Why Agroecology Is the Future of Water Justice
South Africa is the 30th most water-scarce country in the world and yet, our land-use choices place industrial production ahead of the people and ecosystems that depend on this precious resource.
Across parts of Mpumalanga and other provinces, communities live alongside vast eucalyptus and pine plantations while facing chronic water shortages themselves. Many households struggle to access enough clean water for drinking, cooking and sanitation, even as millions of litres are consumed daily by industrial tree plantations. This is a stark reminder that the way we manage land determines who has access to water—and who does not.
Many people assume that planting more trees is always good for the environment. But in South Africa, that is not the case. Ours is not naturally a forested country. Much of our water originates in grasslands, wetlands and mountain catchments that have evolved over thousands of years to capture, store and slowly release rainfall into rivers and underground aquifers. These ecosystems are among the country’s greatest natural water producers.
A catchment covered in trees is not always a healthy catchment. When water-producing grasslands and wetlands are replaced with dense, fast-growing industrial plantations, streamflow is reduced, groundwater recharge declines and less water is available for ecosystems and communities downstream. So, if we want to protect South Africa’s water, we have to prioritise protecting the landscapes that naturally produce it—not replacing them with industrial tree crops.
Industrial plantations are often described as forests because they contain trees. But plantations are not forests. A forest is a living ecosystem, made up of countless species of plants, animals, fungi and microorganisms that have evolved together over centuries. Forests regulate water cycles, enrich soils, protect biodiversity and support life.
A plantation is something very different. It is an industrial crop, usually made up of a single fast-growing species such as eucalyptus or pine, planted and harvested for commercial purposes. Like any monoculture, it simplifies nature rather than working with it.
The consequences are significant. A mature eucalyptus tree can use between 150 and 200 litres of water each day under favourable growing conditions. By comparison, South Africa’s Free Basic Water policy allocates just 50 litres of water per person per day. While these figures are not directly comparable, they expose a profound imbalance in our priorities. At a time when communities queue for water or rely on irregular municipal supply, we continue to devote vast quantities of water to industrial plantations.
The impacts do not stop there. Large-scale plantations replace biodiverse grasslands, wetlands and indigenous vegetation that naturally capture, filter and store water. They alter streamflow, contribute to soil acidification and reduce the diversity of plants and animals that healthy ecosystems support. Once plantations are harvested, restoring soils and ecological function can take many years. These landscapes are not empty spaces waiting for commercial development. They are living ecosystems and, for many Indigenous peoples and rural communities, places of history, culture, spirituality and livelihood. Their loss is both an environmental and a social injustice.
South Africa’s Constitution recognises that everyone has the right to an environment that is not harmful to their health or well-being, and to have the environment protected for present and future generations. It also recognises the right of everyone to have access to sufficient water. These are not separate rights. Healthy ecosystems are what make clean, reliable water possible. When rivers, wetlands and catchments are degraded, the right to water is undermined.
Agroecology offers a different vision.
Rather than treating land as a factory for producing a single commodity, agroecology works with natural systems. It restores soils, protects biodiversity, improves the land’s ability to absorb and retain water, and supports food production that strengthens local communities rather than displacing them. Agroforestry—where indigenous trees are integrated with crops and livestock—is one example of how trees can contribute to livelihoods while enhancing biodiversity, conserving water and restoring ecological health. It demonstrates that trees themselves are not the problem; industrial monocultures are.
The climate crisis demands that we rethink how we value land. Conservation cannot simply mean planting more trees. It must mean protecting the ecosystems that sustain life, respecting Indigenous knowledge and land rights, and ensuring that communities have secure access to water and food.
Water justice, conservation and agroecology are inseparable. If South Africa is serious about building climate resilience, protecting biodiversity and fulfilling the constitutional rights to water and a healthy environment, then we must move beyond industrial plantations and invest instead in landscapes that nurture both people and nature.
The future will not be secured by planting more industrial tree crops. It will be secured by restoring rivers, wetlands, grasslands and healthy soils, and by supporting the communities who have long understood that caring for the land is also how we care for water.
Communities are not waiting for change to happen—they are helping to shape it.
At EMG’s Ecopolitics School in Mpumalanga in July, community members spent time examining how industrial plantations, water governance, conservation and agroecology are deeply interconnected and impacted by climate change. The discussions reinforced an important lesson: decisions about land and water cannot be left to experts, government or industry. The people who live with the consequences must play a central role in shaping them.
During the school, the question of what we do kept coming up. December shared his experience attending the Department of Water and Sanitation meeting on water use tariffs, where he advocated for stronger regulation of water-intensive industrial plantations and the implementation of commitments made in 2001 relating to plantation water management and rehabilitation. IN the meeting government agreed that gum plantations should pay higher tariffs and that the DWS would re-visit the 2001 agreement that they were yet to implement. These discussions have shown that government can be receptive when communities bring evidence, lived experience and practical solutions to the table.
The same principle applies beyond water tariffs. Communities have a critical role to play in public hearings on the Water Services Amendment Bill, in the development of municipal Integrated Development Plans (IDPs), Economic Development Plans (EDPs), and Just Transition strategies. These processes determine how land is used, where public resources are invested, whose livelihoods are supported and, ultimately, who has access to water, food and a healthy environment.
Too often, public participation is treated as a procedural requirement rather than a democratic right. Yet communities possess knowledge that cannot be found in technical reports alone. They know where springs have disappeared, where rivers no longer flow as they once did, which wetlands have been degraded, and how changes in the landscape affect their lives. This knowledge is essential if South Africa is to develop policies that are both environmentally sustainable and socially just.
Building climate resilience is not only about changing how we manage land. It is also about changing who has the power to influence the decisions that shape our shared future.