Cited by 88Water resources management and optimizationWater Resource Management and QualityWater Resources and Sustainability

Spatial inequality in water access and water use in South Africa

Cole, Megan J., Bailey, Richard M., Cullis, James D. S., New, Mark G.·2018·Water Policy

Abstract

The importance of measuring inequalities in sustainable development is reflected in the requirement to disaggregate national data for the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). In this paper, piped water access, water use and water stress are mapped and reported at national, provincial, district, municipal, town and ward levels, and urban and rural areas. The results show that although 45% of the population has water access in their dwelling this ranges from 0.07% to 100% at ward level, with a high level of inequality (Gini index of 0.36). National per capita water use is 208 litres per person per day (l/c/d) but ranges from 8 l/c/d to 2,414 l/c/d at town level, with a Gini index of 0.27. The analysis shows that social factors, such as water access and income, and not natural factors, such as rainfall or runoff, have the greatest influence on per capita water use. The paper provides the first in-depth analysis of per capita water use at the local level across South Africa and suggests new water indicators that could support equitable allocation of water resources and SDG reporting.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2166/wp.2017.111

Cites

22 of 22 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The reserves designated by the Natives Land Act were located in areas with moderate to high rainfall, scattered throughout South Africa's eastern half, receiving between 500 and 2,000 mm of annual precipitation.

    “However, evidence suggests the reserves were located in areas with moderate to high rainfall. Fast and Kallis (2004) document that these reserves were scattered throughout South Africa's eastern half, a region receiving between 500 and 2,000 mm of annual precipitation. This is considered high rainfall for the South African climate (Cole et al. 2018: 38).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Authors
Cole, M. J., Bailey, R. M., Cullis, J. D. S., & New, M. G.
Affiliations
  • University of Cape Town (ZA)
  • University of Oxford (GB)
  • Aurecon South Africa, Aurecon Centre, 1 Century City Drive, Waterford Precinct, Century City, Cape Town 7441, South Africa
  • University of East Anglia (GB)
Corresponding author
Cole, Megan J.
Venue
Water Policy
Published
2017-12-20
Volume
20
Issue
1
Pages
37-52
ISSN
  • 1366-7017 (ISSN-L)
  • 1996-9759
OpenAlex
W2776083579
Cited by
88
References
22
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 3
FWCI
3.68
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Water Policy (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Ocean Engineering › Water resources management and optimization
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Water Science and Technology › Water Resource Management and Quality
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Water Science and Technology › Water Resources and Sustainability
Keywords
regional disparities, water access, per capita water consumption, water stress, piped water, Sustainable Development Goals, Gini coefficient, urban-rural disparities, water allocation, South Africa

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review