improved livelihood challenges

8/14/2019 Improved Livelihood Challenges

1/26

1.

The Challenges in Attaining Sustainable Development forImproved Livelihood

9th WATERNET/WARFSA/GWP-SA SYMPOSIUM JOHANESSBURG, SOUTH

AFRICA

29th to 31st OCTOBER 2008.

By:

Prof. D.A. [email protected]


2/26

2

ABSTRACT

The theme of this year touches on improved livelihood emanating

from how we manage water resources and services in a sustainablemanner. This is a mouthful objective to be met in a two or three days

meeting like this one. The definition of the sustainable development

is well known among all of us. But the connection of this concept or

principle to the concrete steps that need to be taken in order to

achieve improved livelihood is blurred. It is not the aim of this paper

to bridge this gap between the theoretical principles and what hasto be done in practice in order to have sustainable development.

That will be the outcome of our collective wisdom in this symposium.

As alluded above, it is difficult to answer all the challenges facing

our people of the region. This presentation is essentially an attempt

to point out the challenges or hurdles that must be thought through

and the pragmatic solutions found that are appropriate to the

region. The challenges include (i) training of the appropriate

operatives and water professionals (technicians and engineers etc.),

(ii) cost recovery (CR), (iii) water integrity and accountability, (iv)

Appropriate Private Sector Participation (PSP), (v) increasing water

productivity for improved crop yields and hence family incomes of

resource-constrained subsistence farmers, (vi) information and data

archiving and dissemination.


3/26

3

Key words: Capacity building, Cost Recovery (CR), improved

livelihood, IWRM, MDGs, PSP, WDM, Water integrity and

accountability.

1. INTRODUCTION

This is the 9th Water Net/WARSA/GWP-SA Symposium in the

annual series of symposia in Southern Africa. Perhaps it is time

to look back at the series and their perceived or otherwise

achievements in grappling with attaining sustainable

development for improved livelihood. It is not nave to look

into history in order to learn one or two things that has shaped

the current landscape.

Looking back here is in the form of the challenges or hurdles

that we had to overcome or will have to overcome in order to

achieve our expectations. In this regards we look specifically

at the issues of water and how they are imparting on

sustainable development. And in turn how this impacts on

improved livelihood. To start we dwell on the following

questions:-

(i) What have we achieved in terms of down-to-earth

solutions to our peoples aspirations in these series of

symposia since 2000?


4/26

4

(ii) Those we seek to help are not here! They predominantly

live in rural areas or peri-urban settlements largely

depend on unprocessed natural resources which we

exploit with our advantaged position of access to

modern technology. How are we grappling with the

practical realities of ensuring that we have a good idea

of their needs and are able to design our research to

appropriately address their needs?

(iii) Over sixty percent of the water of the region is trans-

boundary by nature. How prepared are we in conflict

prevention and conflict resolution?

(iv) The rich and the powerful can access information (and

sometimes manipulate it!) and influence decision making

in their favour. How is the region ensuring the same

information (un manipulated) reaches the poor and the

powerless?

(v) The issue of privatization or divesture in the provision of

water and sanitation services has caught up with a lot of

the countries (sometimes unawares!) in the region. The

challenge is how has privatization or rather private sector

involvement in most feasible ways taken on board the


5/26

5

expectations of the poor especially the resource-

constrained urban dweller?

(vi) The issue of water integrity and accountability in the

provision of water supply and sanitation especially in

urban centres has become very touching in the World.

How is the region prepared to cope with its own protocols

on the issue?

(vii) The issue of appropriate technologies and standards play

a key role in the provision of water and sanitation

services. How far have we gone in our day to day

endeavours to ensure that the technology is the one

reachable by our customers and how does it meets the

standards?

2. LOOKING BACK THROUGH THE UN-TIME TUNNEL

Let us look back at what the UN through its agencies has

played a role on global water policy making:

(i) The first UN Conference on water was held in 1977 in Mar

del Plata in Argentina. It came out with the International

Water Supply and Sanitation Decade (IWSSD)

Declaration from 1981 to 1990. This was a milestone we


6/26

6

cant easily forget as it was a decision by our leaders on

behalf of all of us! In 1990 and ten years down the time

lane in New Delhi we found out that water was still

undervalued as such, and much of it was misused. A

hard and blatant fact which still hangs on our necks

today.

