2. Key parameters applied in the model
2.6 Current service levels and backlogs
community and social services sports and recreation
Water supply and sanitation
Data on estimated access to water and sanitation in 2009 was received from the Department of Water Affairs, by municipality and Department of Water Affairs (DWAF) settlement type.
Inadequate access to water was defined as a standpipe further than 200 meters from the dwelling, or less.
Inadequate access to sanitation was defined as an inadequate pit latrine (i.e. not a ventilation improved pit (VIP)) or less. Note that chemical toilets were defined as inadequate.
Table 2.8 shows the total backlog in access to water by households, according to Census 2001, the Department of Water Affairs 2007 data and 2009 data, per municipal sub-category.
Table 2.9 shows the total backlog in access to sanitation by households, according to Census 2001 and the Department of Water Affairs 2007 and 2009 data, per municipal sub-category.
25
Informal Informal Traditional Medium Formal
single dwelling backyard dwelling density dwelling
% % % % %
Urban-formal 10 1 12 78
Urban-informal 43 2 5 2 43
Rural-informal 12 28 65
Rural-formal 5 12 74
Total 8 5 10 6 70
Number of households 1 045 000 689 000 1 349 000 833 000 9 008 000
Total need for adequate shelter 1 045 000 689 000 406 000 Table 2.7: Access to housing types in base year (2009)
Department of Department of
Census 2001: Water Affairs 2007: Water Affairs 2009:
Water backlog Water backlog Water backlog
% % %
A 11 6 2
B1 19 9 4
B2 25 13 10
B3 23 9 4
B4 61 30 25
All 27 13 9
Table 2.8: Backlogs for water supply39
39 While there are concerns about the Department of Water Affairs’ methodology (as there are with all current backlog calculation methodologies) the department’s figures are taken here as they are considered to be the best available.
Department of Department of
Census 2001: Water Affairs 2007: Water Affairs 2009:
Sanitation backlog Sanitation backlog Sanitation backlog
% % %
A 19 12 11
B1 34 23 20
B2 37 23 21
B3 47 30 27
B4 80 54 44
All 42 27 24
Table 2.9: Backlogs for sanitation
40 Municipal categories- A: metropolitan; B1: secondary cities; B2: large town with urban core; B3: small town as urban core; B4: rural town with no urban core; C1: district which is not a water service authority (WSA); C2: district which is a WSA.
41 The total households figure reported by the Department of Energy differs from the total households figure used in the MSFM (12,793,837) which is based on Community Survey 2007 household sizes.
42The Department of Transport database does not distinguish between graded and gravel roads, so the percentage of graded roads from MIIF 5 has been used.
2009 data used for MIIF 7
Backlog Backlog Compare
Municipal Total Households 2009 2009 with MIIF 5
category households served (households) (% of households) (2007 data) %
A 4 641 858 3 689 064 952 794 21 22
B1 2 159 096 1 648 860 510 236 24 26
B2 1 060 494 801 113 259 382 24 28
B3 1 617 109 1 190 932 426 176 26 31
B4 2 970 266 1 721 017 1 249 250 42 46
DMA 22 911 15 561 7 349 32
Total 12 471 734 9 066 547 3 405 187 27 32
Table 2.10: Backlogs for electricity
41
Electricity
According to the Department of Energy, in 2008, 73%
of households were connected to the grid. Statistics for the households served and backlogs as a proportion of households per municipal category40are provided in Table 2.10.
The backlog figure of 27% of households is higher than the Community Survey 2007 data, which reported that 80% of households use electricity for lighting, suggesting that the backlog would be 20%.
The Department of Energy (DoE) figures have been used in the model.
Roads
The latest national level data available for municipal roads is a database on road length and condition compiled by the South African National Roads Agency
Limited (SANRAL) on behalf of the national Department of Transport (2010). The total road lengths for national, provincial and metro roads were provided to SANRAL by the provincial and metro road authorities. This data set considers metros to be the 6 official metros and the 3 aspirant metros. The road length data for the remaining 228 municipalities has been calculated by subtracting the national, provincial and metro lengths from the total. However, there remains an estimated 140,000 km of unproclaimed road that have not been assigned to any road authority. As these roads are not currently an official municipal responsibility, they have been excluded from this analysis, resulting in a total municipal road length of 405,000 km. It must be noted that only 14% of the total municipal road length was captured in the data from the sample of 50 municipalities. Thus, 86% of the municipal road length is based on an estimate.
Paved Gravel Graded
A 39 851 9 441 3 077
B1 12 356 25 000 16 200
B2 7 288 42 000 7 000
B3 8 003 40 000 6 982
B4 21 875 141 000 25 000
Total 89 373 257 441 58 259
Table 2.11: Road lengths by surface per municipal sub-category, according to the Department of Transport (2010) roads database (adjusted by the MIIF 7 project team)
42
The previous best available data was the national Department of Transport’s Assessment of the Municipal Roads Network, undertaken in 2007, which was used in the MIIF 5. A comparison between these two data sets (Tables 2.12 and 2.13) shows a 12% difference in the metro road length and a 75% difference in the total municipal road length. The greatest discrepancy is in the length of gravel roads in non-metro municipalities, which is where most of the uncertainty regarding road length and responsibility lies.
It is clear that a large degree of uncertainty still exists around the actual length of the municipal road network, which is compounded by the large number of unproclaimed roads. As the DoT 2010 database is the best available source of data, this data set has been used in the model.
Some interesting statistics can be abstracted from this data in Table 2.14:
The finding from this analysis is that B4 municipalities have a high level of obligation to manage roads in comparison with other municipal sub-categories.
These roads may only be required to carry low volumes of traffic but nevertheless require proper maintenance and rehabilitation.
Waste management
StatsSA’s Community Survey 2007 reveals that, as expected, service levels are highest in the metros, with an estimated 89% of households having kerbside waste removal. On the other end of the spectrum, the low capacity, rural municipalities (B4s) experience the lowest access levels. Overall, 61% of households had access to kerbside removal, 2% communal dumping and 29%
relying on-site disposal. An estimated 7% of households have no or inadequate access to waste disposal.
27
Department of Department of Difference
Transport 2007 Transport 2010 %
Paved 38 442 39 851 4
Gravel 6 185
12 519 53
Tracks 2 016
Total 46 643 52 369 12
Table 2.12: Metro road length comparison
Department of Department of Difference
Transport 2007 Transport 2010 %
Paved 86 730 89 373 3
Gravel 118 483
316 619 118
Tracks 26 694
Total 231 907 405 992 75
Table 2.13: Total municipal road length comparison
43All surfaces’ is the total of all roads which includes, paved, gravel and earth surfaced roads.
Sub-category Length/Households/Metres
Paved Paved and gravel All surfaces
All 7,0 27,0 31,6
A 8,1 10,0 10,6
B1 5,4 16,3 23,4
B2 6,5 44,1 50,3
B3 4,9 29,4 33,7
B4 7,7 57,2 65,9
Table 2.14: Road length statistics normalised per household
43
These results are very different from those available in 2007, used for MIIF 5, which indicated that the extent of kerbside removal was only 41%.
Municipal public services
As noted above, the MIIF 7 includes new information on service levels for municipal public services. But the basic structure for costing, with inadequate, basic and full service levels is retained for the MSFM. However, there is insufficient information available in a nationally consistent structure to allow for reasonably accurate data relating to service levels to be gathered. Therefore, assumptions have had to be made, as Table 2.16 follows: