 |
|
Home » Who is Who » Govind Bhetwal
Thopa Thopa Milera
NEWAH and WaterAid - Non-identical twins
WaterAid, our major partner and donor, has had three Country Representatives during our history. We invited all of them to share their thoughts about NEWAH.
Jon Lane (1987-1991)
The UN's designation of 1981-1990 as the International Drinking Water Supply and Sanitation Decade spurred several of the UN's own agencies to take action. UNDP decided to establish small professional groups in the countries of South Asia, to demonstra te innovative approaches to water and sanitation and to support local NGOs. These groups were known as Decade Cells. The Decade Cell in Nepal comprised three staff and was hosted by the Social Services National Coordination Council (SSNCC), the para-statal agency that registered and coordinated all NGOs in Nepal.
WaterAid came to hear of these groups, and David Collett, its then Director, immediately appreciated their natural affinity to WaterAid. In 1986 he sent Bill Bailey, a retired British engineer who worked as a voluntary Adviser to WaterAid, to Nepal for a few months to work with the Decade Cell. Bill's report was favourable: WaterAid should send an engineer on a long-term contract to work in the Decade Cell. Meanwhile I had applied to WaterAid for different post in Sierra Leone, a process that ended up with me being interviewed for this proposed post in Nepal, which I was awarded.
So I set off, in January 1987, to Kathmandu. Nepal was not unknown territory to WaterAid, as my friend Simon Trace was already there, in Pokhara, on secondment to CARE. Our programmes were however, separate. My characteristically brief pre-departure instructions from David followed the lines of 'Go out there and see what you can do'. I arrived at Kathmandu Airport where, on the tarmac itself, I was presented with a bouquet of flowers by a very welcoming lady who turned out to be Manjuri Singh, the Coordinator of the Decade Cell. So WaterAid's work in Nepal began.
For a year or so we were busy implementing three pilot projects that Manjuri had chosen: one gravity-flow supply in the Hills (Taranagar, Gorkha) one Terai tubewell and latrines project (Pithuwa, Chitwan) and one sanitation project (Panauti, Kavre). As the only technical staff member, I carried out all the field work myself, which was invaluable experience for me later when my work became more managerial and less practical. In the office, I had to climb over the partition to get to my desk if I arrived first in the morning, as the system could not entrust me with the key!
Soon UNDP's funding diminished, and Manjuri's post ended. SSNCC seemed uninterested in the Decade Cell, certainly not yet keen to incorporate it as a permanent part of the organisation. So WaterAid had to decide whether to let it die (as indeed happened to most of the other Decade Cells, with the exception of Bangladesh where it continues to this day as the NGO Forum for Drinking Water Supply and Sanitation) or to take over the whole task of supporting it. It was David Collett himself, visiting me in Kathmandu in mid-1987, who had first suggested the idea of eventually creating a Nepali NGO to take over the work of the Decade Cell. As UNDP withdrew, however, that seemed a remote prospect and David and I agreed to work on for some time aiming to persuade SSNCC to absorb the unit permanently: rather to my surprise we even managed to squeeze into a room in its brand new office at Samajik Sewa Mandir, when it moved there from its shambolic premises in Bhrikuti Mandap.
During 1989 and 1990, our staff grew and we unilaterally changed the unit's name from the Decade Cell to the SSNCC / WaterAid Water and Sanitation Project, because I was told, that the Decade Cell would otherwise finish when the Decade finished at the end of 1990. This had hardly been UNDP's original expectation. Among the first few staff to join was Umesh Pandey, better known in those days as a singer than as a development professional, but to me clearly a person of great integrity and motivation to help the development of his fellow citizens. I asked Umesh to take responsibility for our community management and training work, and together we spent long days walking to remote villages engaged in endless discussions about how to develop the work. Around this time, Simon Trace's post in Pokhara finished and he transferred to the SFDP programme in Kathmandu, and he also contributed to our planning sessions.
By 1991 we could see clearly that SSNCC would never establish our project on a permanent footing. With full support from David Collett and Nick King (then WaterAid's Head of Overseas Operations) Umesh and I started to think seriously about converting the SSNCC / WaterAid Project into a Nepali NGO. To me, that change would mark the natural time to leave Nepal. As the longest-standing, and senior staff member of the project I felt that my continued presence would be a constraint on my colleagues' opportunity to establish real Nepali leadership for the new organisation. With the 30 or so staff, Umesh, Simon and I held a few planning sessions to sketch out the likely form of the new organisation. I agreed with WaterAid in London that my successor as Country Representative should take on the process at this point, working in a different manner from me - not to manage but rather to support and encourage our Nepali colleagues to take the lead. Greg Whiteside (who had been awarded the post in Sierra Leone all those years before) turned out to be the ideal person to fill this role.
I left Nepal in May 1991, sad to leave so many friends but tremendously satisfied to have helped play a part in the water and sanitation sector there, and specifically to have laid the foundations for Newah's existence. David Collett's vision was soon to become a reality.
As NEWAH reaches its tenth birthday it is undeniably a time for fulsome celebration. It is also an excellent opportunity to reflect on some of the reasons for NEWAH's success and perhaps some of the challenges that lie ahead.
Greg Whiteside (1991-1999)
NEWAH was founded at the dawn of Nepal's democracy in 1992 and in many respects is a spotlight example of how democratic systems spontaneously foster organisations that adopt bolder and more creative responses to basic human problems. Looking back it seems clear that NEWAH's effectiveness at the community level, its growth and its general all round durability are all intimately bound up with HMG's policy of pluralism, diversity and support for civil society action. This in itself seems a cause for celebration.
Not all NGOs however have found their way in this new environment and it is perhaps worth considering whether certain aspects of the relationship between WaterAid and NEWAH have had a significant bearing on NEWAH's success. My personal view is that they have, that they've been decisive and that a measure of success for both organisations can now be seen in their ability to diversify activities and strike up new partnerships with other organisations.
Partnership is a much-overused phrase and seldom found in reality but I would like to cite a willingness on behalf of WaterAid and NEWAH to enter into a 'sincere spirit of partnership' as being at the core of NEWAH's current success (and indeed WaterAid's). It is a timeless and universal principle that demands more of individuals but produces rewards that go far beyond mere project outputs. Jon Lane and Umesh Pandey founded the relationship with great energy and clarity on this basis. NEWAH's executive committee and in particular its first two presidents Hari Bhakta Adhikari and Ajaya Dixit provided the vision, guidance, checks and balances necessary to make sure the relationship remained on track and a succession of highly dedicated WaterAid staff including Simon Trace, Simon Kenny, John Kelleher and Michelle Moffat worked with NEWAH colleagues to give the partnership real meaning and texture. Robin Thompson, volunteered for an entire decade as WaterAid's Country Adviser to Nepal and providing unerringly sound advice throughout that period. My successor Alan Etherington has brought to the relationship a more worldly perspective and some very clear strategic skills.