(ii) Thereafter in 1992 the Dublin Principles were conceived

and agreed upon in the Irish Republic by many water

and political leaders. Until now we still grapple with the

comprehension of the four Dublin principles, let alone the

implementation hurdles thereof.

(iii) The Rio Summit was held in the same year of 1992 and

came out with the Rio Declaration and Agenda 21

programme. A formidable and plausible Agenda

indeed. It is still anyones guess how much of these

different aspects of the deliberations have been

integrated into our nations as well as regional plans and

implemented.

(iv) The Millennium Declaration in 2000 and the World Summit

on Sustainable Development in 2002 set global goals.


7/26

7

The above mentioned are among the major and crucial

milestones that touch on the livelihood of our people. We can

reflect back at these Declarations and ponder on the impacts

they have made on the quest of our peoples attain better

livelihood. In reflecting on these well thought out Declarations

and proposals and the huge disparity that currently exists

between what they were intended to achieve and the present

realities, we are confronted with the challenge of proffering

solutions to bridge this gap as a matter of urgency.

3. REFLECTIONS THROUGH THE WATER NET/WARFSA/GWP-SA

ENDEVOURS.

As mentioned earlier on in this discussion, this is the ninth

symposium and just like the last eight meetings each has a

main Theme. The Theme of this year is Water and Sustainable

Development for Improved Livelihoods. This is a very fitting

Theme given the conditions of the present day challenges in

the provision of water supply and sanitation services in the

region.

Traditionally the symposia have been in six major themes i.e.

hydrology, water for people, water and land, water and

environment, water and society as well as water resources

management. Our experience is that these identified themes


8/26

8

are still relevant and appropriate in the region. From the

survey carried by Zaag (2007) on the publications in PCE

Journal arising from previous symposia and the sobering

observation that there is no evidence on the ground, in terms

of improving the livelihoods of people, there is the need to

step up in terms of impacts of our research efforts. It is hoped

that subsequent symposia, including this one, will bring about

the desired outcomes of a steady and sustained improvement

in livelihoods of our people.

This paper is an attempt to highlight the hurdles which are

facing the region and not an attempt to appease a people or

a group of people. It is indeed a reflection and only so!

As expected, articles presented and eventually succeeding in

getting published in the PCE Journal are overwhelming on

Water and Environment. Hard core hydrology scores the

lowest as can be expected due to its technical nature and the

expected nature of the readership in the region. The other

four themes fall in between these two extremes.

In any case if one looks back at the symposium series one

discovers that a wide range of issues and problems have been

addressed. The following is an attempt to scan through the

Themes of each of the past 8 symposia.


9/26

9

In 2000 the symposium was sponsored by WARFSA/WATERNET

with the collaboration of Eduardo Mondlane University (UEM).

The Theme was Sustainable Use of Water Resources:

Advances in Education and Research: The emphasis was on

education and research which was fair enough as we were on

the verge of starting the Modular Masters degree programme

in IWRM in the Region. The sub themes were:-

(i) People, Institutions and Policy,

(ii) Management of Water Systems

(iii) Water Demand Management

(iv) A New Curriculum

The second symposium was held in Cape Town, RSA. The

Theme was Integrated Water Resources Management.

Theory, Practice, Cases. This was the first time IWRM concepts

vividly came on board in the oral presentations as well as in

case studies. An attempt was made towards solving some

water resources issues at basin levels. The Case Studies

indicated attempts at proffering solutions to water resources

problems/challenges on the basis of IWRM principles.

The 3rd symposium was held in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania in

October 2002. The main theme was Water Demand

Management: Sustainable Uses of Water Resources. The


10/26

10

meeting had papers striving to give practical expression to

achieving Water Demand Management and its potential

benefits of having larger segment of society benefit from water

supply services.

The 4th symposium was held in Gaborone, Botswana between

15th and 17th October 2003. The Theme was Water, Science,

Technology and Policy convergence and action by all. This

was indeed a meeting point for action leading to sustainable

development. This was a meeting that intended to achieve

convergence of concepts and practice in the water sector. In

any case it left some challenges for the next symposium.

