Community Participation and Water Resource Management - Case Study Example

COMMUNITY MANAGEMENT OF BASIC SERVICES: Case Studies in Community Participation and Water Resource Management INTRODUCTION Preventable causes such as polluted water claim the lives of nearly five thousand young children every day, around the world due to diarrhoeal diseases. WHO/ UNICEF (2005: 2) programme for joint water supply and sanitation monitoring, states that this toll can be reduced by the availability of sufficient and better quality drinking water and basic sanitation facilities. In contemporary urban as well as rural societies, the empowerment of community members to participate in community development projects in order to ensure a sustainable provision of basic services, is considered essential. Basic services include infrastructure such as water supply, sanitation, health facilities and hospitals, education facilites such as schools and colleges, and adequate transportation services. According to Munier (2005: 10), for sustainable development in the built environment, the proper methodology should be followed. “Sustainability should meet the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. Sustainability is a vision of the future which provides us with a road map, and helps focus on a set of values, ethical and moral principles by which to guide our actions”. The successful management of a community water supply means operating and maintaining a system on an every-day basis, so that members of the community can avail of the facility as planned. Management of water supply include increase in the hygienic handling and prevention of pollution of water, to improve community health (Davis et al, 1993: 141). The purpose of this paper is to determine how the participation of community members to provide essential infrastructure can ensure delivery of basic services such as water supply. Several community water management case studies are reviewed and discussed. DISCUSSION Improved water and sanitation are fundamentally essential for “eradicating extreme poverty and hunger, reducing child mortality, improving maternal health, combating HIV/ AIDS, malaria and other diseases, ensuring universal primary education, gender equality and women’s empowerment, strengthening environmental sustainability and developing a global partnership for development” which are the Millennium Development Goals, 2005 to 2015 being the Decade for Action: Water for Life, state WHO/ UNICEF (2005: 2). A water supply system can range in size from one handpump in a village to a complex gravity sytem serving several thousand households in urban areas (Davis et al, 1993: 141).The main reasons for developing community water supply are: to improve social and economic conditions and to improve the health of the community. The benefits would include: a reduction in the effort and time required to collect water, reducing the heavy workload of women. To make water available closer to the women’s homes, wells may be dug in the village itself, or water may be piped from a distant water source. Readily available water supply will result in economic and social benefits by increasing “productivity in raising crops, small-scale gardening, the dyeing of cloth and other income-generating activities”, Davis et al (1993: 9). Building community capacity is vital for making a difference in water supply management. This involves bringing together more resources, taking help from agencies for training members of the community, improving skills in establishing water services, and teaching and practising hygiene behaviours (WHO/ UNICEF, 2005: 24). Community Water Supplies: According to Davis et al (1993: 1), partnership of the community and a support agency is generally established for managing community water supplies. Agency is a term used “for a range of implementing agencies which include national and international non-governmental organisations (NGOs), church organisations, bi-lateral and mutli-lateral aid agencies, and government departments responsible for water”. There are three different methods for the implementing of community water supplies. In the agency-developed and managed approach, the members of the community are only consumers, and are not involved in the construction and management of the supply. In the second approach, the agency and the community work together to operate and maintain the water supply, for as long as the non governmental agency is able to continue in the partnership. The third method: which is community developed and community managed is the most common approach. The procurement of water from sources such as tradtional water holes, dug wells and springs are implemented without any external support” (Davis et al, 1993: 1). The first two approaches are affected by the problem of uncertain duration of support given by the external agency. The third approach has problems related to availability of sufficient water, polluted quality of water, distance of water sources from the village, non-availability of water at certain times of the year and shortage of funds. It is for overcoming the problems associated with the third type of approach, that water supply programmes need to be established. These in turn may face problems of long-term operation and maintenance, thus causing the communities to revert to their original inadequate and poor quality water sources, state Davis et al (1993: 1-2). Governments should aim at developing flexible water supply programmes that communities can mostly manage on their