The political ecology of water, energy and food in the Gauteng City-Region

This project examines mining-induced ecological changes in three case study areas Blyvooruitzicht, Rustenburg and Secunda. It specifically explores the effects of heavy metals from mine-workings on the quality of water and soil in these case-study areas, as well as possible interventions for promoting urban resilience and sustainability of those mining and post-mining landscapes.

The GCR, as the centre of a century of gold, coal, platinum and other mineral extraction in South Africa, has well over 374 mine residue areas (Bobbins, 2013). This mining has contributed significantly to the shaping of the GCR’s biophysical and human landscapes. Its legacy of significant pollution effects on aquatic ecosystems – the discharge of chemicals, heavy metals and sediment into water flows and bodies – has led to problems around the availability of clean water for local communities. Additionally, mining operations require significant amounts of water for various purposes such as ore processing, dust control and worker consumption. Moreover, this anthropogenic activity can encroach on agricultural land, affecting local food production. That disruption can lead to soil degradation and loss of arable land. Mining operations are also energy-intensive, involving drilling, blasting, dust suppression from roads and waste dumps, mineral processing, transportation of slurry through pipelines and other processes.

This research project focuses on these complex and interconnected relationships among water, energy and food systems, examining the synergies, conflicts and trade-offs over their access and use. It recognises that the current ecological conditions in Blyvooruitzicht, Rustenburg and Secunda are variously explicable both by a pre-colonial and apartheid past, as well as a post-apartheid present, arguing that the current ecological conditions are not inevitable but are varyingly the results of political economic choices. The heavy metals contaminating mining areas could have been managed differently, and different actors (farmers, households, communities, environmental organisations and mining companies) have had specific engagements with this eventuality. The study contributes to the discussions on social equity, resource distribution and why some communities near mining operations seem to be coping better than others.