Between 2nd and 4th November 2004 the 5th

WATERNET/WARFSA Symposium was held in Windhoek,

Namibia. The symposium was held in association with GWP-SA,

DRFN as well as Polytechnic of Namibia. The Theme was

IWRM and MDGs, Managing Water for Peace and Prosperity.

The challenges were many but there were a lot of papers that

made an attempt to solve them head on. There was a good

combination of IWRM and MDGs in order to achieve peace

and prosperity. The symposium theme was most fitting, taking

cognisance of the fact that MDGs were at the centre stage of

most UN-sponsored international fora. Going back to the


11/26

11

introduction again the issue of transboundary waters and their

inherent potential conflicts was addressed in the forum.

The 6th WATERNET/WARFSA/GWP-SA Symposium was held in

Ezulwini, Swaziland during 2nd - 4th November 2005. The Theme

was Water for sustainable social-economic development,

good health for all and gender equity. This was the first time

issues of social-economic nature and gender equity were

dealt were addressed. It was a meeting that strived to breach

the gap that had had been left out for more technical and

visible subthemes.


Lilongwe, Malawi 1st to 3rd November 2006. The Theme was

Mainstreaming Integrated Water Resources Management in

the Development Process. The major sub-themes being

Hydrology, Water and Environment, Water and Land, Water

and society, Water for people as well as Water Resources

Management. A lot of papers were presented which

generated new ideas and to some extent built on the

knowledge already acquired in past symposia.


Lusaka, Zambia during 31st October and 2nd November 2007.

The Theme was IWRM from Concept to Practice. Here again


12/26

12

the emphasis was on the less romantic and more mundane

practice and down-to-earth solutions to water resources

problems that people in the region face.

This is the 9th Symposium in the Series. And rightly so the Theme

is Water and Sustainable Development for Improved

Livelihoods. Again here we see the issue of water and

sustainable development but with emphasis on improved

livelihoods. It is expected that papers presented in this forum

will address the issues related to improving the livelihoods of

people of the region through better management of the water

resources IWRM principles! It is therefore another challenge

to all of us here on how we relate our research findings to

offering better service to the people.

4. LESSONS LEARNED AND CHALLENGES AHEADLessons learnt so far can be summarised as follows:-

4.1 Millennium Development Goals (MDGs).

The 7th MDG is very relevant here the goal has three

targets i.e. sustainable development and environmental

conservation; increase in population with access to safe

drinking water and sanitation as well as improvement of

lives. In pursuance of this goal, this forum will play a very

significant role of elevating the need for achieving

improved livelihoods.


13/26

13

Some hard facts about access to various forms of sanitation in Sub-Saharan

Africa are very scary (Strauss, 2006).

Just about 53% do have access to pit latrine option.

Those who do not have (they do not own or have access to a neighbours

facility!) any access are sizeable at 35%.

A mere 8% have access to flush toilet.

The rest use any other system including the infamous flying toilet.

In any case investment into this subsector is considered

private as such most governments do little on this if

anything. But we all know that sanitation holds the key toachieving MDGs especially those evolving around water.

Recently (October 7th to 9th) our African leaders

recognised these challenges as such they have

committed themselves to follow up on the following 8

challenges see box below (AU, 2008)

- water and sanitation infrastructure financing- water conservation and equitable distribution

- closing the sanitation gap

- breaking the silence on sanitation and hygiene

- adapting to climate change

- integrated management of national and transboundary surface and ground water

- investing in information, knowledge and monitoring

- institutional development as well capacity building

This shows a recommendable commitment by our leaders

that need to be followed by a matching commitment by

our experts seating in this forum.


14/26

14

However, the challenges remain that the resources

required to achieving them are not available in time and

in quantities that will bring about significant changes. In

Tanzania as an example, the amount required is close to

US$ 2billion a colossal amount by any standards. I

believe this state of affairs is replicated in many other

countries in the region. Then how can our esteemed

experts in these symposia contribute towards the

attainment of the MDGs through their research and

publications? Perhaps the speech by the former

president of Tanzania (Mkapa, 2005) would shade some

ideas and challenges for the seemingly enormous task

(see box below).