own, eliminating dependence on external agencies. Community Participation and Management of Water Systems: “Small water systems require greater community participation in their design, management and maintenance” (Kelly and Yacoub, 1999: 51). Community participation in implementing the service within the planned budget, and with overall focus on prevention of pollution is essential. This means that community members must be involved from the beginning of the project, to maintain the system, especially in the urban slum neighbourhoods of developing countries. In an actual community managed water supply system, the members of a community own, operate and maintain the supply. The fact of ownership is central to community management of water services (Davis et al, 1993: 144). WHO/ UNICEF (2005: 23) state that water and sanitation interventions are cost-effective, and provide multiple returns to communities. Case Study of a Community’s Difficulty in Overcoming Limitations, and a Contrasting Example of Water Resource Development With the Help of an Intermediary Organisation: Cleaver (1999: 604) states that development practitioners may propagate the idea that communities if properly trained and mobilized, can carry out development projects with great capability. He observes that actually those communities that need development the most, are severely affected by very real structural and resource constraints. Even in communities where members are highly motivated and well organised, inadequacy of material resources can cause limitations in their struggle for development. For example, “The people of one village studied in Zimbabwe were notable for their self reliance and positive sense of community. They had built their own school, established a variety of income generating clubs, and had high levels of associational activity. In response to severe water shortages they had established a community fund from household contributions for the purchase of a windmill pump. However, due to drought and low agricultural incomes, the fund was insufficient to buy a windmill. The villagers, constrained by their remote location, were unsuccessful in lobbying the district council and donor agencies for assistance and several years after the first visit they still lacked adequate water supplies and were forced to travel ten kilometres to access water from another village”. (Cleaver, 1999: 604). On the other hand, Gasteyer (2004: 38) argues that the infrastructure for addressing chronic water shortage should take into consideration the social, physical, green and built environments. Only through developing appropriate networks, the community will be able to address water security and sustainability issues. Social capital in the form of community organisation, human capital in the form of knowledge and skills, natural capital which are the existing water resources; are all integrated, and the nexus helps to enhance the financial capital that is available to the community. “Achieving this balance provides for water resources sustainability, as the community improves management and begins to implement water conservation. This, in turn, improves water system security, as the community is more prepared to respond to the next water crisis (most likely in the form of drought)”. Intermediary organisations may also play a vital role in creating networks to procure resources for implementing actions, by first identifying essential criteria. Mount Vernon, Oregon provides an example of this type of collaboration, as described below. Since the community was affected by periodic drought that caused great hardship, the community worked with the Oregon Rural Community Assistance Corporation (RCAC) to develop a plan for addressing the conditions. “The water conservation management plan identifies characteristics of groundwater and surface water hydrology for the waterways such as the creek and river. The plan also identifies geologic characteristics for the valley with soils and drainage information”. Based on the new guidelines for water conservation management, RCAC helped the community members to draft the plans for achieving better water resource management (Gasteyer, 2004: 38). The water conservation management plan includes community education regarding drinking water, water use, and expenses incurred for the facility. It is observed that educating the public on drinking water, as well as wastewater helped the community to achieve a better understanding of maintaining the systems. Slight cost elevation in maintaining the infrastructure, has not caused any opposition from the community members. “The plan includes information on water use during winter and summer months, and targets the high use months for education regarding water use, particularly for farming and gardening. RCAC worked with the finance committee on the budgeting and rate setting process. Mt. Vernon’s efforts to complete a water conservation management plan could be a new model in the state” (Gasteyer, 2004: 38). As seen in the above example, effective participation means that community members must develop skills to analyse the sources of the problems, to come up with feasible solutions. Water resources and environmental pollution issues are mutually interconnected, and are a part of the entire living environment. Hence, for practical and permanent solutions to be found, the community members should seek help from organisations outside the local community and beyond a single government agency. Solutions must be developed and implemented with