More recently, the willingness of other donors including DFID, IRC, MS Nepal, CECI-Fog Quest and UNICEF to enter into partnership with NEWAH, and indeed displace WaterAid as the principal donor, is an effective endorsement of the processes that have led to NEWAH's development. Many challenges lie ahead perhaps as many as there are communities without safe drinking water and sanitation but NEWAH undeniably has the knowledge and track record necessary to qualify it as a leading actor in Nepal's water sector. Its capacity to combine traditional strengths of flexibility, patience and skilful diplomacy with stakeholders while striving for international organisational standards will no doubt be tested further, but if NEWAH's second decade is even half as productive as its first, then there should be cause for further celebration right across the country and in democratic states everywhere.
Alan Etherington (2000-2002)
As NEWAH has changed during its decade, so has WaterAid. Now about to celebrate its 21st anniversary, WaterAid has evolved into an international network, striving to better understand the obstacles that prevent universal water and sanitation and to work to overcome these within its 15 country programmes and beyond. Its modest resources will do little to directly improve the situation of the 1 billion without safe drinking water and the 2.4 billion without sanitation. But by innovating, experimenting, documenting and learning and using these lessons and insights to advocate for better policies and more resources, its reach and influence can be expanded many times.
WaterAid cannot do this alone and would not want to. Its core strength is its partners, mostly NGOs who now number hundreds around the world. Partners such as NEWAH keep us grounded and in touch with practical realities as communities struggle to improve their water supplies and then maintain them. We also hope that NEWAH and our other partners will join with us in analyzing their experiences and sharing their best practices and lessons with the decision-makers that allocate resources and determine government and donor policies.
As we in WaterAid Nepal have worked to adapt WaterAid's international vision to the realities of Nepal, NEWAH has been a strong and active partner always willing to engage in discussion of new ideas, to join us in new ventures and to provide its candid opinions. Together we have, for example, begun urban community projects, a civil society forum for discussing Kathmandu water supply reform proposals, prepared ideas on rural drinking water reforms, commenced an ambitious study to determine the current status of all the projects it has built over the past ten years and launched an experiment in building District Federations of Domestic Water User Groups.
NEWAH has many challenges and struggles ahead. Some of these can already be identified: rehabilitation of non-functioning projects, a wider diversification of funders, implementing policies to prevent social exclusion, maximising the livelihood and poverty reduction aspects, expanding the sanitation ladder and developing total sanitation approaches, building capacity of District and Municipal authorities, staff development and regional decentralisation. And there will be others that cannot be now be envisaged. But what is clear is that NEWAH's capacity to absorb such a range of changes during these past ten years is a testimony to an inner strength and capacity for self-criticism that bodes well for its future.
Rediscovering Our Ghaansi Origins
Dipak Gyawali
In our samaaj, it is often said that 'after studying' as if study can ever have an end one has to consume jaagir either in the jangi (i.e. warring) services or in the sewa of some nizam. The behavioral message we receive from these cultural genes is at 180o counter variance with the more egalitarian ideas of not "consuming" but giving one's services to better the lives of those more unfortunate than ourselves. This contradiction becomes more acute in the career path of those who work as modern day activists in CBOs or NGOs. Where is the dividing line between the altruism of sewa nai dharma ho and the practicality of expecting or demanding a reward for service delivery?
To find an answer, let us go back to the cultural roots of the Nepali language, the dialogue between the grasscutter ghaansi and Bhanubhakta, which gave the original impetus to his writing the Ramayana. The ghaansi, an everyday hardworking Nepali, possibly a dalit or a janjaati, goes about his daily duty of gathering fodder and selling it to the owners of cattle. It is an informal albeit market-inspired democratic business regulated by demand and supply both of the grass and the grasscutter. He is not benefiting from a monopoly trade nor does he have to demean himself as a kamaiya bonded labourer. This enterprise provides him a little surplus profit over and above his subsistence needs.
And what does he "consume" with that surplus to increase his sense of well-being? Gurus of neoclassical economics would tell us that he could spend it on rakshi, as most of his peers probably did, or he could buy for himself any of the glamorous trinkets the bazaar had to offer. He does not do any of these things. Instead, he sees his well-being in a more aesthetic, un-self-centered activity providing drinking water to his fellow villagers who have difficulties in procuring it for their daily requirements.
Bhanubhakta is of course inspired by this act of selfless idealism and goes on to write the Ramayana in Nepali, earning himself a place in history. The epic had previously been written by others more saintly than our bard, who was guided by the more selfish desire to earn a name for himself. None-the-less, he was the first to give Ramayana a Nepali expression, and those who do anything for the first time are treated as heroes. It is, however, not possible to be the first person to dig a well in general. It is not even possible to say who it was that dug the first well in the world or in Nepal or for that matter in Kathmandu Valley.
It is, however, very possible to be the first to dig a well (or build a conduit) in a particular village, for a particular community having difficulties with their water supply. It is this act of selfless heroism that Bhanubhakta's ghaansi friend indulged in, much to the gratitude of those who then had to undergo less of a drudgery everyday. The ghaansi can therefore be considered the greater hero, the unsung hero, if you will if selfless service were the criteria for judging greatness.
To come back to the aadhunik yug, when a villager attempts to provide safe drinking water to a community that does not have clean water within comfortable distance, is he or she not upholding the ideals of the great ghaansi? Why is it that our samaaj is so miserly when it comes to first recognizing and then saluting the heroism so selflessly exhibited? To reverse this sad state of affairs, perhaps NEWAH should, in its own modest way, institute a Ghaansi Shri award for the most selflessly dedicated individual in the drinking water and sanitation CBOs we work with. In honouring such people, we are really prodding the lofty ideals dormant in all of us and in our samaaj to achieve higher ethical standards than has been the norm of late. This in itself may not solve the conundrum we professionals face in our everyday lives, but by honouring such individuals with funds not from donors or projects but from contributions made every year by the staff and board of NEWAH just for this purpose, might we not be appreciating ourselves and our ideals just so much more Let's think about it.
Understanding Hygiene Behaviour
Renuka Rai
Background
In January 1998, Eveline Bolt of International Water and Sanitation Centre (IRC) proposed that NEWAH be IRC's research partner to look at some questions and issues related to hygiene promotion in rural water supply projects. Some of the questions were: Do people keep on performing the new or changed behaviours after intervention has terminated or do they go back to their old ways of behaving? Are some behavioural changes more likely to be sustained than others? Can certain conditions for sustained behaviour be identified? What is the relation between the approach applied during project implementation and the sustainability of behavioural changes?
The promotion of hygienic practices and improved sanitation are as crucial as the provision of drinking water. Because of its emphasis on the provision of water supply and education in hygiene NEWAH committed itself to the proposed research. The organisation's Social Division was involved in preparing the research design and questionnaires and in securing funding for the research by identifying appropriate donors. The research was financed by the European Union (EU) through IRC and by the Dutch government (DGIS). Water Aid/Nepal provided the funds needed for the field activities of the three-year research project named 'Sustaining Changes in Hygiene Behaviour.'
