Inserting rights and justice into urban resilience : a focus on everyday risk

Resilience building has become a growing policy agenda, particularly for urban risk management. While much of the resilience agenda has been shaped by policies and discourses from the global North, its applicability for cities of the global south, particularly African cities, has not been sufficiently assessed. Focusing on rights of urban citizens as the object to be made resilient, rather than physical and ecological infrastructures, may help to address many of the root causes that characterize the unacceptable risks that urban residents face on a daily basis. Linked to this idea, we discuss four entry points for grounding a rights and justice orientation for urban resilience. First, notions of resilience must move away from narrow, financially-orientated risk analyses. Second, opportunities must be created for “negotiated resilience”, to allow for attention to processes that support these goals, as well as for the integration of diverse interests. Third, achieving resilience in ways that do justice to the local realities of diverse urban contexts necessitates taking into account endogenous, locally situated processes, knowledges and norms. And finally, urban resilience needs to be placed within the context of global systems, providing an opportunity for African contributions to help reimagine the role that cities might play in these global finance, politics and science processes

Preexisting autoantibodies to type I IFNs underlie critical COVID-19 pneumonia in patients with APS-1

Patients with biallelic loss-of-function variants of AIRE suffer from autoimmune polyendocrine syndrome type-1 (APS-1) and produce a broad range of autoantibodies (auto-Abs), including circulating auto-Abs neutralizing most type I interferons (IFNs). These auto-Abs were recently reported to account for at least 10% of cases of life-threatening COVID-19 pneumonia in the general population. We report 22 APS-1 patients from 21 kindreds in seven countries, aged between 8 and 48 yr and infected with SARS-CoV-2 since February 2020. The 21 patients tested had auto-Abs neutralizing IFN-α subtypes and/or IFN-ω; one had anti–IFN-β and another anti–IFN-ε, but none had anti–IFN-κ. Strikingly, 19 patients (86%) were hospitalized for COVID-19 pneumonia, including 15 (68%) admitted to an intensive care unit, 11 (50%) who required mechanical ventilation, and four (18%) who died. Ambulatory disease in three patients (14%) was possibly accounted for by prior or early specific interventions. Preexisting auto-Abs neutralizing type I IFNs in APS-1 patients confer a very high risk of life-threatening COVID-19 pneumonia at any age.publishedVersio

IRES working paper series, no. 2014-05

The recognition of the right to water as a universal human right marks a milestone in the realm of water governance, and yet scholars and policy makers continue to debate the successes and failures of its implementation as the ways this right is negotiated, experienced and struggled for in different contexts still remain key challenges. This paper looks at the on the ground implementation of the human right to water by focusing on lived experiences and material conditions of water access in an impoverished urban area in Cape Town – Site C, Khayelitsha. One of the main findings of this work is that the material conditions of water access and the social and cultural associations they carry accentuate an introduced inequality between shack dwellers and owners of formal housing. I will argue that a focus on materiality within the scholarship on lived experiences with rights can not only add more nuance and better understanding of the quotidian experiences with the right to water, but it can also reveal levels of difference and experiences of relative marginalization produced by the material conditions of water access. I will also argue that the lens of ‘lived experiences of rights’ can help reveal socio-political processes of marginalisation that may remain invisible if we only look at political conditions of implementation (e.g., policy) and at the extent of basic infrastructure coverage (e.g., access to basic water services).Science, Faculty ofResources, Environment and Sustainability (IRES), Institute forReviewedGraduat

Resilience in South Africa’s urban water landscape

Resilience is becoming a core concept in water governance. It refers to the ability of communities, cities or regions to withstand the challenges posed by an increased intensity and frequency of floods and droughts.Science, Faculty ofResources, Environment and Sustainability (IRES), Institute forUnreviewedFacultyGraduat

Water services infrastructure in Cape Town

In this paper we argue that in South Africa the state is understood and narrated in multiple ways, notably differentiated by interactions with service provision infrastructure and the ongoing housing formalisation process. We trace various contested narratives of the state and of citizenship that emerge from interactions with urban water service infrastructures. In effect, the housing formalisation process rolls out through specific physical infrastructures, including, but not limited to, water services (pipes, taps, water meters). These infrastructures bring with them particular logics and expectations that contribute to a sense of enfranchisement and associated benefits to some residents, while others continue to experience inadequate services, and linked exclusions. More specifically, we learn that residents who have received newly built homes replacing shack dwellings in the process of formalisation more often narrate the state as legitimate, stemming from the government role as service provider. Somewhat surprisingly, these residents at times also suggest compliance with obligations and expectations for payment for water and responsible water consumption. In contrast, shack dwellers more often characterise the state as uncooperative and neglectful, accenting state failure to incorporate alternative views of what constitutes appropriate services. With an interest in political ecologies of the state and water services infrastructures, this paper traces the dynamic processes through which states and citizenship are mutually and relationally understood, and dynamically evolving. As such, the analysis offers insights for ongoing state-society negotiations in relation to changing infrastructure access in a transitioning democracy.Science, Faculty ofResources, Environment and Sustainability (IRES), Institute forReviewedFacultyGraduat

Water services, lived citizenship, and notions of the state in marginalised urban spaces: The case of Khayelitsha, Cape Town, South Africa