cooperation from other sectors and departments such as “environment, health, public works and planning, and as an on-going partnership among communities, local non-government organisations (NGOs) and government” (Kelly and Yacoub, 1999: 51). To strengthen planning and implementation of programmes at community as well as regional levels, collaboration between NGOs and larger support agencies proves beneficial. NGOs work on a small scale in partnership with an identified community group, whereas large support agencies work with government or national agencies at a regional or national level. Exchange of feedback between the different agencies with their specific approaches and experiences, proves to be mutually supportive, state Davis et al (1993: 4). The Importance of Sustainability in Water Resource Development: Nearly a fifth of the world’s population does not have access to safe water supplies. “The escalation of a water crisis in the world is due essentially to the unsustainable use and management of water resources and to the destruction of ecosystems such as forests, wetlands, and soil that capture, filter, store, and release water” (Flint, 2004: 49). The earth has provided human beings with food, water, air, and shelter from the beginning of mankind’s history. Development refers to improving or bringing to a more advanced state, and sustainable means continuing without lessening. Thus sustainable development is crucial to achieving water resource quantity and quality, which further impacts national security, economic health, and societal well-being. “The word sustainability implies the ability to support life, to comfort, and to nourish”. Sustainability creates “progressive socio-economic betterment without taxing the ecological carrying capacity, achieving human well-being without exceeding the earth’s capacities for natural resource regeneration and waste absorption” (Flint, 2004: 43-44). Heintz (2004: 6) stresses on the importance of developing criteria and indicators about the concepts of sustainability and sustainable development, so that feedbacks relevant to water resources may be improved. Community Management of Rural Water Supplies in Sub-Saharan Africa: Over the past two decades, community management has become the chief method of management of rural water supplies throughout sub-Saharan Africa (IRC, 2003). Research in Ghana, Kenya, Uganda, and Zambia shows the prevalence of widespread faith in community management. However, the extent to which it can achieve the target of sustainable rural water services has to be determined (Harvey and Reed, 2007: 366). Though the method is advocated by both donors and implementing agencies, low water supply sustainability levels throughout the sub-continent indicate that it is unsuitable for long-term relief. If community management systems are to be sustainable, they require ongoing support from an external institution to provide knowledge, training, supervision, participatory planning, capacity building, partnership in implementation and specialist technical assistance. If such support is not available, then the private sector has to approached for water supply services (Harvey and Reed, 2007: 365). “The basic principles behind the concept of community management are that the community that benefits from an improved water supply should have a major role in its development, should own the water system or facility, and have overall responsibility for its operation and maintenance. In general, this is fulfilled through the formation of a community water committee that is responsible for operating the system, setting and collecting water tariffs, and managing maintenance and repair activities. Community members are normally expected to contribute to initial system installation costs and to meet all ongoing maintenance and repair costs through the regular payment of appropriate water tariffs”. (Harvey and Reed, 2007: 365-366). Though the principles of community management of rural water supplies are applied in sub-Saharan Africa, the interventions do not give sustainable results, due to which 35% of all rural water systems in sub-Saharan Africa are not functioning. Recent research in individual African countries indicate operational failure rates of between 30 % and 60 % (Sutton, 2005). The main reasons for lack of sustainability are related to community issues, such as “limited demand, lack of affordability or acceptability among communities, perceived lack of ownership, limited community education, and limited sustainability of community management structures” (Carter, Tyrrel, and Howsam, 1999: 292). For successfully achieving the Millennium Development Goal of increasing the number of people with sustainable access to safe water by the year 2015, sustainability levels need to be greatly improved. Water Reform, Decentralization and Participation in South Africa: According to the WWAP (2003: 378), “the political changes in South Africa and the emergence of a democratic system, have allowed for reform of the water sector as regards policy, organisational structure, water rights and legislation”. This water reform is considered to be a very comprehensive and innovative approach to water management. Water is considered as a national resource, and decentralisation of government water policy has shown beneficial outcomes. The law provides for nineteen catchment management agencies which have to perform all the functions for implementation of the water law: preparing a management plan, issuing water licences and actively promoting