taken into consideration when the project is finally implemented. Hence, engaging with the community leaders as the settlement’s communication channel regarding the water plans and project is a key public participation principle that the ward councillor failed to consider and implement in Empolweni. This further has the potential to continuously enforce and exacerbate the settlement’s water struggles even after the implementation of the water project.

The findings further highlight how challenges associated with poor public participation practices do not only affect the physical access to water in informal settlements, but they further create tensions and lack of trust between the invented spaces that operate in the settlements and the communities regarding the settlements’ water supply challenges. As presented in the Empolweni case that the lack of engagement and clarity from the ward councillor and the CoCT regarding the period planned for the water supply project and the causes of the delays in the implementation process resulted in tensions and lack of trust between the community committee and the residents of Empolweni. As a result, the shortcomings presented by invited spaces in the delivery of water in informal settlements has the potential and ability to create mistrust and destroy relationships between the invented spaces and the informal communities they represent. This results in informal settlements being more marginalised and lacking even the basic access to water supply and losing community leadership structures as their form of public participation platform and representation at local government. These conditions show that indeed invited spaces fail to achieve their purpose of public engagement in practice as they often tend to hinder rather than encourage local democracy by undermining and reducing poor citizens’ voices (Dube et al., 2021).

Additionally, the case of Empolweni reveals how informal settlements invented spaces have to find different forms of mobilisation and engagement to force the invited spaces and government at large to listen to the settlements' water grievances and take action to assist the communities with these challenges. Though the community committee cannot force the invited spaces to involve it and the community of Empolweni in the decision making process of the planned water supply project and give updates on the project’s implementation date, but the use of different mobilisation tactics yielded some positive outcomes for the settlement’s water supply. If the community committee did not mobilise the settlement to protest and never ensured that it continuously approaches SANCO and the ward councillor to report the water needs of the settlement, then Empolweni would not have received the Jojo Tank from Lindiwe Sisulu the 2019 Minster of Human Settlement, Water and Sanitation. Moreover, the CoCT would not have supplied the area with truck water and there would not be plans to install standpipes in the settlement. Through its efforts and fighting for the water needs of the community at large, the community committee has been able to put pressure on government to provide some levels of water to the settlement, even though the water provision is through unimproved water sources that provide irregular access. This further proves the views of scholars such as Koster and de Vries (2012); Miraftab (2004); Vivier and Sanchez-Betancourt (2020) who highlight that the choice of engagement used by invented spaces depends on what forms of mobilisation would be effective in getting the desired outcome during that particular period.

It is further important to emphasise that unlike the invited spaces that overlook and exclude informal settlements from decision making processes, the community committee involved the community in all the forms of mobilisation that were used, and as highlighted in the findings that the mandate of the committee comes from the settlement. Hence, invented public participation platforms such as community leadership structures have become important avenues for the marginalised who are often silenced to engage with political representatives and acquire basic services.

Moreover, while the community leaders, the household respondents and the ward councillor all expressed the various benefits that formal recognition of the community leadership structure at the municipal level could bring, this formal acknowledgement might undermine some of the fundamental reasons for its creation. These structures were originally established as invented spaces that are meant to ensure that the voices of the voiceless informal settlements occupants are represented at local government. Having the structures formally acknowledged at local government would mean that the structures would have to adhere and abide by the rules and regulations set for them at local government. This will result in the structures’ inability to challenge the existence of invited spaces that often exclude the poor with the hope of bringing societal change and resist the dominant government power that exist in invited spaces (Miraftab, 2004). Thus, the way that the Effective Public Participation Guideline for Enhancing Public Participation (2013) accommodates the importance of interest groups and other engagement channels at the municipal and ward levels, gives informal settlements community leadership structures the opportunity to be included in local government decision making processes without any limitations that would prevent them from fully representing the settlements and challenging invited spaces.

The case of Empolweni further shows the misalignment between policy and practice. Though the Effective Public Participation Guideline for Enhancing Public Participation (2013) clearly outlines the mechanisms that are meant to be implemented and improve the lack of public participation faced by informal settlement communities, the case of Empolweni shows that the Guideline exist on paper but it is not effectively implemented on the ground. Using Arnstein’s ladder of participation, the case of Empolweni lies at the bottom of the ladder under stages 1 and 2 which is considered to involve manipulation and therapy and a representation of non-participation as the invited spaces failed to include the informal settlement community leadership structures, as the settlements’ representatives from participating in planning of the water project.

Therefore, the exclusion and disregard of informal settlements and their community leadership structures in water supply plans at the municipal level enforce and exacerbate the water struggles faced by the residents of the settlements. These conditions force settlements such as Empolweni to make use of unimproved water supply sources such as; begging for water from other neighbourhoods and putting their lives at risk given the crime rate present in the settlement, depending on illegal connections that provide unreliable access, using their last funds to pay for illegal connections and buy water from neighbouring areas and residents being infringed of their right to water access by municipal water truck drivers who only allow them to fill one bucket per household and who do not come often to supply water in the settlement. Thus, the irregular and unpredictable water supply posed by the water sources are a barrier to water access for informal settlement residents such as those residing in Empolweni (Khatri & Vairavamoorthy, 2007; SERI, 2018). These challenges have resulted in Empolweni residents to live under unbearable conditions, having their human right to water infringed for years. These situations call for better public participation practices and the inclusion of informal settlements and their community leadership structures in decision making process regarding the settlements’ water supply plans.

Conclusion

Using Empolweni as a case study, this article has shown how the failure to encourage public participation by involving informal settlement communities and their invented spaces in the settlements’ water supply decision making processes by invited spaces, enforce and exacerbate water access struggles in such settlements. Throughout the Empolweni case the invented spaces failed to include the settlement’s community committee in the settlement’s water supply plans. As highlighted in the findings that the ward representatives and the CoCT representative acknowledge the importance of the community committee in Empolweni only when they will benefit from the existence of the leadership structure. Instead of using the community committee as its intermediary when communicating with the settlement, the ward representative used SANCO as its link to the settlement and upheld the views of SANCO above those of the community committee. As shown by the study findings that, while these conditions worked for the ward councillor it proved to be a failure for the settlement. It caused delays and miscommunication between the ward councillor and the municipality regarding the settlement’s service delivery needs. The settlement further had decisions regarding its water supply needs made by the ward councillor and the CoCT without it’s inputs. The study findings also revealed how the exclusion of informal settlements community leadership structures as the settlements’ representatives result in conflict and mistrust between the settlement and its community leaders. Thus, this study highlighted that indeed the exclusion of informal settlements such as Empolweni and their community leadership structures regarding planned water supply projects for the settlements, force the residents to use unimproved water sources that enforce the resident’s water struggles.

Furthermore, the study findings showed how informal settlements community leadership structures have to continuously use other methods such as protest demonstrations to force the invited spaces to listen to the settlement’s water grievances. Therefore, this study makes valuable knowledge contributions by highlighting that improved water access in informal settlements can be achieved by enhancing public participation, where the invited spaces allow informal settlements invented spaces as the representatives of the settlements, to participate in water supply decision making processes for the settlements. Giving informal settlements invented spaces the opportunity to participate in water supply decision making processes, will ensure that challenges that may hinder the residents’ water access are taken into consideration when municipalities provide water supply in informal settlements. Thus, this will further ensure that the water struggles faced by informal settlements occupants are dealt with and their water access is improved.

Though this study gave a brief enlightenment on why invited spaces overlook invented spaces in informal settlements, resulting in the invited spaces being ineffective in informal settlements, future research should give more attention and focus to the in-depth understanding of why invited spaces are particularly inefficient in urban informal settlements.