IRC functioned as the coordinator of the research. The other agencies involved were London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine; German Agency for Technical Cooperation, Germany; Nepal Water for Health; Foundation for Technical Cooperation, Sri Lanka; and Socio-Economic Foundation. The African partners were Network for Water and Sanitation, Kenya; Water Aid, Uganda and Volta Region Community Water Supply and Sanitation Agency, Ghana. While the Asian and African partners undertook the research, the European partners provided professional back-stopping and resources. Despite their different mandates, the organisations were guided by a common interest in understanding the long-term effectiveness of the efforts in promoting hygiene.
Objectives
The study had two general objectives and five specific objectives.
General objectives
- To support the durable improvement of human health by ensuring a higher effectiveness of water supply and sanitation programmes through gender-specific insight into the conditions under which people can and will sustain changes in hygiene behaviour.
- To contribute to the sharing of experiences with effective hygiene promotion and to the development of a research methodology that will increase the knowledge level on this issue.
Specific scientific and technological objectives
- To develop an active network in the field of hygiene promotion
- To assess the level of sustainability of behavioural change one to two years after hygiene promotion interventions,
- To develop a methodology for simple/cost-effective longitudinal monitoring of behavioural changes
- To find causal relationship between project approaches and external conditions and sustainability of changes in hygiene behaviour
- To determine policy and programming implications and influence policy to increase the effectiveness of water and sanitation programmes.
Apart from espousing the general and specific objectives of the study, the main goal behind NEWAH's involvement in the research was to assess the impact of its water supply, health education and sanitation programme and to get suggestions from the communities it conducted research in order to further improve the programme.
Progress in NEWAH's hygiene research
The NEWAH team developed a work plan and received support from Water Aid/Nepal. Subsequently, the team attended the 1st Planning Workshop held in the Netherlands from 2 to 19 February, 2001. At this workshop the team developed a plan for research as well as field survey tools. The survey tools consisted of household interviews and observations, pocket chart voting and focus group discussions. A team of enumerators was trained and pre-tested the tools in Aapchaur, a hill community, and in Dhirapur, a Tarai community. Community water supply and sanitation systems had already been built in both the villages. The tools were revised and finalised after the pilot tests.
Then five communities each in the five districts were selected; they were Phajigaon, Ilam; Patharabudharam, Rautahat; Mallaj, Parbat; Thagleni, Surkhet and Bagnaha Bardiya. In each community, projects had been completed in 1997/98. The trained enumerators were divided into two groups to conduct the survey. The data they collected was forwarded to IRC for analysis. The research team commented upon its preliminary analysis and provided suggestions for improving the quality of data. Subsequently a second survey was completed in another five communities from 6 February to 25 March, 2002. They were Bhadaiya, Siraha; Sonarniya, Lamjung; Taksar, Rautahat; Gobardiha, Dang and Kukudepani, Baitadi. Water supply and sanitation projects were completed in 1999/00 in all the five communities, which were selected so that a community in each of the five development regions was included.
Constraints and difficulties
During the nineteen months of the study period, the team faced many difficulties. First of all, pre-testing in Dhirapur (a Tarai community) could not be done after the training of the enumerators and the pre-testing at Aapchaur. The pre-testing had to be postponed for three weeks due to a three-day mass strike called by seven communist factions and then the royal massacre of 1 June, 2001. The first survey, which was planned to be held in August, was completed only in September 2001. Consequently, the trained enumerators did not conduct the second pilot survey. As a result, there was a gap between the training, the single pre-testing and the actual surveys.
The Maoists insurgency posed the other major challenge. In Thagleni, Surkhet, the Maoists almost prevented the conduction of the survey. Most of the Project Maintenance Committee (PMC) members sympathized with the Maoists. Since both of the survey team members were female and because they asked simple questions related to hygiene and sanitation, they were allowed to carry out the survey. Yet, the team members endured lots of interrogation and the PMC kept watch on them closely. The second survey slated to be conducted from December 2001 to February 2002, had to be postponed because the government had declared a State of Emergency. The situation throughout the country changed.
lessons
Despite the difficulties a few but important lessons were learnt. The first lesson was related to the surveying itself: the plan, it must be realised, must be flexible and must consider all the factors that may hinder the actual fieldwork. Secondly, the time allocated between field-testing and the actual surveying should not be short. Though the gaps between the three surveys were purposefully planned to achieve the research objectives, the discontinuation of the trained enumerators inevitably invited difficulties, while external events led to delays and increased the cost.
Despite these procedural hurdles, the study provided important insights. Previous exposure to hygiene or other awareness interventions, like saving and credit schemes, helps individuals understand group dynamics and follow norms formulated by a group. In Mallaj, Gobardiha and Fajigaon, small farmers groups and women's credit groups had launched an awareness and adult literacy programme and they knew about hygiene issues. Diverse intervention methodologies are useful in learning how different groups of people would behave. For example, many women benefited from tole/cluster health education sessions and home visits. They could not attend video or puppet shows because the shows were organized far away from their homes or were held late in the evening. Knowledge about hand washing was far better than the actual practice of it. In the first survey 95 percent knew that hands should be washed but only 66 percent demonstrated the practice correctly. These percentages in the second survey were 99 and 64. These findings suggest that knowledge and practice do not necessarily go together. If changes are to be meaningful, external support needs to be provided continuously and on a long term basis. In focus group discussions almost all communities mentioned that intervention need to last for a longer time or that follow up visits are necessary to help solve problems people faced.
Another lesson learnt regarded offset latrines useful. Such latrines, because they have a permanent superstructure, may be an expensive investment upfront, but since they are more durable, they create incentives for sustaining the practices of using latrines. Though simple pit latrines were easy to adopt and showed good coverage initially, their use did not extend for longer period in Gobardiha. One of the reasons was that, in the Tarai, the sidewall collapsed frequently. In addition, the presence of a latrine does not necessarily mean that all family members use it. In Sonarniya, only women, children and aged persons used latrines; men did not. During group discussions, both male and female members of the community mentioned that the construction of latrines and tap stand alone is not enough to change their hygiene behaviours. This reinforced the notions that hardware is not enough and that innovative strategies are needed to bring about behavioural changes.
Findings on research hypotheses
In the second survey, when the definition of education was changed from a strict five years of formal education to iliterate, attended school for a few years or adult literacy programme, the team found that the mother's education helped determine domestic hygiene practices such as covering food and water and cleaning the household yard. Mothers with some training on hand washing showed better actual application. Their children tended to use latrines which tended to have a pan, a slab and rings installed (i.e. were fully constructed). Water container for anal cleansing as well as washing latrine showed signs of use. However, in the first survey, linkages between a mother's education and behaviours could not be discerned as the sample size was very small (only 3 educated women were interviewed). It was decided, however, that the original definition of education was narrow. In fact, even a rudimentary level of education can have a positive impact on sustaining positive hygienic behaviour. The distance to a water supply source did not determine hand washing behaviours as most of the sampled households had enough water throughout the year from the newly built systems. Only 5 out of the 150 household which were included in the second survey had to go back to using old water sources because of a seasonal deficit and thus reported fewer instances of hand-washing.