In this paper we argue that in South Africa the state is understood and narrated in multiple ways, notably differentiated by interactions with service provision infrastructure and the ongoing housing formalisation process. We trace various contested narratives of the state and of citizenship that emerge from interactions with urban water service infrastructures. In effect, the housing formalisation process rolls out through specific physical infrastructures, including, but not limited to, water services (pipes, taps, water meters). These infrastructures bring with them particular logics and expectations that contribute to a sense of enfranchisement and associated benefits to some residents, while others continue to experience inadequate services, and linked exclusions. More specifically, we learn that residents who have received newly built homes replacing shack dwellings in the process of formalisation more often narrate the state as legitimate, stemming from the government role as service provider. Somewhat surprisingly, these residents at times also suggest compliance with obligations and expectations for payment for water and responsible water consumption. In contrast, shack dwellers more often characterise the state as uncooperative and neglectful, accenting state failure to incorporate alternative views of what constitutes appropriate services. With an interest in political ecologies of the state and water services infrastructures, this paper traces the dynamic processes through which states and citizenship are mutually and relationally understood, and dynamically evolving. As such, the analysis offers insights for ongoing state-society negotiations in relation to changing infrastructure access in a transitioning democracy

Tracing and situating water resilience across scales

Under increasing urbanization and climate change impacts, many cities today are facing higher risks of water scarcity, flooding, or water pollution. Building resilience in the water sector is widely recognized as a key objective across scales—from global to local. However, there remain key gaps in theoretical and empirical understanding of how resilience thinking is to be applied in the context of water systems and water governance. In addressing these gaps, this dissertation draws on several methods to theorize and develop a situated understanding of “water resilience”—attentive to specific biophysical environments, socio-political contexts, and lived experiences. I first provide a comprehensive overview of how resilience ideas articulate with contemporary thinking in water governance and water resource management (Chapter 2). I find that the resilience-informed water governance literature remains fragmented and predominantly centered on conventional approaches and framings. It thus still lacks integrative or innovative approaches that encompass the various dimensions of the water system. However, I also find that while debates about how to theorize or operationalize resilience in relation to different systems—social or biophysical—may be unresolved, defining resilience is likely not a key factor in how experts think it should be operationalized (Chapter 3). Instead, realizing resilience involves focusing on the trade-offs, tensions and conflicts that arise from resilience building efforts in different contexts. I draw on evidence from fieldwork in Cape Town to document and compare different water resilience framings and to critically examine their implications in the context of Cape Town’s municipal water management. I find that various notions of water resilience co-exist in tension with each other and with resilience frameworks imposed by external actors. Situating these resilience debates in Cape Town’s marginalized urban spaces further demonstrates that these sites are central to urban social-hydrological resilience despite being physically located at the periphery. These results reveal conflicts and disconnections that inhibit socio-hydrological resilience in Cape Town. Ultimately, this dissertation argues that water resilience is a fruitful boundary concept whose application, however, requires unpacking and addressing fragmented governance processes, power and inequality.Science, Faculty ofResources, Environment and Sustainability (IRES), Institute forGraduat

Rethinking the human right to water: Water access and dispossession in Botswana’s Central Kalahari Game Reserve

This paper engages debates regarding the human right to water through an exploration the recent legal battle between San and Bakgalagadi and the government of Botswana regarding access to water in the Central Kalahari Game Reserve. The paper reviews the legal events that led to the realization of the human right to water through a decision of the Court of Appeal of Botswana in 2011 and the discursive context in which these events took place. We offer a contextual evaluation of the processes that allowed the actual realization of the human right to water for the residents of the Central Kalahari Game Reserve, revisiting and extending dominant lines of inquiry related to the human right to water in policy and academic debates. Adding to these discussions, we suggest the use of ‘dispossession’ as an analytical lens is a useful starting point for a conceptual reframing of the human right to water. Doing so helps to expose some of the problems with the public/private binary, often at the centre of these debates, allowing for greater nuance regarding the potential of the human right to water in different contexts. Copyright statement: “NOTICE: this is the author’s version of a work that was accepted for publication in Geoforum. Changes resulting from the publishing process, such as peer review, editing, corrections, structural formatting, and other quality control mechanisms may not be reflected in this document. Changes may have been made to this work since it was submitted for publication. A definitive version was subsequently published in Geoforum, [VOL49, (October, 2013)] http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2013.06.012¨Science, Faculty ofResources, Environment and Sustainability (IRES), Institute forReviewedFacult

Expert views on strategies to increase water resilience: evidence from a global survey

Scholars and policy-makers are advocating for increasing the resilience of water systems, both social and biophysical, to climate change impacts, and global environmental change more broadly. But what is "water resilience," and what does it imply for water resources management and water governance? Generally, water resilience may include ecological aspects of water quality or flood mitigation, engineered infrastructure to ensure safe and reliable water supply and to mitigate floods, and the socially inclusive and equitable governance of these systems. Following this, our goal was twofold: (1) explore and draw out a comprehensive set of water resource management strategies across sectors that are likely to contribute to increased resilience, and (2) investigate whether disciplinary divides are indeed a barrier toward convergence around key water resilience actions. To address these two gaps, we drew on a survey of experts in resilience and various aspects of water management and governance (n = 420), and aimed to synthesize their views on the specific strategies that can help enhance water resilience. Specifically, we surveyed experts across various water domains from ecosystem management to drought and flood management. Overall, we found that while debates about how to theorize or operationalize resilience in relation to different systems - social or biophysical - may be unresolved, there is considerable convergence among various experts about which actions are likely to make water systems more resilient to increasing risks and uncertainties. The most widely agreed upon strategies for building water resilience revolve around improved ecosystem health, integration across scales, and adaptation to change