A multivariate dataset on water-energy-food nexus: Multi-actor governance for social justice

Abstract

The article presents and validates an extensive multivariate dataset that offers insights into water-energy-food (WEF) nexus governance for social justice at the intrahousehold, household, and community levels. The lack of insights in the WEF nexus debate that take social justice and governance into account is what spurred the data collection. The initial process involved scoping the originally selected investigated sites and their suitability. Once the research areas were identified, the data were collected from 1184 households in the Matatiele, Magareng, and Greater Taung Local Municipalities in South Africa, using a semi-structured questionnaire and KoboCollect software. The freely available software was installed on Android Tablets which were used by the enumerators. The questionnaires were initially piloted in Matatiele Local Municipality, testing for internal validity and skip patterns, as well as time to complete the questionnaire. The reliability of the Likert responses from the questionnaire was evaluated using Cronbach's alpha. The questionnaire was then refined for data collection and utilized a total of twenty-two (22) locally trained enumerators who were employed at the investigated sites. These enumerators were trained in administering the questionnaire and the use of the KoboCollect software used in data collection. The enumerators also received training on how to conduct the survey ethically, including informed permission, confidentiality, and the option to withdraw from the interview. The design of the data collection process was a cross-sectional survey that was conducted between 6 June and 4 August 2022, using purposive sampling. At the end of each data collection day, the enumerators uploaded their collected data into the KoboTool cloud, which allowed the lead in the survey to assess the data and effect any correctional measures on the questionnaire if the need arose. The enumerators also used a WhatsApp chat group to communicate real time opportunities and challenges in the questionnaire, which allowed the lead in the survey to constantly update the questionnaire. The multivariate questionnaire was divided into sections of socioeconomic and demographic characteristics, community-level governance, decision-making, food, energy, and water security, social justice, legal knowledge, and rights to utilize these resources. The dataset will be of significance to multi-disciplinary researchers focusing on WEF security, governance, and social justice in Southern Africa. Furthermore, environmental and sustainability practitioners can find valuable insights from the provided data. The employed methodology is replicable and adaptable, enabling real-time monitoring of social justice and governance in the context of food, energy, and water security. The real time monitoring of governance and social justice in water, energy and food allows for the possibility of continual data collection and updating, and if a longitudinal design is adopted, it can be used for impact inquiry of any interventions or policies.

Keywords: Agency; Community; Equity; Governance; Household energy multi-dimensional index (HMEPI); Household food in-access scale (HFIAS); Households water insecurity experience (HWISE); Social justice; South Africa; Water–energy–food (WEF) nexus.

Graphical abstract

Fig. 1

The context under which the data was compiled.

Fig. 2

Lorenz curve of inequality.

Fig. 3

Water, energy and food security.

Fig. 4

Reasons for not engaging in agricultural production/reduced productivity.

Fig. 5

Requirements to improve food security.

Fig. 6

Agency in household food production and cooking decisions.

Fig. 7

Opinion on causes of poor water quality.

Fig. 8

Problems associated with not having access to clean water.

Fig. 9

Type of toilet facilities available.

Fig. 10

Problems associated with not having access to energy.

Fig. 11

Causes of frequent energy problems.

Fig. 12

Existence of community-based forums and groups.

Fig. 13

Effectiveness of community-based forums and groups in water, energy and food development.

Fig. 14

Social group consideration by agricultural, energy and water user groups in water, energy and food development.

Fig. 15

Social group consideration by ward committees in water, energy and food development.

Fig. 16

Social group consideration by IDP forums in water, energy and food development.

Fig. 17

Water, energy and food development recommendations through different forums and groups.

Fig. 18

Action-taken based on water, energy and food based recommendations in the different forums and groups.

Fig. 19

Public speaking and working together with community members on water, energy and food issues.

Fig. 20

Awareness of the relevant laws, legislation and regulations concerning water, energy and food decisions at the community level.

Fig. 21

Responsibility for improving water, energy and food security in the community.

Fig. 22

Adequacy, timeliness, accuracy, accommodation, objectivity and independence of community level water, energy and food decisions.

Fig. 23

Study area.