Another important finding was related to hand washing practices: they were better where hand-washing materials (water, ash or soap) were available. In Bhadaiya and Sonarniya, where hygiene education interventions had been carried out for two years, the villagers did better than hill communities in the use and maintenance of latrines. If an intervention is longer than a year, the use of latrines tends to be sustained. The communities that had a two year interventions also maintained latrines better. In these two communities, offset latrines with permanent superstructures were promoted because they are durable and easy to maintain. This fact may have contributed to better maintenance of latrines. The finding supports the hypothesis that if hygiene intervention is longer than one year then the maintenance of latrines tends to be sustained. Although the sample sizes were small, latrines that were convenient to use, especially by children, had sustained use.
Implications of the findings
To improve a hygiene education programme, diverse intervention methodologies should be pursued. Such methodologies must suit the socio-cultural context of the community. Women benefited from cluster health education sessions. They were not able to attend puppet and video shows because they were either organized far away from their houses or organized late in the evening. Since knowledge about hand-washing was better than practice of it, practice need to be reinforced by frequent home visits of health volunteers. Health volunteers must observe and use a check-list to record progress in assuming the practices. Various technological methods to improve sanitation need to be provided and upgraded as per the demands of the community.
Organisations involved in water supply and sanitation need to formulate appropriate policies for regularly visiting the communities with whom they have worked to develop water supply and sanitation services, so that their hygienic practices can be ascertained and support provided if needed. The community should also be encouraged to assist in establishing links with other agencies to begin new sets of activities in the communities that can bring about improvement in their quality of lives. Established partners and community groups must be supported for a minimum of two years when intensive health promotion and sanitation programmes need to implemented. Such support makes hygiene education more effective when new water supply systems are built.
NEWAH would like to thank Noki Tamang, Leela Kumari Rai, Pushpa Ghimire, Benu Gurung and Dil Kumari Bista for their hard work ; during the survey.
Water for sustainable livelihoods
Mark Harvey
I have been asked to contribute an article to this souvenir to celebrate NEWAH's 10th Anniversary. Firstly I should like to say that I am honoured to be asked and should begin by congratulating NEWAH well done and best wishes for the next 10. I should also like to wish that all your staff are safe and well and that they stay that way in the current environment.
Without taking too much space I should explain who I am and what I do. I am the Infrastructure and Urban Development (I&UD) Adviser in the DFID-Nepal office in Ekantakuna, Kathmandu. DFID is the Department for International Development of the United Kingdom. DFID was known as ODA before the 1997 Labour party came to government in the UK. There has been more than just a name change. Also, I&UD Advisers were previously known as Engineering Advisers again the change is more than just in a name. What this means is that I am responsible for infrastructure sectors such as water (resources and services), transport, urban development, energy, information and communication technology, geo-science. But this can extend into school building, disaster management, labour-based construction, procurement, local government, etc. But I am a water sector person at heart. My recent experience has been in India for 5 years (Maharashtra and Lucknow) and Southern Africa for 4 years.
My relationship with NEWAH comes from my formal responsibility in DFID as project officer for the support we provide to them to undertake the Mid and Far West Rural Water Supply and Sanitation Project. More broadly, I am currently co-ordinating an informal gathering of donors and NGOs in the (mainly rural) water supply and sanitation sector in Nepal. NEWAH are an active and valued participant in this group.
So, congratulations NEWAH on your 10th anniversary. This coincides with my own 10th anniversary since coming to Kathmandu for the 1992 WEDC Conference that some readers may have attended. I wish I had been able to see more of Nepal in 1992 and I would be able to comment from personal experience on the achievements that have been made by NEWAH and others since then.
So what can I say here. I can see the huge challenges that remain ahead for Nepal water and sanitation services. I should like to discuss 2 issues. The first is the sustainable livelihoods approach and the second is the developments taking place in the sector here.
Sustainable Livelihoods
There has been a lot of work done in recent years by various agencies in taking forward a sustainable livelihoods approach to poverty elimination. This article does not have enough space to discuss the theory and the details. But from the little that I have seen in Nepal a number of NGOs are adopting SL principles and practices in their work. Some of this is explicit, deliberate and planned; some of it is unintended.
The sort of activities that I interpret as part of a SL approach are those that seek to promote and implement ideas such as simple drip irrigation and kitchen gardens. This is recognising that while the world may define the sector as being for "household" or "domestic" water supply, we know the reality is that people want to and will use water for whatever aspect of their lives is important, especially for productive purposes.
Similarly, projects undertake community mobilisation and group strengthening as a means to an end that is to establish sustainably managed water services. But the mobilisation and empowerment that takes place is building the social capital of those people a key feature of the SL asset pentagon. Some projects take this further and introduce training and capacity building in literacy. Thus building human capital.
There is no doubt in my mind that the SL approach is a key one but a challenge is how government can begin to adopt such an approach in its way of working. Is it realistic to expect this to happen or can government services only be provided from boxes and silos? How can the approach be taken forward across departmental boundaries when the public sector divides the world into water services and water resources?
Sector Developments in Nepal
This year, 2059, will see some significant developments take place in the water sector. Firstly we should see the 10th 5-Year Plan which is government's Poverty Reduction Strategy. Cascading from this we should see a 3-year FMedium Term Expenditure "ramework" (that is a 3 year rolling sector plan) for some key departments, one of which is the Department of Water Supply and Sewerage (and I ask why is it "sewerage" when that means nothing for most people!). We should see some re-design and next phase of the Rural Water Supply and Sanitation Fund Development Board. We should see the process of developing a possible further phase of support from the Asian Development Bank for a community based water supply and sanitation project. I may have missed others, for which I apologise.
What a great opportunity for us all to influence for the better the way the sector is structured and improve its efficiency and effectiveness. An opportunity to raise the profile of sanitation, an opportunity to tackle gender and poverty more strategically, an opportunity to really decentralise responsibility for water services to the level where people can have a meaningful stake in water management that meets their needs. And what an opportunity for the donors to work together under one framework, recognising their various comparative advantages and dynamic diversity of approaches, but putting aside their rivalries and reducing the transaction costs and burden on government. We did this in South Africa - after a period of 5 years following democracy, during which donors had supported their own projects, DFID came together with the European Commission, the Netherlands Government and others to support a sector support programme. I hope we can do it here. I think NEWAH can and will play an important role in this and I look forward to it becoming a reality.
A Gender and Poverty (GAP) Approach in NEWAH
Michelle Moffott
What is needed to ensure institutions and programmes are able to enhance capacities for equitable demand-driven community management? International thinking has focused on decentralised, demand-driven approaches. This approach was based on a belief that community-centred approaches, which respond to demand, would prove more sustainable. NEWAH's experience over the past few years is that the demand driven approach is often practiced without the key ingredients. Those ingredients include a long-term approach that seriously attempts to address gender equity and poverty issues. It requires an approach that addresses power relations, to understand and overcome difficulties experienced by common property institutions. Such an approach raises questions such as whose demands are heard. Is it the elite or everyone in a community? The question of who can participate and who is included is crucial in addressing poverty reduction.
