Water tankering as a short-term solution in water provision has been scrutinised for its alignment with sustainable development, which prioritises resource conservation and equitable distribution. In the context of this study, sustainable development refers to the pursuit of water provision strategies that meet current human needs without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own. It emphasises social equity, environmental protection and economic viability as mutually reinforcing goals. Within South African municipalities, sustainable development therefore entails ethical water governance, long-term infrastructure investment and participatory decision-making that ensures all citizens – especially marginalised groups – have equitable access to safe and reliable water.

This study adopts sustainable development not merely as an environmental principle but as an ethical and governance framework against which water tankering practices are evaluated. Sustainable development, in this sense, provides the moral and analytical lens through which the ethical implications of water tankering are examined. It calls for decisions that balance immediate humanitarian relief with environmental responsibility and institutional accountability. Water reallocation based on sustainable thresholds is crucial to meet excess demand effectively, reinforcing the need for tanker operations to adhere to sustainable water management practices. The ethical considerations involved in water tankering, especially within South African municipalities, further underscore the importance of ethical decision-making to support sustainability and social equity in water distribution. Al-Jawad et al. (2019:220) highlight that integrating sustainable development principles within water management can serve as a guiding framework for investments in water systems, with the potential to balance short-term needs and long-term goals of universal access to safe water.

Sustainable development in this study therefore functions as both a benchmark and a critique: it is a benchmark insofar as it defines what ethical and resilient water governance should achieve, and a critique insofar as water tankering, as currently practised, often falls short of these ideals. By contrasting the temporary, resource-intensive nature of tankering with the principles of sustainability, this study highlights how short-term relief efforts may inadvertently perpetuate inequity, dependency and environmental degradation.

Omarova et al. (2019) point to the need for holistic approaches in water resource management, where social, economic, and environmental factors are addressed concurrently to ensure sustainable outcomes. Dai, Li and Chen (2021) emphasise the integration of sustainability within water delivery systems, arguing for a comprehensive strategy that balances immediate needs with broader developmental goals. Accordingly, this study positions sustainable development as a normative goal for ethical water governance – demanding that municipalities transition from reactive measures such as tankering towards proactive, long-term water infrastructure planning. While the literature collectively supports the notion of water tankering within a sustainable framework, a more critical evaluation of these sources could have enriched the review, offering a stronger basis for understanding the complex intersections of immediate water supply solutions and sustainable development practices.

The governance challenges in water provision are multifaceted, encompassing technical, social and ethical dimensions. A considerable portion of the literature identifies ineffective institutional frameworks, corruption and insufficient community engagement as core issues disrupting optimal water governance. For instance, Kwami and Tyler (2020) emphasise that adaptive governance is crucial for ensuring public accountability in water provisioning, and it is particularly important in diverse urban contexts where governance models vary significantly. Meanwhile, Mthiyane, Wissink and Chiwawa (2022) argue that socioeconomic disparities complicate water service delivery, particularly in rural areas where marginalised communities often receive inadequate services, exacerbating local inequities. The failure to secure equitable water access leads to broader implications for public health and community well-being, ultimately undermining social cohesion and fostering conflict over dwindling resources.

The underlying causes for such governance challenges stem largely from historical inequities, financial mismanagement and environmental pressures. Chiwawa and Wissink (2024) highlights the deep-rooted systemic issues within South African governance structures that have perpetuated failures in service delivery, especially regarding water and sanitation. Similarly, Mthiyane et al. (2022) state that service delivery challenges reflect a lack of comprehensive strategies that address systemic governance failures, inadequate funding and poor infrastructural development. The increasing strain on water resources because of climate change and urbanisation further complicates these challenges, emphasising the need for innovative governance models that prioritise ecological sustainability and community participation. Geographical disparities also play a significant role; for instance, disparities in fiscal autonomy between cities impact local governments’ capacity to effectively manage water resources, which can result in inconsistent service quality (Kithatu-Kiwekete 2013).

The consequences of these governance challenges are disproportionately felt by vulnerable populations, who typically lack the political clout needed to influence decision-making processes. Informal and decentralised water systems can provide partial solutions, but they often fail to meet long-term needs in a socially just manner. Those experiencing inequitable service delivery not only face immediate challenges regarding water quality and availability but also suffer broader socioeconomic impacts, which further entrench existing inequalities. This dynamic benefits those in power, as governance failures can enable the privatisation of water services, yielding profits for private investors while compromising the public good (Bresnihan 2016). Additionally, integrating ethical principles into water provision could promote greater fairness and accountability. The intertwined nature of these challenges and ethical dimensions underscores the necessity for holistic approaches that extend beyond mere efficiency metrics to incorporate equity and justice within water governance paradigms (Hutete & Sibanda 2022).