Perhaps we might be tempted to ask if in 2000 world leaders were over-

ambitious in setting these goals. But let me ask you, learned people and

scientists:

What is so ambitious about halving, over a period of 25 years, between 1990

and 2015, the proportion of people earning less than US$ 1.0 per day and

those who suffer from hunger? The goal was not to eliminate poverty, only to

halve it; not to eliminate hunger, only to halve it. Is it really too ambitioustaking into account the wealth and the knowledge that our world has?

What is so ambitious about ensuring that by 2015, all children, boys and girls,

would be able to complete a full course of primary school education? Is that

really too much to ask?


15/26

15

What is so ambitious about eliminating gender disparity in primary and

secondary schools; or in reducing by two-thirds the under-five mortality rate

and maternal mortality rate?

4.2 Privatisation and Divesture

This is an issue which is a challenge to all of us here. How

can we embrace privatization or rather private sector

involvement as a policy but avoid the inherent

monopolistic machinations? And at the same time keep

water supply and sanitation services affordable to thepoor especially the urban poor. The other issue is how the

State remains in control and accountable over water

management if the water sector is transformed from the

public law domain into theprivate law domain?

We can at least borrow a leaf from the PRINWASS (2004)

research findings on the issue. The main findings of thisthree year research (the author was a member of the

team) is the Policy of Promoting Private Sector

Involvement in Urban Water and Sanitation Projects was

pitched on thepremise that the public sector is inefficient

and under resourced and that private sector

participation would bring higher efficiency throughcompetition and fresh resources, and help to extend

coverage of these services to the poor. The case

material does not support this claim. There are 14 other


16/26

16

findings from this study which are worth noting and taking

on board before joining the band wagon of privatization.

These findings confirm what Briscoe (2003) had allayed

and to quote him .The role of Governments and the

World Bank which are basically public institutions is

facilitation, getting regulatory frameworks right, and then

automatically all this would be done by the private

sector. But we and others vastly overestimated what the

private sector could and would do in difficult markets.

Hukka and Katko (2003) buttress this by stating that

Water Supply and Sewerage Systems are, and will

remain, natural monopolies since it is not viable to build

several networks and facilities in the same physical

environment. This finding ties with those of the PRINWASS

(2004) study. The poor pay more for water of suspicious

quality was another stack finding by Kjellen (2000). Annez

(2006) points out that PPI must be revisited so that the

perceived services e.g. water supply and sanitation are

rendered in a manner and spirit of the served.

PPI = Private Participation in Infrastructure


17/26

17

Now some fifteen years further even the World Bank representatives admit among others that

however, PPI has disappointedplaying a far less significant role in financing infrastructure in

cities than was hoped for, and which might be expected given the attention it has received and

continues to receive in strategies to mobilize financing for infrastructure (Anew, 2006).

Thus, the challenge is rather how to develop private sector companies thatwould sell their services and goods in ways that will guarantee competition. And

how to develop the capacity of local governments. And how to promote and

develop public enterprise reforms. And how to develop the overall games of

the rules like regulation.

Policy Research Working Paper 4391Alternatives to Infrastructure Privatization Revisited: Public

Enterprise Reform from the 1960s to the 1980s Jos A. Gmez-Ibez The World Bank

Sustainable Development Network. November 2007. WPS4391

4.3 COST RECOVERY ISSUES

When considering privatization we usually refer to urban

settings. This is partly because very little or no privatization

can take place in a rural setting. This is a wrong notion as

yet, in rural conditions in many countries we have thetradition of water cooperatives of small systems owned

and managed by people themselves. These are also

private, but they are not profit-making. Thus, there is a

difference between private and private depending what

we are speaking about Mashauri and Katko (1992). There

are exceptions but this is neither the place nor the time

for an argument on the issue.


18/26

18

On the other hand cost recovery will and can take place

in rural setting. Both Hukka and Katko (2003) and Yacoob

(1990) agree that cost recovery must be imbedded in the

policies of provision of water supply and sanitation

services. They also concur that CR must be articulated so

that it does not overburden the poor. Even the poorest of

the poor must be afforded the bare minimum amount of

water to make him survive. This is the third challenge that

must be looked into when we ponder about the theme of

this meeting.

4.4. Water integrity and accountability

The issue of water integrity and accountability is as old as

the water resources trade itself. At regional level issues of

transparency and accountability are well articulated in

the SADC Protocol Against Corruption (Earle et al 2008).