There are plenty of examples in Nepal where the self-interests of elite male-dominated rural water management/user groups have led to conflict. Examples include inequitable and non-transparent financing. Illegal pipe connections by the better off has affected equitable water distribution in a number of communities, which in turn has led to irregular user fee payments and breakdown of water systems. Ultimately such conflicts have led to unequal access and control over safe drinking water systems. Those who suffer most are usually women and the poorest who have no voice or choice in decision making. So how does an institution address gender and class/caste inequities?
NEWAH's commitment to addressing gender equity and poverty issues began by allocating resources, with support from WaterAid and DFID, for gender awareness and skills building of its staff. A Gender and Poverty (GAP) Unit was established in 1999, comprising of 32 technical and social staff. Five regional operational GAP teams and one team based at headquarters were created. After a period of training and practice by delivering gender awareness training to peers in NEWAH, partners and communities, the teams began in 2000, to pilot a GAP approach in 5 projects throughout Nepal. The GAP approach recognises that without agency intervention, poor men and women are automatically excluded by elites from managing community water supplies.
In order to be poverty sensitive, it is necessary to identify who the poorest actually are. A Well-Being Ranking PRA exercise was introduced in the GAP pilot projects to determine who contributes what. Identifying the poorest households enables NEWAH and communities to provide additional support such as paid labour, free latrines and differentiated financial contributions for O&M, in agreement with the community management committee. The households themselves decided the criteria for each socio-economic group and ranked households into groups. Criteria included amount of land ownership, food sufficiency, employment/income, indebtedness such as bonded labour and disability. In the pilot projects most often the lower caste households filled the lower socioeconomic groups, but not exclusively. However, there were no lower caste households in the richest groups, reflecting the link between caste and poverty. The results of the exercise were presented in a mass community meeting and debated until a consensus was reached.
The GAP approach aims to achieve a 50/50 gender balance in community management committees. This is to help ensure women participate in decision making with men over water resources and to minimise management committees being dominated and controlled by male elites. GAP teams were pro-active in persuading communities of the benefits of active mixed gender committees for increased democratic community decision-making. The results of the 5 GAP pilot projects are very encouraging. Women were elected into 50% of the 4 key positions in the management committees (Chair, Vice-chair, Treasurer and Secretary). NEWAH will monitor the performance of these committees, particularly women's roles in decision-making and identify future support they require to continue to be effective. Equally important is the increased representation of poorer, lower caste men in committees.
GAP teams evolved their own strategies for supporting women and poorest groups to enable them to achieve equal access to project information, training and paid job opportunities. This involved many informal meetings and discussions, such as negotiating with richer groups of men and women, encouraging women and poor men to attend meetings and to voice their opinions. Building confidence of women and men to allow women to train in technical jobs and to take key positions in community management committees was also a key activity. GAP teams reported that the GAP pilot projects presented team members with major challenges, especially in facilitating discussions on very sensitive gender and poverty issues. The GAP teams feel they have gained confidence and skills in implementing a GAP approach. Dealing with initial resistance by elites to avoid conflicts was a very real concern for staff at the beginning of the process. The fact that no conflicts were experienced in the community and significant results were achieved has considerably increased the confidence of GAP staff.
The GAP approach recognises that community level financing of water services, usually in the form of flat rate user fees, often penalises the poor. A graded rate maintenance system for O&M has been piloted with some communities, which allows for the poorer socio-economic groups to pay less than the better off groups. Despite initial resistance by some better off households, these households were subsequently persuaded by the community management committee and GAP staff to participate in the system on the basis of sustaining the livelihoods of the poorest and the water system. NEWAH will monitor the progress of these graded rate systems of payment in the longer term for impact on sustainability and livelihoods.
NEWAH's recent experience is that consulting women as well as men on technology design options ensures technology is appropriate to meet both men and women's practical needs. Under the GAP approach women are consulted over the number, location and position of tapstands and tubewells to ensure their practical needs are met. For example tapstands that have to be located by a busy trail have, at the request of women, been positioned facing away from the trail to increase privacy. Women were consulted on height of parapets used by them to wash clothes. Through consultation with women as well as men, some GAP communities have even opted for community-financed communal bathing units.
NEWAH has a flexible policy relating to the number of tapstands per cluster of households. In situations of caste conflict that cannot be overcome, tapstands will be built separately, particularly for isolated, low caste, deprived houses. This is an important dimension in addressing caste discrimination and ensuring equal access to safe drinking water. In one GAP project a small cluster of 3 low-caste households opted for a smaller tapstand to reduce their contribution in local materials for cement and because they felt they did not require a full-size tapstand. In another project clusters of high caste and low caste households agreed they should and could share a water point.
Free latrines to the poorest households were introduced because the poorest households cannot afford to purchase permanent latrines. Temporary latrines have not been effective as they are perceived as "kutcha" or poor quality and therefore not worth maintaining. Over 95% of the poorest households in the GAP pilot projects benefited from a free permanent latrine (sanitation slabs that cost 2 GB pounds). However, some households were unable to build a latrine due to being landless and other strategies will need to be considered for landless households. NEWAH will monitor this initiative to assess the effective use of these latrines in the post-project phase. School latrines were constructed separately for boys and girls, taking into account practical gender needs.
As part of the GAP approach men as well as women have access to health, hygiene and sanitation education. Men need to change hygiene behaviour too! In their role as fathers, men need to be encouraged to assist their children in changed hygiene practices such as handwashing after defecation and before eating. If every member of the family has access to increased health and sanitation knowledge, the impacts on health will be greater. In the GAP pilot projects men were often resistant to joining women in tole health education, as they perceive health and hygiene to be the role of women. NEWAH recruited a male and female community health volunteer (CHV) in each project. The male CHVs were able to persuade more men to attend health education and to discuss health issues. The impacts of changed hygiene practice and related sharing of roles between husbands and wives will be evaluated in 2003.
NEWAH has been implementing a Child-to-Child health and sanitation approach in schools for 5 years. In the GAP projects this approach was expanded to "out-of-school" children. The Child Health Awareness Committees (CHAC) were comprised of an equal number of boys and girls who trained both "in school" and "out-of-school" children in health and sanitation education via posters, competitions and street theatre. The impacts of this approach have yet to be evaluated, but anecdotal evidence suggests this was a successful initiative, as children were able to successfully act as agents for change. For example, applying pressure on parents to purchase and use a latrine. Perceptions of teachers and parents revealed there was improved personal hygiene in 75% of schools and improved school environment in 85% of schools. Perceptions of children, relating to school and family's changed hygiene practices will be obtained in a forthcoming evaluation.
The GAP approach recognises that poor men and women who often volunteer to contribute unpaid and unskilled labour in water supply and sanitation projects are being penalised. NEWAH's projects require up to 50 days free labour days from each household, depending on the number of households and distance from roadhead, during construction of the water system, as part of the community contribution. This means that poor families are unable to work in their fields or as paid farm labourers during this period resulting in a loss of income. The GAP projects therefore introduced 50% payment of the standard daily labour rate for the poorest households who contributed unskilled labour.
