In the Technological Footprints of Urbanity: A Socio-political History of Water and Sanitation in Nairobi, 1899-2015

• Main Author: Akala, Jethron
• Format: Others
• Language: en
• Published: 2019
• Online Access: https://tuprints.ulb.tu-darmstadt.de/8550/1/Jethron%20Ayumba%20Akala.pdf; Akala, Jethron <http://tuprints.ulb.tu-darmstadt.de/view/person/Akala=3AJethron=3A=3A.html> (2019): In the Technological Footprints of Urbanity: A Socio-political History of Water and Sanitation in Nairobi, 1899-2015.Darmstadt, Technische Universität, [Ph.D. Thesis]

While History of Technology as a discipline has developed more strongly in the Global North, a huge lacuna exists in the Global South, particularly in Africa. In addition, the few texts that have given attention to the South have more often than not continued to bracket these localities and the experiences of its peoples as either a historical or lacking agency. The over-emphasis on the perspective of the colonizers rather than the colonized that is evident in most of the literature has led to inconclusive typologies common to many syntheses of Africa’s past especially its urban experiences. In many instances, the dichotomous and a symmetrical analysis results into the African practices of the city being reduced to a colonial perception of disorder. To envision Africa’s cities only in terms of their colonial and postcolonial relationships may preclude a fuller understanding of the multifaceted ways in which they have engaged with the larger world. Furthermore, most studies on technology and infrastructure to be particular have employed dominant paradigms like the theory of Large Technical Systems (LTSs) and propagated the imagination of most urban spaces within the lenses of the ‘networked city model’. These theoretical frameworks have produced incomplete narratives that see the South as chaotic, disorderly and operating on the brink of collapse. It is this fact that has driven contemporary social science and technology studies to call for a departure from the ‘old’ to a new scholarship that acknowledges the localities in the South as not only ‘sources for data’ but also as ‘sites for theorization in their own right’. What is needed in history of technology is a shift from focusing on ‘origin and invention’ to ‘use, meaning and effect’ so as to avoid the reproduction of knowledge that continues to ‘privilege’ the North. Towards the development of Global History of Technology, the gap needs to be bridged by giving attention to the historical particularities of the Global South rather than the South being approached as exceptional. It is on this backdrop that this study of Nairobi was undertaken. Moving between the formal level of engineering and planning and the informal level of daily practice, the dissertation investigated how urban water and sanitation technologies were adopted, appropriated, and contested by various actors. Archival investigations in Nairobi, London and Oxford (UK) and oral accounts of users were employed and analyzed qualitatively. By departing from the dominant LTS perspective, the study zeroes in on the role of users as participants in the making of the histories of the city and as non-passive recipients of migratory ideas and ideals, especially in the process of procuring their daily needs. Technical infrastructural artifacts are looked at as multilayered and possessing a powerful political and economic nature that determines their access and ‘allocative’ role. Nairobi’s water and sanitation socio-spatial outlay was unbundled to reveal a quilt of a heterogeneous techno-scape. Nairobi, like any city in the world has its urban materialities embodying aspirations of various actors but historically, its engineer sociologists continue to define both the characteristics of the technical artifact and the social universe in which they are to function. As a colonial city and an urban space, Nairobi was loaded with imprints of social differentiation, social control and domination and the post-colony has seen elitist ideals augmented in parallel with a rapidly expanding group of urban poor. However, much as infrastructure supply has for several years followed a variegated path, this study sought to push the boundaries beyond the conventional asymmetries of race, class and ‘legal’ versus ‘illegal’ as explained through the formal and informal binary that is common in Urban Studies. It is not enough to conclude that the deployment of key infrastructures adheres to racialized (later elitist or class) planning. Rather, the question of access is informed by many factors that include the political nature of artifacts themselves and people as non-passive recipients; the cost-recovery component of ‘modern’ infrastructure projects as juxtaposed to the socio-cultural constructs of water and sanitation provisioning. Nairobi in retrospect attains a techno-collage or patchwork of modalities of provisioning that affirms the heterogeneous nature of most urban spaces. Furthermore, juxtaposed against the ‘splintering urbanism’ thesis, this work reverses the narrative by pointing out that the Global South cities have traditionally been fragmented and ‘splintered’ in terms of their socio-technical topologies. Nairobi for instance has from its foundation been marked by a quilt of different socio-technical arrangement of water and sanitation provision that combine both top-down approaches that are characterized by highly centralized municipal governance and bottom-linked modalities. These include shallow wells, boreholes, rain-water-harvesting, cesspits, and pushcarts amongst others. There are also ‘mediative’ hybridized arrangements like the ‘spaghetti’ pipes and standpipes cum water kiosks. The centrality of some of these methods from below, as espoused in this study, has witnessed a process of streamlining. This is acknowledged by the utility companies through public-private partnerships that combine the large and the small to plug into the technological gaps existing especially in the informal settlements that are melting pots of both technological innovation and contestation. Heterogeneity and ‘decentered’ or devolved small scale modalities of provision have been and will always remain a permanent marker of most cities as their history goes hand in glove with that of the cities themselves. Nairobi’s checkered sociotechnical outlay is as old as the city itself. Perhaps, as the writing of a Global History of Technology takes center stage, future scholarship needs to focus more on the multilayered nature of human and knowledge flows that go beyond the North-South binary to encompass South-North, South-North-South, South-South amongst many other shifts and counter-shifts, as we grapple with the challenge of knowledge production on histories of technology that is highly representative.