The Protocol covers the water sector, too. The corrupt

practices in the water sector have been attributed as

taking the form of:

- Abuse of resources,

- Corruption in procurements,

- Administrative corruption in payment systems, and

- Corruption at the point of service delivery.


19/26

19

You and I in this forum constitute a good section of

expertise in the region. We are therefore better off (than

the people we pretend to represent!) to explain how we

are grappling with water integrity and accountability in

our own countries or in our work domains. It is yet another

challenge which can mean success or failure in the

provision of water and sanitation for improved livelihood.

Are we really accountable to our peoples in the

deliverance of services such as those of water supply and

sanitation? Did we have to dance to tunes of

Globalisation and the good governance stuff? See box

below (Shivji, 2003).

Political conditionalities were added to economic conditionalities, while

economic conditionalities were upgraded to include privatisation of not only

parastatals but also services-water, electricity, communication, education, etc.Multiparty democracy, human rights, good governance, poverty reduction

became the buzz words of the discourse, now renamed policy dialogues

4.5. Capacity Building and Sustainable Development

This is yet another issue which needs proper evaluation

and support if we are to achieve the MDGs. This is a

region proud of less than 20 engineers per 100,000

people. A number much less than the one required to

form a critical mass for development. Rotival (1990)

stated that in order to progress (post IWSSD) Capacity


20/26

20

Building in terms of strengthening of sector institutions and

sector plans and strategies, human resources

development and improved information systems is

crucial. Ellis (1990) concurs with Rotival and alludes that

training of engineers and technicians is of paramount

importance in the water sector. This line of thought is

equally supported by Mkanga (1990). It is gratifying that

WaterNet is a capacity building network that has a

mission to enhance human knowledge base so as to

achieve improved livelihood. Indeed WaterNet is playing

its role in mounting short specialised courses, Masters

degree programmes as well as running

workshops/meetings like this one which is part of its

mission. We are all proud to be part of the WATERNET

family. It is hoped that our governments and their

development partners will endure the new paradigms in

terms of vision, mission and implementation so as to attain

the MDGs.

4.6 APPROPRIATE TECHNOLOGIES AND STANDARDS

The issue of appropriate technologies and standards is usually taken

for granted in the provision of water and sanitation services. If the

technology chosen is in-appropriate it will not meet the aspirations

of the intended users of a given system. On the other hand when


21/26

21

the standards are not adhered to, resources will be lost, too. Thus

there must be both carrot and stick system that will ensure resources

are not wasted and services are delivered at the prescribed quality

(pressure, water quality and for the number hours per day etc). Of

course the criteria is that all this done but should not overburden the

user in anyway. The paper by Van Vuuren (2008) says it so well see

box below.

When you go into a hardware store, chances are you will find it much easier and cheaper to

purchase a non-compliant plumbing component than a compliant equivalent

Nearly 60% of plumbing products are not SABS or JASWIC complaint

Plumbers and product manufacturers considered a lack of enforcement of legislation due to a

lack of trained inspectors as the biggest problems in the sector at present.

The list is long but it serves to show how non-adherence to standards

can be causative to problems of service delivery to the

communities we have committed ourselves to serve.

5.0 CONCLUDING REMARKS

It can be concluded that the series of

WATERNET/WARFSA/GWP-SA symposia is still relevant andprovide a viable avenue for dissemination of research

findings.


22/26

22

There is a need to concretise whatever has been

researched and found to be workable, and thereafter

translated into country and regional plans.

Issues of water integrity and accountability are real and

must be taken on board in all our endeavours of water

development.

There is a need to streamline all that can be done or should

be done in order to achieve the MDGs by the set time of

2015 (which is just around the corner).

The knowledge base (training, research, information and

data archiving and dissemination) must be enhanced in the

region if we have to improve the livelihood of our people.

Issues of cost recovery (CR) and affordability must not

remain as slogans but rather pragmatic strategies of

provision of water and sanitation services especially to poor

should be more vigorously pursued.

Investment in the sanitation sub-sector is far below the

actual requirements. On the other hand sanitation may hold

the key to success or failure of the MDGs. It is really a time

bomb (in terms of health and the environment) awaiting to

be detonated!

The issue of appropriate technologies and standards is

usually taken for granted in the provision of water and

sanitation services. It is therefore just appropriate that


23/26

23

standards are adhered to and appropriate technologies

are implemented.