The GAP approach places emphasis on paid job opportunities to women as well as men. Traditionally the better off men in a community come forward for training and paid job opportunities. In the GAP pilot projects women have been trained as paid system maintenance caretakers as well as men. This enables women to swiftly respond to breakdowns that immediately affect them, especially in the absence of men, who are increasingly away as seasonal labourers in other towns or cities. Women were also trained as paid sanitation masons, along with men. Some women were initially resistant to taking on technical jobs, because they feared being ridiculed by men and other women in the community. Confidence and awareness building by NEWAH and partner staff enabled women to train and become effective in their new roles, with the support of the community.
As part of phasing-in of the GAP approach throughout NEWAH's programme, NEWAH has trained a second phase of GAP teams in the summer of 2002. From this year the GAP approach will be integrated in around 35% of NEWAH's programme, with the aim of achieving 100% integration by 2004.
NEWAH as a changing institution is also shaping the behaviour of its partner organisations in promoting gender-sensitive pro-poor policies and implementing them at community level. In the 5 GAP pilot projects, NEWAH oriented partners on the rationale of a GAP approach, provided gender and poverty awareness training and skills building at community level, to enable successful implementation and facilitation of a GAP approach. By 2004, it will be in a position to influence the behaviour of around 60 partner organisations and communities with whom it works annually.
Conclusion
Scaling up gender and poverty-sensitive community management of water supply and sanitation systems requires institutional commitment, resources, time and long-term support. NEWAH has clearly demonstrated all of these over the past few years. What is significant is NEWAH's ability to change institutional attitude in accepting and implementing approaches to enhance gender sensitive and pro-poor community management. It is essential to view women and men in a community as equal, regardless of caste or class, and to respond to their needs. This important dimension is being addressed in all stages of NEWAH's project cycle. Addressing gender and poverty issues can substantially contribute to achieving equitable access and sustainability for poverty reduction. We can certainly look forward to these contributions in the next ten years with NEWAH's innovative and valuable work in the development of communities in Nepal.
Development and Water
Dr. Sudhindra Sharma
Providing water to its citizen has become an important function of the Nepali State. But, even before the modern state got involved in water supply, people had been obtaining and managing water themselves. In the hills and the Tarai, various sources of water were used: for drinking water, dhunge dhara, kuwa and inar were generally used and for religious practices nadi, khola and kunda were used. Pokhari, khahare and kulo were used for other household uses.
If the people of Nepal like those in other developing countries, have had access to water, then what is the provision of water by the modern state all about? What is the enterprise of water provision (khane pani) all about? How does it relate to the fact that throughout history people have used and consequently developed ways of managing water? What is at issue when we talk of providing water for development by the modern state? What is development co-operation between two nations in providing such supply about?
Official reports justify government's interventions to ensure the provision of 'adequate water supply and sanitation services' and the 'adequate coverage of such services'. They suggest that interventions are required because of limited access to safe and hygienic water; the high incidence of child morbidity arising from water-borne diseases, inadequate sanitation facilities and the ensuing health hazards; and drudgery for the women-folk. However, before inadequate service levels and inadequate coverage of services gained salience as the rationale for intervention, the raison of the premier agencies engaged in the sector used to be providing 'piped' water. In stating its past achievements and in charting its future plans, projections invariably rested on the percentage of people who had and did not have access
to 'piped' water.
With 'safe' water having replaced 'piped' water as the justification of intervention, concerns of inadequate service levels and inadequate coverage of services have come to the fore. This rationale has become so central to agencies involved in water supply and sanitation that it has become a self-evident and universal truth. Discussions on, deliberations about and actions and institutionalized practices that are related to these issues have become, so to speak, the dominant discourse. It has consequently made other concerns peripheral.
Normally the term 'discourse means passages of connected writing or speech. The way the term is used here, however, is broader: derived from the Foucauldian interpretation of the term, it refers to both language and practice. Micheal Foucault uses the term 'discourse' in a much broader sense than language to include many other elements of practice and institutional regulation. By discourse Foucault meant a group of statements which provide a language for talking about a way of representing the knowledge about a particular topic at a particular historical moment.(Hall, S. (1992) who in turn cites Foucault, M (1972) and Foucault, M. (1980). Discourse in this sense is about the production of knowledge through language. Moreover since all social practices entail meaning and since meanings shape and influence what we do, all practices have discursive aspects. The term 'discourse' as used in this study refers to both language and social practice.
Coming back to water supply and sanitation, what is permissible for discussion within the parameters of conventional wisdom is discussions pertaining to institutional modalities and resource mobilization strategies for expanding the coverage of services and for enhancing service levels. With regard to the proper institutional arrangements, the debate among water supply agencies centers around the roles of line agencies, locally elected government bodies such as District Development Committee (DDC) and the Village Development Committee (VDC), and NGOs in delivering services and the working arrangements between these agencies and water user associations. Similarly, with regard to resource mobilization strategy, the debate concerns the various combinations between external funding (from the government and bilateral and multilateral donors) and local funding (from DDCs, VDCs and users), the type of funds to be raised (in kind, labour and cash) and how the funds are to be mobilized.
What a case study conducted in the hills of western Nepal by this researcher reveals is that households generally use water from more than one source in order to meet their various domestic water requirements. The fact that households generally use water from more than one source should not, however, be construed to imply that water availability is not a problem. It is, but more so during specific times of the year than in others. Although spring sources do have water throughout the year, availability varies considerably. During the rainy season (i.e., the months of June, July, August and September), nearby spring sources have ample water. These sources continue to be recharged up to February through the percolation of monsoon rains and through occasional showers. Little precipitation falls in the months of March, April and May, however; consequently the spring sources do not get sufficiently recharged. Nearby sources dry up and users have to travel further and further away to get to larger spring sources which may still contain some water. Thus during summer when the demand for domestic water reaches its peak, the supply gets increasingly depleted and the drudgery associated with fetching water increases.
The prospective users are generally keen on having a piped scheme installed with the assistance of an external agency because the tap stands would be closer to their homes than spring sources are. The piped scheme would also have a more reliable supply both in terms of daily access and year-round availability. This, in turn, would means less drudgery to those who have to carry the water-namely the women-folk and young boys and girls.
Official documents create the impression that the people of a particular locality simply do not have access to domestic water and that they have not managed to meet their needs prior to intervention. Calls for intervention are legitimized by neutral parameters (in this case, the hardship score), which value 'safe' water and sanitation. These calls give the impression that the proposed source of water supply is generally an untouched mountain source whose water is just being wasted. The fact of the matter is that even prior to the implementation of a project, people do have access to water though the supply varies according to the seasons. People seek external assistance for a more reliable supply in terms of access and year-round availability provided by taps located close to their households in order to lessen the drudgery of those who have to carry water. While externally-funded water supply and sanitation projects suppose that implementation enables hill people to access hitherto inaccessible water supply and sanitation, local people see external support as helping to further consolidate their water rights as well as to lead to better reliability and accessibility. The lack of sanitation is not perceived to be an undesirable condition because it is generally not associated with drudgery. The water supply source tapped is generally one that is already being used by one community but which another community covets.