community participation. “Participation by stakeholders is an important tool in implementing changes, as it facilitates more informed decision making, eases conflict resolution”, and gives weaker sections of the community such as women and indigenous groups an opportunity to exercise their rights and responsibilities. To remedy government, market and system failures, a need for improvement in water governance is considered essential. To incorporate the principles of equity, accountability and transparency, conventional forms of water governance with their top-down approach with the help of professional experts, have to be replaced with the bottom-up approach using the experience, knowledge and understanding of various local groups and people. They would also be able to resolve conflicts on scarce water resources by ensuring continuous dialogue among local stakeholders (WWAP, 2003: 378). Doe and Khan (2004: 360) state that the failure of the top-down approach to community development has resulted in the government formulating policy to aim at a bottom-up approach in basic service delivery such as water supply, sanitation and health care without adequate analysis of the various criteria. Incorporating community management into development strategies has to be done with adequate collaboration for successful outcomes. Sometimes, a combination of both top to down and bottom to up approaches may be called for. An example is the following case study of urban poor who remain unserved in spite of governmental action to provide water supply and sanitation to more people. A new successful approach by the Brazilian government, implemented from 1988 is outlined below. Community Participation and Low Cost Technology for Brazil’s Urban Poor: The Brazilian government obtained aid from the World Bank for implementing its new water supply management approach. “The project was called the first water supply and sanitation project for low income populations, or PROSANEAR 1 for short”, according to the World Bank (2006: 1). The World Bank is a leading external financier, providing approximately 1.5 billion USD yearly for water supply and sanitation projects, together with knowledge and training. The PROSANEAR 1 project supported the development of a new approach to delivering water supply and sanitation services (WSS) to the urban poor in Brazil from 1988 to 1996, combining cost effective technologies with community participation. “The project provided a million poor people with piped water supply and sanitation and contributed to building stronger communities” (World Bank, 2006: 1). The unique method of the PROSANEAR 1, was that dozens of separate projects in many different communities around the country formed the main project, which was hence not a single project. Neighborhood residents worked with engineers, consultants, and officials of the local water agency for each project. These projects were implemented by local executing agencies, with assistance and supervision from both regional and national coordinating units. Instead of expensive, conventional, high-tech systems, communities chose simpler, innovative systems that made water supply and sanitation more affordable and more technically appropriate for poor and crowded settlements. “In many places, groups of households were batched together in a creative “condominium” approach that not only made the networks more efficient and affordable but also forged new bonds among neighbors”. For sustainability of the project, local women’s, sports and religious clubs were mobilised, to educate people about the importance of sanitation and to teach them to operate and maintain their new systems. “PROSANEAR 1 resulted in a total of 900,000 people obtaining potable water piped directly into their homes and around 1 million people obtaining sewerage services in 60 low-income settlements in 17 cities at a lower average unit cost for the services (World Bank, 2006: 2).. Stronger Communities resulted from PROSANEAR projects which became neighborhood projects, in which highly motivated and fully informed community members participated “Some groups that came together to build water and sewer systems stayed together to work on other neighborhood needs. Women, involved in PROSANEAR, found an unusual chance to speak and gain respect in the community. In addition, local construction and consulting firms adjusted their business and technical practices to include the community consulting and low-cost technology alternatives. The project demonstrated the power of combining community participation and appropriate, lower-cost technology. In addition, discussing and agreeing upon cost recovery, tariff policy, and operation and maintenance routines with all stakeholders during project preparation proved to be beneficial. The project helped change the view that the poor could not pay for WSS services. On the contrary, the poor paid, as they understood what they were paying for and that they would receive adequate services in return. Finally, the project demonstrated that water and sanitation interventions should be carried out as part of a local area development plan, and critical complementary investments such as drainage, paving, housing improvements, etc. should be identified early in the process” (World Bank, 2006: 2). In 2000, the PROSANEAR 2 project, which incorporated complementary infrastructure interventions, benefited low-income communities in thirty-five municipalities throughout Brazil. PROSANEAR has been adopted by governments in other parts of