The role of political influences in water management is complex and pervasive, shaping policies, resource distribution and the engagement of stakeholders across various levels of governance. Studies by Dewan, Mukherji and Buisson (2015) highlight the historical shifts in water management in coastal Bangladesh, observing that although depoliticised community-managed models emerged because of donor demands, local communities still advocate for greater political involvement from elected representatives. Similarly, Suhardiman, Karki and Bastakoti (2020) underscore the intertwined nature of politics and water governance, suggesting that power dynamics significantly impact water quality governance and decision-making processes. However, while attempts are made to frame water governance as a technical issue, these studies collectively argue that political factors are integral and unavoidable, affecting both local and transboundary water management.

Despite efforts to neutralise governance frameworks, political interference continues to complicate sustainable water management, often exacerbating challenges rather than fostering resilience. Muharram et al. (2021) explore how political pressures intersect with ecological considerations, illustrating the challenges in achieving sustainable governance when political agendas conflict with environmental needs. Chiwawa and Uwizeyimana (2025) highlight that even transboundary water management requiring cooperative diplomacy cannot escape political influences, which deeply impact cooperation and resource-sharing efforts. This critical synthesis demonstrates that addressing these entrenched political dimensions is essential for creating inclusive, transparent governance that can adapt to and mitigate the complexities of water management, ultimately supporting long-term sustainability.

The governance and political dynamics surrounding water resource allocation in South Africa highlight the ethical and systemic issues underpinning reliance on water tankering as a temporary measure. The issue of water tankering, as observed by Interviewee 1, raises ethical concerns surrounding sustainability and long-term planning, where resources are diverted to temporary solutions instead of addressing fundamental infrastructure needs:

This view resonates with the findings of Jaglin (2012), who argues that the frequent use of temporary solutions such as water tankering reflects governance failures that disregard systemic infrastructure investment, especially in areas experiencing chronic scarcity. Similarly, Von Schnitzler (2016) underscores that inadequate governance often leads to reliance on unsustainable solutions in marginalised communities, which only serves to exacerbate existing inequalities. Consequently, it becomes a moral imperative to prioritise long-term water security solutions, particularly in under-resourced areas where temporary measures perpetuate rather than resolve water insecurity.

In contrast, municipal officials, like Interviewee 5, emphasise the need to explore alternative water provision strategies to address these ethical challenges:

This suggests that sustainable water management involves addressing the root causes of scarcity by investing in robust infrastructure and implementing policies that promote equity across regions. As a result, governance should pivot from short-term relief measures to durable infrastructure planning to prevent future crises. The emphasis on sustainable alternatives not only aligns with ethical governance principles but also reflects broader trends in public policy advocating for fair access to resources. These findings underscore a significant point that policies prioritising long-term water provision over temporary relief measures promote ethical governance and reduce dependency on practices such as tankering that are ultimately unsustainable and inequitable.

The analysis also revealed some systemic issues related to water tankering, particularly in terms of equity and access. Participants highlighted systemic issues such as corruption, unequal resource allocation and infrastructural neglect as major challenges. These insights emphasise how structural governance failures hinder equitable water distribution. The outcome highlights the disparities in water distribution, emphasising how marginalised communities face greater challenges in obtaining water. For example, one Municipal Official opined:

This suggests that the distribution system is inherently flawed, leaving vulnerable populations to fend for themselves. Residents shared experiences that further underscored these systemic challenges. Their perspectives, informed by daily interactions with the water tankering process, illuminated the inconsistencies and frustrations experienced during water shortages. Municipal officials and water utility employees also contributed valuable insights, identifying logistical challenges and governance issues that complicate effective water distribution. This confirms that corruption in water resource management directly affects marginalised communities by diverting resources from essential infrastructure projects, thereby entrenching inequities. This echoes the conclusions of Chiwawa and Wissink (2024), who argues that the ethical implications of water governance demand accountability, particularly in regions where political neglect has resulted in systemic inequities. Holding authorities accountable, as advocated by Interviewee 13, is a necessary step towards ethical governance, ensuring that water access is regarded as a right rather than a privilege.