If accessibility is indeed a problem in the hills, what the case study of the hill scheme illustrates is that the implementation of water supply and sanitation programs is likely to be increasingly problematic in the future. The coverage of water supply services has expanded in the hills through piped schemes involving gravity flow. These gravity-flow schemes tap spring sources and small stream sources and convey the water to tap-stands through high-density polythene pipes. Achieving high coverage in the hills means that most spring and small stream sources have already been tapped. It also means that the remaining ones could either be mired in water rights disputes or could be very difficult, in technological and consequently economically terms to harness. In these circumstances, accessibility for one community is achieved at the cost of depriving other communities their prior entitlements to water and by blocking its access to still other hard-pressed communities. Schemes are likely to face resistance from the negatively affected quarters and delays in implementation will ensue. Accessibility is already a genuine problem in the hills and ensuring a supply of water in the future is likely to be even more problematic. It is ironic that the expansion of water supply and sanitation services in the hills, where accessibility to water is indeed an acute problem, is likely to face increasing hurdles and challenges while its expansion in the Tarai, where accessibility to water is not a problem, is likely to be less problematic.
With regard to the question at the outset what khane paani, the provisioning of domestic water by the state with the support of foreign aid, is all about, the answer is different things to different agencies and people. For state structures, khane paani is as much about procuring hardware and equipment as it is about providing access to people who supposedly had no previous access to a supply of water. For donor agencies, khane pani is as much about remaining in the business of channeling, disbursing and siphoning foreign funds as it is about improving water supply and sanitation coverage and services. Both foreign aid agencies and state structures, placed as they are between the donor headquarters in the first world and the hinterlands of Nepal, act as the interstices in the global discourse on water. For people in the hills and Tarai of Nepal, who have had some sort of access to water supply all along, khane pani is as much about becoming modern (adhunik) as it is about reducing drudgery, saving labour and boosting convenience.
Many bilateral and multi-lateral development agencies provide support to the drinking water supply and sanitation sector in Nepal. The agencies participating in these activities support a certain institutional arrangement and adopt a specific resource mobilization strategy. By participating thus these agencies actively take part in the discourse of the rural water supply and sanitation improvement policy of the country. In this sense, Nepali State is not isolated from global-level actors and their related discourse. The global discourse thus shapes the nature and outcomes of activities in the aid recipient nation. The challenge ahead for those involved in the water supply and sanitation sector in Nepal is to engage in the water debates at local, regional and global levels so that the real condition of those without access to drinking water and sanitation services is reflected and commensurate policies gets formulated. Such an engagement, moreover, needs to be continuous.
Arsenic contamination: Drinking Water in NepalM
Anil Pokhrel and Kim Rud Adamsen
Drinking Water Contamination
Water is the most essential element for all beings; in fact it plays a vital role in maintaining the entire life cycle on the Earth. Human beings need safe drinking water. If it is not free from biological and chemical contaminants it can have serious implications for all life forms. In particular, the presence of contaminants in water makes it unacceptable to drink for humans and cause adverse health effects. Ironically because water is a universal solvent, many substances including contaminants like arsenic dissolve in it.
In Bangladesh, West Bengal and in many localities of the Tarai of Nepal, the arsenic concentration in "drinking water" from tube wells is higher than the permissible level set by World Health Organisation (WHO). Arsenic is a more hazardous contaminant than microbiological contamination in that the effect of arsenic develops over period of up to thirty years. This means that effective mitigation of the arsenic levels also takes many years.
Arsenic can kill
Arsenic contaminant can cause acute and chronic ill health. Only 60 milligrams is enough to kill an adult instantly. This metalloid dissolves in water, contaminating it, but we cannot see, taste or smell arsenic without chemical tests. Symptoms of arsenic poisoning cannot be detected in its early stages; its impact is evident only much later when it might be too late for treatment. If a person consumes arsenic contaminated water continuously over a long period of time, the traces can be found in samples of hair and nail.
High concentration
In many developing countries, tube wells are the preferred technology for providing safe water to rural areas. Hand pumps and tube wells are installed to extract groundwater from aquifers at different depths some of which may be contaminated with arsenic, fluorides and nitrates. In the last two decades there has been a sharp increase in the number of private tube wells and thus in the extent of impacts.
Test results
Various agencies have tested more than 17,000 wells in Nepal in the last few years. Still, the number of tube wells tested is less than 5 per cent of all the tube wells it is estimated to be installed. Tests were carried out on water from wells supported only by external agencies. Of the tested tube wells, more than 26 per cent have arsenic concentrations of 10 micrograms per liter (ppb), which is higher than the WHO limit. About 5 per cent had concentrations that exceeded 50 ppb, which is the accepted standard in Nepal, India and Bangladesh. The actual number of tube wells in Nepal which are contaminated is still largely unknown; thus there is no conclusive data on the scale of the problem.
Several factors indicate that arsenic contamination may acquire crisis proportions if not taken seriously. The scale of the problem has increased with migration to the Tarai, natural the population growth, and growing number of people who use groundwater, the lack of mitigation measures and low levels of awareness. If a situation of crisis is to be averted, effective monitoring programs must be initiated as should awareness building campaigns and local-level steps towards mitigation. The cost of delay will be hard on the poor and the number of suffers will be very high.
Constructive co-operation
Government departments, academic bodies, NGOs and donors have come together in the last two years to prepare an action plan for the monitoring and mitigation of arsenic contamination. Print media have also shown an interest in the arsenic issue. In addition, arsenic mitigation issues are discussed by the National Arsenic Steering Committee and informal NGO groups. All sectoral agencies that support the use of groundwater participate in these fora to design to improve understanding about the problem and its mitigation.
NEWAH's role
NEWAH began testing the pumps it installed for arsenic in 2000. It also uses GPS positions and GIS to locate those wells. The organization has also developed protocols for implementing tube well projects as well a procedures for conducting field testing. It is currently developing plans for mitigating arsenic contamination NEWAH is a member of both the National Arsenic Steering Committee and the NGO informal group.
From management for to Management by communities
Eveline Bolt and Raju Khadka
The call for sustainability
In many developing countries the successful operation and maintenance of widely dispersed rural water systems cannot be done without the full involvement and commitment of the users. Whereas donors usually do support the implementation of water systems, they leave the organisation of the systems management to government agencies, whilst at the same time paying insufficient attention to sustained institutional support. However, central government agencies do not dispose of sufficient staff, transport and budgets to provide this type of service to rural populations, which leads to broken down systems, dissatisfied consumers and demoralised agency personnel.