the world, including South Africa, Indonesia, Bolivia and the Philippines (World Bank, 2006: 2). Community Heterogeneity: Social Inclusion for Community Participation: “As a result of the twenty-seven-year civil war in Angola, more than half of the population have been displaced and resettled in large incumbent areas termed Internally Displaced Persons’ (IDP) camps. Within these IDP camps there were a number of complex historical and social divisions based on the areas from which they had been displaced”. Improved safe water and sanitation facilities were required to be provided at these camps, for which Oxfam GB initiated a water and sanitation programme. “The programme focused on key water and sanitation infrastructure interventions, including hand-dug well or borehole provision, water quality monitoring, environmental sanitation and hygiene promotion” (Godfrey and Obaka, 2004: 156). Maximum community participation was mobilized in the construction and monitoring of communal improved hand-dug wells. The community based project had a two-stage approach: “firstly through the identification of varied heterogeneous groups, and secondly through a process of social inclusion of potential community leaders” (Godfrey and Obika, 2004:156). Within the apparently homogeneous groups of the Angolan IDP camp settlements, were people from different social divisions, forming socially complex groups. For ensuring maximum community participation, it was essential for Oxfam GB to identify the different social divisions, and to ascertain the social inclusion of those considered as the minority group. Moreover, by recognizing potential community leaders, task-force management and work implementation was done with full participation from all members of the groups. Also, conflict was reduced enabling the establishment of community water supplies (Godfrey and Obika, 2004:163). CONCLUSION Backed by review and research, the results of this paper show that communities can manage to deliver basic services such as water supply, through participation and involvement. However, sustainability of water supply interventions can be possible only with the support of external agencies, as seen in the case studies. Community management and participation alone is inadequate. Funding from donor agencies such as World Bank, and help from NGOs and governmental agencies can enable the achievement of sustainable water supplies. Low cost water supply and sanitation services which can be accessed by the poor need to be achieved with policy changes in water governance. References Carter, R. C., Tyrrel, S. F. and Howsam, P. (1999). Impact and sustainability of community water supply and sanitation programmes in developing countries, Journal of the Chartered Institute of Water and Environmental Management, 13: 292–296. Cleaver, F. (1999). Paradoxes of participation: questioning participatory approaches to development. Journal of International Development, 11: 597-612. Davis, J., Garvey, G., Wood, Michael. (1993). Developing and managing community water supplies. Oxford: Oxfam Publishers. Doe, S.R. and Khan, M.S. (2004). The boundaries and limits of community management: lessons from the water sector in Ghana. Community Development Journal, 39 (4): 360-371. Flint, W. (2004). The sustainable development of water resources. Universities Council on Water Resources. Water Resources Update, 127, February 2004: 41-51. Gasteyer, S.P. (2004). Building bridges: community-based social networks for sustainable and secure water management. Universities Council on Water Resources. Water Resources Update. February, 2004. Issue 127: 31-40. Godfrey, S. and Obika, A. (2004). Improved community participation: lessons in water supply programmes in Angola. Community Development Journal, 39 (2): 156-165. Harvey, P.A. and Reed, R.A. (2007). Community managed water supplies in Africa: sustainable or dispensable? Community Development Journal, 42 (3): 365-378. Heintz Jr., H.T. (2004). Applying the concept of sustainability to water resource management. Water Resources Update, 127, February 2004: 6-10. IRC. (2003). Community water supply management: history of a concept, International Water Supply and Sanitation Center, the Netherlands: Delft. Kelly, M. and Yacoob, M. (1999). Community participation and management of water systems. In Providing safe drinking water in small systems: technology, operations and economics. Craun, G.F., Hearne, N., Cotruvo, J.A., (eds.) World Health Organisation, United States of America: CRC Press Publications. Munier, N. (2005). Introduction to sustainability: road to a better future. United Kingdom: Springer Publications. Sutton, S. (2005) The sub-Saharan potential for household level water supply improvement, maximizing the benefits from water and environmental sanitation, 31st WEDC Conference, Kampala, Uganda, 2005, Water Engineering Development Centre, Loughborough University, United Kingdom. WHO/ UNICEF (World Health Organisation/ United Nations International Childrens Emergency Fund). (2005). Water for life: making it happen. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organisation. World Bank (2006). Community participation and low-cost technology: bringing water supply and sanitation to Brazil’s urban poor. Water Supply and Sanitation Feature Stories, March, 2006. Retrieved on 8th September from http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTWSS/Resources/Brazil.pdf WWA (World Water Assessment Programme). (2003). Water for people, water for life. United Kingdom: Berghahn Books. Read More