Emergent governance responses to shocks to critical provisioning systems

The research investigates how the structure and functioning of formal and informal governance arrangements, and associated infrastructure, influence a city's response to major environmental disturbances. The authors argue that disruptions to critical provisioning systems (e.g., water and food) not only impact resource access but also challenge the legitimacy and authority of actors involved in distribution. Critical goods are often provided through a mix of public and private means, potentially leading to exclusion. The study emphasizes the need for stable provisioning arrangements that guarantee access to essential resources during disruptions. Governance of critical resources involves ensuring infrastructure reliability, managing access rights, mitigating entitlement failures, and distributing economic, moral, and political rewards. These goals often involve complex interactions between public and private actors, sometimes within a single decision-making forum or across multiple forums. The commodification of resources like water often means private actors profit from reliable infrastructure, while the public sector typically addresses risk of entitlement failures. Shocks to these systems highlight interdependencies and governance limitations, revealing where existing arrangements succeed or fail and potentially prompting innovation. However, there's limited understanding of how actors and institutions shape infrastructure for critical goods and services, or how responses to disturbances shape governance arrangements. This is particularly complex when resources are considered citizens' rights, as with water and food in South Africa, where states are obligated to guarantee access, yet private actors play significant roles. The paper focuses on Cape Town's 'Day Zero' drought and the subsequent COVID-19 pandemic, examining how these crises revealed and altered the roles of different actors in resource provisioning.

The paper draws on existing literature highlighting the importance of governance arrangements in shaping responses to disruptions (Janssen et al., 2007; Quigley et al., 2017, 2018; Tellman et al., 2018). It cites studies on the challenges of ensuring equitable access to water and food in contexts where both public and private actors are involved (Finewood & Holifield, 2015; Schwartz et al., 2015; Sutherland et al., 2015; Rodina & Harris, 2016). The authors also reference work on the governance of rights, risks, and rewards in resource provisioning (Sen, 1990; Hodbod & Eakin, 2015; Amicelle et al., 2019; Eakin et al., 2022), the complexities of interactions among private and public actors (Auerbach et al., 2018; Kooy, 2014; Lubell, 2013), and the challenges of polycentric governance (Berardo & Lubell, 2019; Berardo et al., 2015). The literature review also includes studies examining the role of the state and private actors in food and water provisioning in South Africa (Moyo & Thow, 2020; Yates & Harris, 2018), highlighting the complexities of hybrid governance structures. The authors mention examples of polycentric governance in other sectors, such as policing, which have implications for equity (Brodeur, 2010; Bayley & Shearing, 2001).

The study uses two case studies from Cape Town: the 2017-2019 'Day Zero' drought and the 2020-2021 COVID-19 pandemic. The drought case study focuses on the emergence of Water Service Intermediaries (WSIs), private entities authorized to supply water to end-users during the crisis. Data for this case comes from interviews with five WSIs, municipal politicians, and a quasi-public economic development agency representative, conducted in 2021-22. Ethical approval was granted by Arizona State University's IRB, and interviewees provided verbal consent. The data was supplemented by existing interviews from the Cape Town Drought Response Learning Initiative. The COVID-19 case study examines the rise of Community Action Networks (CANs), grassroots groups that provided food relief during the pandemic lockdown. Data collection for the CANs case began in April 2020, involving interviews with activists from eight CANs and two metropolitan-level coordinating groups. Three rounds of interviews were conducted between April 2020 and March 2021, with ethical approval granted by the University of Cape Town and informed consent obtained from all participants. Observations of online discussions also contributed to the data. Both case studies provide qualitative data on the roles and responsibilities of actors in resource distribution, rights, and risk management before, during, and after each crisis. The analysis highlights how the crises made implicit roles visible, how actors were enrolled in new functions, and how rewards were distributed.

The drought case study shows how the water crisis prompted affluent residents and businesses to seek alternative water sources, leading to the emergence of WSIs. These private entities invested in infrastructure (boreholes, water treatment) to maintain operations. The City initially supported this, but as the crisis subsided, it moved to reclaim control over water infrastructure and revenue, largely ending WSI contracts. WSIs reported both empowerment and frustration; they gained experience but also lost long-term opportunities for partnership with the City. The COVID-19 pandemic, impacting low-income households' incomes, created a food security crisis. Community Action Networks (CANs) emerged, utilizing social networks to identify those in need, gather resources, and distribute food through vouchers and community kitchens. CANs built partnerships across communities, highlighting the unequal impact of the pandemic. While the state struggled to respond effectively, CANs filled the gap in food provision. However, donor fatigue and the need for sustainable solutions led to some CANs formalizing as nonprofits or diversifying their activities. The crisis prompted a dialogue between the state, civil society, and academia about the future of food system governance, focusing on urban agriculture and food security. The study contrasts the centralized, public-sector-dominated water system with the more decentralized food system, which is heavily reliant on private actors. The drought highlighted the City's vested interest in maintaining control over water infrastructure and revenue, while the pandemic revealed the state's limited role in ensuring food security. Both cases demonstrate how shocks can lead to governance innovation, but that existing power dynamics and infrastructure constraints can limit the sustainability of these changes.

The findings demonstrate that systemic shocks can generate change in resource governance, exposing limitations of existing arrangements and prompting innovation by non-state actors. The study highlights the divergence between resource provisioning and risk management functions, often handled by different actors. Non-state actors stepped in to address humanitarian needs and the economic risks to businesses. The responses illustrate how urgency fosters creativity and resource investment, but also how established power structures and infrastructure constrain longer-term change. The contrasting responses to the drought and pandemic highlight how the characteristics of resource systems shape resilience and innovation. The modular and adaptive nature of food infrastructure enabled more flexible, decentralized responses by CANs. However, the rigid water infrastructure and the City's control over it hindered long-term decentralization despite short-term WSI successes. The study challenges the assumption that polycentric governance is always feasible or desirable, showing potential tensions between resilience and equity.

The study shows that crises can create opportunities for innovation in resource governance, but the sustainability of such changes is contingent on various factors, including existing power dynamics and infrastructure. The contrasting experiences of water and food provisioning during the drought and pandemic in Cape Town highlight the importance of understanding the specific characteristics of critical resource systems when designing resilience strategies. Future research should focus on understanding the conditions under which governance innovations initiated during crises can become institutionalized and contribute to more equitable and resilient provisioning systems.

The study's reliance on qualitative data from a specific city limits the generalizability of findings to other contexts. The limited number of WSI’s interviewed might not fully represent the diversity of experiences within that group. The research might have been influenced by the selection process for CANs. The short timeframe of the COVID-19 data collection might not fully capture long-term impacts. Future studies could incorporate quantitative data and a wider range of case studies.