Among the commitments made by world leaders at the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro in June 1992, was a comprehensive programme to bring sustainable water supply and sanitation services to the hundreds of millions of people who currently lack them. One of the guiding principles adopted in the New Delhi Consultation in 1990 and reconfirmed in Agenda 21, the Earth Summit's strategy for sustainable development in the 21st century, is: Community management of services, backed by measures to strengthen local institutions in implementing and sustaining water and sanitation programmes (Evans & Appleton, 1993). This calls for states and support agencies to find ways to best support communities and local institutions. Making the transition from being providers of water supply systems to facilitators of processes in communities that results in better community management, is a way to do that. Done efficiently and effectively this can enlarge benefits from investments made and reduce costs otherwise involved in centralised, ineffective management. Supporting a more prominent role for communities as managers of improved water supply systems has several advantages. It can lead to greater efficiency in system performance, improve cost-effectiveness for both communities and agencies and has better prospects for the long-term sustainability of water supply systems. Resources otherwise used for reconstruction or rehabilitation of broken down systems can be diverted to increase water supply coverage.
The challenge
Many governments embraced the idea of changing from "providers to facilitators" and have become convinced that centralised systems cannot deliver the required services for the sector. Hence the strong push towards decentralisation that started in the late eighties and a growing trend to encourage rural communities to manage their water resources.
Still, many challenges are to be addressed. A first assessment of the situation in six countries that took part in a participatory action research on the role of communities in the management of rural water supplies (IRC, 1997) indicates that:
- In each of the countries, community management of rural water supply systems is the accepted national policy, but implementation is not universal and each agency has its own ideas on how this is best to be done.
- In spite of the national policy, governments do not treat communities as future managers in the sense that they can make their own choice from a range of options, each with their own pros and cons. Such choices concern the use of water resources and system construction as well as management organisation.
- Experience with existing community managed water supply systems varies. In Cameroon, 438 schemes were built to be community managed. At the time of the assessment only 9% of these schemes are broken down. Many other schemes built without community involvement are no longer operational. Other countries report that a lot of community managed systems do not function well, partly for technical and ecological reasons, partly because of poor administration and lack of anagement training and back-up support.
- Training to prepare communities for management is often focused on technical tasks and bookkeeping, and is mostly given to men.
- Quite a few community members are not served because of poor water distribution and poor network management. Although many of these people have contributed to the construction of the system in cash or kind, they do not obtain the benefits.
- Problems with existing systems are of technical, managerial and socio-economic nature, but communities just mention technical problems. Other problems surface only after further probing and discussion.
- Record keeping, both financially and concerning agreements in meetings, is very limited and erodes the confidence of the community members. The same goes for communication and information sharing that is sparsely done and is mainly in the hands of the local leadership.
- Many agencies stipulate preconditions for future management, usually the formation of a water committee with some women representation and the establishment of a maintenance fund according to the agencies' principles. However little is done in developing management tools or management training.
A statistical analysis of an assessment done in 88 communities showed that good governance at the community level during project cycle is positively correlated with a more sustained water supply. "Good governance" comprises characteristics such as: a local organisation monitors contributions to construction and deals with defaulters, women participation in monitoring and control, male and female community members are trained in technical, managerial, financial, and water use/hygiene aspects, and accounts are shared with the entire community (World Bank/IRC, 2000).
Management by communities
Many definitions of community management exist and we do not intend to provide one overall, universally accepted definition here. We feel it is more useful to clarify the concept of community management by making a distinction between management for the community and management by the community and to subsequently take a look at the consequences of "management by the community" for the actors involved. Without denying that many "in-between forms of management exist" we distinguish three major actors; i) the public sector, ranging from national government to local authorities, ii) the private sector, ranging from small local entrepreneurs to multinational companies, and iii) the community, a heterogeneous group of people being or to be served by a water supply system.
Management for the communitycan be described as a situation whereby, generally speaking, water users have neither the knowledge nor the interest to get involved in decision making as long as service levels remains acceptable. This is often the case in more urban areas. Consumers exercise their influence through selection of members of the management institution or by not paying the bill. The management institution can be a public utility or a private company being authorised by the public authority to manage the water supply system.
Management by the communitycan be described as a situation whereby water users are owners. Having ownership, they feel and are responsible for sustaining or even improving the water supply service level and hence directly or indirectly (through a local management organisation) take part in management decisions. Users contribute in cash or kind. Management by communities does not imply that communities must take care of everything or pay the full costs. A partnership with the other actors allows scope for sharing responsibilities between the local management organisation of the community on the one hand and the public and/or private sector on the other. The functions to be performed by the users or their local management organisation can thus vary considerably, depending upon the agreed division of responsibility between the actors. The different actors or their representatives thus have to come to an agreement on what the specific contributions and responsibilities will be over time. This they can only do on the basis of informed decision making by community members already during system construction, which particularly addresses the expected service level and the long term management of the system.
Whether managed by or for the community, for any water supply service to be sustainable, it is crucial that there is a demand and that users are involved in decisions related to service level and tariff setting.
Implication of management by communities
Community management, however, faces a lot of constraints for agencies, public or private as well as for communities. As indicated above, agencies have a strong tradition and focus on construction of water supply systems. Still too little emphasis is put on the establishment of management capacity at local level for lack of experiences and strategies. It needs to go beyond training a caretaker and a bookkeeper.
The same is valid for the establishment of support capacity within the agency. On the community side, there is often a lack of experience with management of water supply systems and a lack of tools to cope with their management. On the agency side there is often a lack of skills to facilitate community processes. The legal and policy environment may also not offer sufficient framework for community management.
An issue often overlooked is monitoring and the development of simple monitoring tools. If they are provided at all, most monitoring tools are reporting forms and not tools that help communities to identify potential problem areas and that initiate and stimulate action. Often more importance seems to be adhered to reporting on achievements (positive or negative) than to sustaining the service of the water supply system at the desired level. Monitoring should help tackle the technical, economical and managerial problems related to the performance of the system. Communities or their local management organisations need to be assisted in the development of indicators for potential problem issues and ways to collect information. Action to be taken if the desired level for specific indicators is not reached needs to be determined.
Some concluding remarks
Currently in most countries, community management of rural water supply systems is the accepted national policy. However, political will is needed to transform policy into practice. Communities are usually not treated as future managers in the sense that they can make their own choices from a range of options. Nor do they get sufficient opportunity to learn the required management skills. This and the lack of back-up support for problems going beyond the community level are important reasons for the substandard performance of many systems. This will continue to be the case unless the managerial aspects are better taken in hand and practical management tools are developed together with communities.
Fortunately, new learning approaches emerge and are gradually being adopted in challenging institutional settings where community knowledge and institutional knowledge are equally valued and people start to respect each others views.
The partnership approach means for agencies that strategies and methods are needed to foster management capacity with communities, building on existing knowledge and practices. This also implies that agencies need to make the necessary adjustments and strengthen their own capacity to replace a top-down approach by an approach whereby they provide effective support to communities. Communities also need to come to grips with working with the agency staff in a horizontal relationship.
On both sides there is a need for the paradigm shift of communities participating in agency projects to one of the agencies participating in community projects.
|
|
|
 |
|
Latest Updates
|
 |
|
|
