South Africa is still months away from local government elections – likely around the end of 2026 or early in 2027. Numerous service delivery issues will likely feature prominently, among which water and sanitation will most certainly be high, if not dominant, on the list. When it functions, it is largely invisible; and when it fails, it is immediate and difficult to ignore. And we know from bitter experience that its system performance and institutional capacity are main issues that affect South Africans’ quality of life. It is not simply that either of these has not been at the standards that users would want, yet in the past this issue has not swung votes to the same extent that social attitudes and party allegiance have.
But the 2024 Green and Blue Drop findings from the Department of Water and Sanitation (DWS) showed a system under sustained pressure, and the recent progress reports from the DWS confirm that these issues continue to fall short of citizens’ expectations. What we do not know for sure, is whether this will be reflected in the forthcoming elections.
Let’s first look at the state of these services. Around 47% of wastewater treatment works are classified as being in critical condition, a further deterioration from the most recent comprehensive Green Drop finding. Only around one in ten systems have achieved “good” or “excellent” status.
On the drinking water side, Blue Drop results show that while pockets of high performance remain, compliance and reliability are uneven, with smaller and rural municipalities particularly affected. And “non-revenue water” remains extremely high – in the range of 40-50% nationally – due to leaks, theft and weak system management. Although these indicators are not uniform, they are sufficiently widespread to raise serious concerns.
The key numerical data1 comparing the 2026 reports with the 2023/24 audit period for previous reports shows the following:
- Critical failure of wastewater systems: The 2026 Green Drop report found that 47% (396 of 848) of municipal wastewater systems are in a "critical state", which is a regression from the 39% reported in 2021/22.
- Decline in “excellent”/”good” performance rating: Wastewater systems assessed as operating at "excellent" or "good" levels dropped from 14% (118 systems) in 2021/22 to only 8% (66 systems) in the 2026 report.
- Number of local systems achieving top-tier Green Drop certification: This fell to 14 in 2026, a decline from 22 in 2022.
- No significant progress in improving water safety: While wastewater management showed a decline, the 2025/2026 Blue Drop Progress Assessment found that drinking water risks have stabilised but remain at a high level compared with the 2023 report.
- Further systemic failure: The 2026 findings highlight that 64% of wastewater treatment works are at high or critical risk levels. The new reports show a trend of deterioration in water and sanitation services and infrastructure in many municipalities.
The issues and workable solutions are not technical only, but concern municipal capability and accountability – and governance at large. As water services are constitutionally assigned to local government, this places municipalities at the centre of delivery and accountability2. Yet, large metros such as Johannesburg, eThekwini and Gqeberha continue to face severe wastewater management challenges, including failing treatment works and pollution. In Emfuleni in Gauteng, longstanding dysfunction in wastewater systems has caused chronic pollution of the Vaal River system and in urban areas, despite several national interventions. These are not isolated cases, but are symptomatic of the wider municipal system. Some municipalities – often supported by stronger technical capacity or regional water boards – perform relatively better, but these remain too few.
The DWS does try to resolve the legacies of its decline in recent decades, but the Operation Vulindlela drive has been focusing its reform efforts on structural constraints on service delivery. Its engagements in recent years with private sector expertise has intensified, reflecting recognition that infrastructure failure has broader economic and institutional implications. These are important developments that address bottlenecks in the system, but they operate primarily at the level of framework and process. Their impact on service delivery will take time to materialise, with mixed results among municipalities.
Such institutional reform is inherently gradual, depending on alignment, capacity building and reform. These efforts may not address service delivery pressures in time, as the legacy of infrastructure decline continues to degrade. The systems are already fragile, with delays in maintenance and in process and investment intervention.
As a result, there is a growing gap between reform efforts and service delivery outcomes at the local level – and in many ways nationally and provincially, too. It would be premature to suggest that water will define the next local elections, as voter behaviour is shaped by multiple factors, and the political landscape remains fluid. But it is reasonable to expect that water and sanitation will carry increasing weight in how municipal performance is assessed.
Yet, the DWS monitoring and intervention efforts must be sustained to help water services provide a direct and measurable interface between citizens and the providers – whether from the public sector or private sector. Where such efforts fail, accountability is more immediate and more difficult to deflect.
This raises the continuing problem of political resistance to involving non-state actors. The increasing involvement of organised business in infrastructure discussions reflects a shift in how the problem is being approached. It may support improved performance through technical assistance, investment or partnerships, but it also raises questions about the longer-term configuration of service delivery. If improvements are concentrated in certain areas, disparities between municipalities may become more visible. Politicians may find this difficult to digest.
This must, at some point, drive policy choices that are not currently easy to operationalise without political and trade union resistance. In the short term, more targeted stabilisation measures may be required in systems that are already at risk of collapse. But none of these choices are straightforward. All involve trade-offs between institutional design, political considerations and practical feasibility.
The municipal elections may be shaped by the trajectory of reform and the experience of service delivery on the ground. The Vulindlela reforms will be under pressure during the election campaigns, but it is pivotal that South Africa’s water sector reflects the governance challenge of a gap between institutional intent and operational capability. In the build-up to local elections, the more immediate issue is how existing systems perform. For voters, the test is unlikely to be framed in technical terms; it will be based on their experience – and frustrations – with poor services. Reform is underway and may, over time, improve system performance. But in the short term, the test is simpler and more immediate – how existing systems actually function. For voters, this will not be framed in technical terms. It will be judged through experience: whether water is available, reliable and safe when needed.
The question taking shape ahead of the elections is therefore not whether water matters. It is whether it will increasingly be treated as a direct measure of municipal performance – and political accountability.
Chris Heymans is an independent adviser specialising in the political economy of local government, urban development and service delivery.
Endnotes:
1 “Green Drop Report: South Africa’s deteriorating municipal wastewater systems”, in Engineering News, 17 April 2026.
2 https://ws.dws.gov.za/IRIS/releases/2026GD_BD_ND%20overall%20findings%20sp7.pdf