All of us should reflect back on the symposia achievements

and take something home to experiment with and perhaps

report back in the next symposium!


24/26

24

REFERENCES:

1.Annez, P.C., (2006), Urban infrastructure finance from private operators:

what have we learnt from recent experience? World Bank Policy Research

Working Paper 4045.

2.AU-African Union, (2008), Achieving the Millennium Development

Goals on Water and Sanitation in Africa by 2015, Priorities,

Partnerships and Plans. Report for the Meeting of Joint Meetings of

the African Ministers Council on Water (AMCOW), African

Development Bank (AfDB), UN Water/Africa and Partners, Addis

Ababa, Ethiopia, 7th

-10th

October 2008, 14p. Available at ww.africa-

union.org.

2. Briscoe, J., (2003), Return to resources for the World Bank,Water 21 June 2003, pp. 13-14.

3. Earle, A., Lungu, G., and Malzbender, D., (2008); Mapping of

Integrity and Accountability in Water Activities and RelevantCapacities in the SADC Region, UNDP Water GovernanceFacility at SIWI, WaterNet and Cap-Net, Paper 12, p. 45.

4. Ellis, K.V., (1990); Potable Water for the Developing World someof the problems, J. Water SRT-Aqua Vol. 39, No. 6, pp. 368-375.

5. Hukka, J.J., and Katko, T.S., (2003), Refuting the paradigm ofwater services privatization, Natural Resources Forum.

27 (2003) 142-155.

6. Katko, T.S. (1990); Cost Recovery in Water Supply inDeveloping Countries, Water Resources Development,Volume 6 No. 2, pp. 86-94.


25/26

25

7. Kjellen, M., (2000); Complementary Water Systems in Dar esSalaam, Tanzania: The Case of Water Vending, WaterResources Development, Vol. 16, No. 1 pp. 143-154.

8. Mashauri, D. A., and Katko, T.S., (1992), Water Developmentand Tariffs in Tanzania: From Free Water Policy towardsCost Recovery, Environmental Management Journal,Volume 17(1), pp. 31-39.

9. Mkanga, P.J., (1990); Experiences of the Water Supply andSanitation Decade in Tanzania as a DevelopingCountry, 1981-1990, Vesitalous 6/1990, pp 12-14.

10. Mkapa, W.B., (2005); Speech by The former President of theRepublic of Tanzania, at The UniPID conference,University of Joensuu, Finland, 9th September 2005, 7p.Available athttp://www.joensuu.fi/ajankohtaista/unipid090905.html

11. PRINWASS, (2004); Main Trends and prospects characterizingprivate sector participation in Water and Sanitation: Adiscussion of project findings, Oxford University, 4p.

(Also at www.geog.ox.ac.uk/~ prinwass/).

12. Rotival, A.H., (1990), The Decade in Retrospect and FutureWork within the UN, Vesitalous 6/1990, pp. 3-5.

13. Savenije, H.H.G., (2002), Why water is not an ordinaryeconomic good, or Why the Girl is special, pp. 340-343.

14. Shivji, I.G., (2003), Good Governance, Bad Governance

and The Quest for Demography in Africa: AnAlternative perspective, Lecture at Nordic Africa Days,Uppsala, Sweden 3rd-5th October 2005, 17p.

15. Strauss, M., (2006), Urban Sanitation Challenges in Un-sewered cities, International Conference on Faecal


26/26

Sludge Management(FSM) Policy, Dakar, Senegal May9th-12th 2006. Available atwww.sandec.eawag.ch.

16. Van der Zaag, P., (2007); The Impact of Regional WaterResources Building: Citations of published proceedingsof the annual WaterNet/WARFSA/GWP-SA Symposia inSouthern Arica, 2001-2005, Physics and Chemistry ofthe Earth 32 (2007) 971-975.

17. Van Vuuren, L., (2008); Cheap Plumbing Imports WastesPrecious Resource, The Water Wheel, July/August 2008Vol. 7 No. 4, pp.16-18.

18. Yacoob, M., (1990); Community Self-Financing of WaterSupply and Sanitation: What are the promises andpitfalls? Oxford University Press, Health Policy andPlanning 5(4): pp. 1-6.

improved livelihood challenges

Documents