The environmental consequences of water tankering are another significant theme. Stakeholders highlight the environmental harm associated with this practice, such as increased carbon emissions, ecological disturbance and pollution, stemming from the transportation and overuse of groundwater reserves. The temporary nature of tankering, driven by a lack of investment in sustainable water systems, contradicts environmental ethics and principles of sustainability. Water tankering is viewed as a costly, energy-intensive stopgap that can lead to long-term degradation of natural resources. An engineer emphasised that although tankering may offer short-term relief, it is unsustainable for long-term water security. Addressing these environmental issues requires prioritising sustainable infrastructure investment to reduce tankering dependency. This call for an environmentally responsible approach to water scarcity underlines the ethical responsibility municipalities hold in ensuring minimal ecological harm and fostering resilience against future climate impacts. One municipal official pointed out:

This aligns with existing literature, where Chiwawa and Wissink (2023) argue that dependency on carbon-intensive methods for water supply worsens climate change, making water tankering a detrimental short-term solution. Similarly, Kithatu-Kiwekete (2013) found that the environmental strain from such methods contradicts sustainability goals, adding an ethical layer to the debate about resource management and climate justice.

Moreover, stakeholders in the study argue that the resource intensiveness of tankering conflicts with principles of environmental responsibility and economic viability. An engineer asserts that while tankering offers short-term relief, it is unsustainable for long-term water security:

Here, the financial and environmental burdens overlap, suggesting that without sustainable investment, tankering merely delays resource scarcity issues. Similarly, Chiwawa and Wissink (2023) point to the need for infrastructure investment to prioritise renewable water management over fossil fuel-based logistics, further supporting the need for an environmentally conscious transition.

The perspectives also reveal a strong advocacy for sustainable water management through decentralised approaches such as rainwater harvesting and localised treatment facilities. A community leader underscores:

This resonates with the findings of Hove et al. (2022), who emphasise community-based solutions as effective and empowering in mitigating climate impact and promoting sustainability. Community involvement has proven vital in adapting to climate challenges, in that localised, decentralised management builds resilience and reduces ecological degradation in the long term. This highlights the necessity for coupling immediate crisis responses with proactive infrastructure investment is underscored by water management specialists.

By advocating for a dual focus on crisis response and sustainable development, this perspective finds support in literature suggesting that comprehensive water management approaches yield more sustainable water security. These studies reveal that balancing short-term responses with long-term investment is critical for sustainable water solutions, emphasising the ethical obligation of municipalities to minimise environmental harm and adapt for future climate impacts.

The theme of community engagement and empowerment is central to addressing ethical challenges in water management, particularly regarding the practice of water tankering. Tankering is often seen as a temporary solution to water scarcity, yet it fails to address the root causes of the issue and can exacerbate social inequities. Stakeholders, including community leaders and residents, argue that ethical water management requires a commitment to community-driven solutions that empower local populations. As one resident stated:

This view is echoed in existing literature that emphasises the role of sustainable infrastructure and community involvement in achieving equitable water distribution and long-term resilience. These studies suggest that empowering communities to implement local solutions, such as rainwater harvesting and decentralised water treatment, builds resilience and mitigates dependency on external water sources. This also aligns with recent studies advocating for a balance between immediate response measures and the development of community-centred, sustainable practices that mitigate future vulnerabilities (Munzhedzi 2021). By involving communities in decision-making and planning, municipalities can ensure that water management strategies are aligned with cultural values, enhancing the sustainability of water resources.

The interplay between socioeconomic factors and equitable water distribution is fundamental to understanding the ethical complexities of water tankering. The research highlights the entrenched inequities in water access tied to socioeconomic factors in South Africa, particularly through the reliance on water tankering in marginalised communities. As the study illustrates, the systemic nature of these disparities affects access to water services in rural and peri-urban areas, where the need for more consistent and equitable access is acute. In these settings, reliance on water tankering as a stopgap solution underscores the ethical and structural limitations within current water distribution strategies. This dependency on temporary solutions is captured by one participant, who describes it as:

Such feelings resonate with broader studies on water justice, which underscore the need for holistic, long-term investments in infrastructure to mitigate inequities in access, especially among economically disadvantaged populations. The role of socioeconomic status, geographic location and political representation in influencing water access is a central point within the manuscript’s findings:

This observation parallels research by Chiwawa and Wissink (2024), who assert that unequal water distribution in South Africa often correlates with socioeconomic status, geographic isolation and political neglect. Communities on the urban periphery or in rural regions frequently encounter barriers to accessing reliable water services, suggesting that governance failures are particularly detrimental to already vulnerable populations. Such barriers in South Africa mirror challenges observed in other regions with limited infrastructure, reinforcing the argument that policy reforms, infrastructural investment and community involvement are critical for advancing water equity. This aligns with Munzhedzi (2021), who discuss how disparities in water access perpetuate cycles of inequity, where marginalised groups are systematically disadvantaged because of political and geographic marginalisation. Consequently, addressing water access disparities requires targeted policy reforms and community-based solutions that prioritise equitable resource allocation.

However, water tankering, as depicted by the results of this study, is merely a ‘band-aid’ solution that fails to address the root causes of water scarcity. This was confirmed by one participant who had the following to say:

This reliance on temporary solutions rather than sustainable infrastructure highlights the limits of reactive policies in addressing core issues of socioeconomic inequality. Researchers in similar contexts argue that such approaches perpetuate cycles of dependency, where vulnerable populations lack agency over basic resources like water. Without significant infrastructural investment, water tankering will likely remain a recurring, rather than a diminishing, feature of water access for these communities, thereby cementing systemic inequalities.

This view is echoed by scholars who argue that ethical water access must involve long-term solutions that address the socioeconomic factors driving inequities. In the field of water ethics, scholars such as Masuku and Jili (2019) advocate for social equity frameworks that prioritise both immediate relief and systemic change. Ethical imperatives for social justice in water distribution, as supported by the study’s findings, suggest that ensuring equitable access extends beyond the provision of water; it necessitates confronting the structural barriers that have historically marginalised certain populations.

At its core, the inequitable allocation of tanker water challenges the principle of distributive justice, which requires that essential goods such as water be provided according to need and not privilege. The study’s findings show that marginalised communities – particularly those in rural and peri-urban areas – experience delayed or inconsistent access to tanker water. This inequity is not merely administrative; it is a violation of the moral obligation to ensure fair and dignified access to a basic human right. From a rights-based ethical perspective, the selective provision of tanker services reproduces spatial injustice and undermines social equity, contradicting the spirit of South Africa’s Constitution and international human-rights standards on water access.

The environmental consequences of tinkering – such as carbon emissions, groundwater depletion and ecological disturbance – invoke ethical questions about intergenerational responsibility. Reliance on fuel-intensive logistics to deliver water represents a form of ‘ethical short-termism’, where immediate political or social gains are prioritised over the long-term well-being of ecosystems and future citizens. In ethical terms, such practices contravene the principle of non-maleficence (do no harm) by externalising environmental costs to vulnerable communities and future generations. A just water-management system must therefore reconcile emergency responses with ecological stewardship, ensuring that crisis interventions do not perpetuate environmental degradation.

The study also exposes governance failures – corruption, political patronage and weak oversight – that raise serious ethical questions regarding public accountability and fiduciary duty. When public funds are repeatedly channelled towards temporary tanker contracts instead of sustainable infrastructure, decision-makers compromise ethical governance principles of transparency, responsibility and fairness. Ethical governance demands not only technical competence but also moral commitment to equitable service delivery. In this sense, water tankering functions as a mirror reflecting the moral deficit in municipal accountability structures.

The exclusion of affected communities from water-management decision-making constitutes a violation of procedural ethics – the moral principle that those affected by decisions should have a voice in them. Findings reveal that tankering decisions are often imposed top-down, fostering mistrust and dependency. Ethical water governance must therefore prioritise participatory mechanisms that restore agency to communities, enabling co-production of solutions such as decentralised treatment systems and rainwater harvesting. Participation transforms beneficiaries into partners and aligns with the ethical ideal of respect for autonomy and dignity.

Taken together, these ethical dimensions underscore that water tankering, while providing short-term relief, is not ethically sustainable. The practice reproduces inequality, environmental harm and governance deficits that conflict with the moral duty of the state to promote justice and sustainability. Ethically informed policy must transition from emergency relief towards long-term infrastructural investment guided by principles of fairness, transparency and ecological care. Integrating ethical reasoning into water governance ensures that crisis interventions support, rather than undermine, sustainable development goals.