The United Nations General Assembly has declared 2013 the International Year of Water Co-operation. In Sub-Saharan Africa, where an estimated 330 million people do not have access to safe drinking water,⁽²⁾ the need for increased cooperation between stakeholders in improving water security cannot be overemphasised. While access to water is a human right, water consumers across the board have a shared responsibility for advancing new ideas and strategies geared towards the efficient use of water resources. Indeed, there is a need to forge and strengthen symbiotic relationships in mobilising financial and human resources, skills integration and capacity building. While great strides have been made towards this end, most notably through the Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM) approach, it is clear that there is scope for even greater cooperation at multiple levels of decision-making.

This CAI paper highlights the benefits of collective action when stakeholders have a shared vision and commit to mutual objectives by focussing on three key partnerships. In particular, the paper stresses the importance of a bottom-up approach in facilitating comprehensive water demand management, as domestic water users are empowered to become active decision makers who manage their own quality of life. This requires a cogent framework of collaboration and an enabling environment, which bring the comparative strengths of various stakeholders to bear in the sustainable management of water resources.

Collective action in managing water resources

Water security is high on the African water policy agenda, as scarce water resources face increasing risks from climate warming and a burgeoning urban population. Indeed, water resources in Africa’s growing urban centres are extremely overburdened, and prolonged service disruptions are the order of the day in most cities, as water authorities struggle to deliver this vital resource. With the tightening of public budgets in many of these countries, supply side management will no longer be a feasible strategy to meet the ever-increasing demand for water. The critical water supply shortage has resulted in a significant increase in the exploitation of groundwater sources, primarily through illegal deep well-digging in densely populated areas, and a heavy reliance on water vendors who, according to some studies, charge as much as 10 times the price of municipally supplied water.⁽³⁾

As is common with public goods, water consumption has been characterised by free-riding at the household level. While expressing their right to safe drinking water, there has been a tendency for domestic water users to absolve themselves of responsibility in terms of efficient water use and ensuring the resource’s sustainability. As such, excessive water consumption is rampant, while late and non bill payment is prevalent, particularly among low-income households. However, several studies on this issue suggest that non-payment is primarily due to ratepayers’ inability rather than unwillingness to pay for services.⁽⁴⁾ In their defence, domestic water users bemoan the service provider’s lack of accountability to ratepayers and lack of transparency - particularly with regard to management of funds.⁽⁵⁾ However, the significant increase in water demand in urban areas necessitates cooperation between water users and local government in devising and committing to effective water demand management strategies.

In most developing countries, the need to ensure universal access to water and sanitation has resulted in the design of tariff structures that do not reflect the full cost of providing these services.⁽⁶⁾ To a large extent, this has deterred private sector involvement in the water sector and subsequently, technology and skills transfer, as private entities would need to charge full marginal costs to ensure a reasonable return on their capital investments. In the absence of financial and technical support from the private sector, developing country governments grapple with infrastructure backlogs, limited managerial capacity, and challenges in the maintenance of existing infrastructure. With the deepening of the water crisis, the importance of forging mutually beneficial public-private partnerships (PPPs) in water resources management is becoming increasingly recognised. In addition, water resources management has been largely relegated to water professionals, with minimal cooperation from those in other sectors. However, because water is a vital social and economic good to all water consumers, the need for cross-sectoral cooperation is critical, now more than ever. In addition to enhanced inter-sectoral integration, there is a compelling need for the creation of a platform that facilitates cross-transfer of skills, knowledge and expertise between water professionals and those outside the ‘water-box’.

Recognition of the increasing interconnectedness of water uses and water users engendered the Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM) approach, which the Global Water Partnership (GWP) defines as “a process that promotes the co-ordinated development and management of water, land and related resources, in order to maximise the resultant economic and social welfare in an equitable manner without compromising the sustainability of vital ecosystems.”⁽⁷⁾ Indeed, as noted elsewhere, “collaboration is the way to greater synergy.”⁽⁸⁾ This idea is the cornerstone of Vision 21, an initiative formulated by partners in the Water Supply and Sanitation Collaborative Council. The objective of this collaborative framework is to tackle water, hygiene and sanitation challenges and subsequently, human development and poverty elimination, through the active participation and commitment of people and leaders at all levels of decision-making.⁽⁹⁾ Much like the IWRM framework, Vision 21 takes a holistic approach which sets a framework for collaboration - both vertically (between stakeholders at multiple levels of decision-making) and horizontally (between agencies, non-governmental organisations, state departments, and the public and private sector). The central premise of the Vision is that peoples’ initiative and management of their own quality of life should be at the centre of planning and action.⁽¹⁰⁾ It stresses a bottom-up approach with the household becoming a focal point in water, sanitation and hygiene decision making, and emphasises collaboration between government and civil society.⁽¹¹⁾

Partnership: Domestic water users and local water authorities

As noted above, there is a general mistrust of local water authorities engendered through a lack of accountability and transparency. There appears to be a strong perception of misappropriation of ratepayers’ funds, as evidenced by poor service delivery. In one discussion, a domestic water user explained that individuals are wary “of contributing to collective purses as they have reservations on the capability of the city to effectively manage those funds.”⁽¹²⁾ According to a South African study on the factors determining compliance behaviour with respect to utility fees on water and electricity, without trust, facilitating social-cooperation is a challenge.⁽¹³⁾ Specifically, the study notes that “citizens are likely to trust the government only to the extent that they believe that it will act in their interests, that its procedures are fair and reasonable and that their trust of the state and others is reciprocated.”⁽¹⁴⁾

A fundamental starting point in facilitating cooperation between domestic water users and water authorities is the creation of mutual trust and understanding, through constant dialogue aimed at addressing the above issues in an open and honest way. Water authorities should use this platform to discuss water access challenges by providing statistics on average daily demand for water, pumping capacity versus demand, service disruption timetables and water quality, among other issues. Most importantly, the service provider should use this platform to educate water consumers on their responsibility in the water provision cycle.⁽¹⁵⁾ As noted above, human rights come with responsibilities and as such, it is imperative for water users, with the support of the service provider, to assume an active role in the formulation and implementation of effective water demand management strategies. Indeed, there is an urgent need for water users to adjust their consumption preferences and find ways of utilising the resource in a more efficient manner. While water rationing is a common water conservation strategy employed by the service provider, if consumers resume excessive water use as soon as the water service is restored, it is largely ineffective.

The importance of community governance in the management of natural resources is increasingly being recognised. One of the fundamental benefits of community engagement is that it creates a sense of beneficiary ownership. When stakeholders feel that they own and control their resources, they tend to be more responsible in their use. Secondly, as research from public goods experiments shows, communities are often able to admonish negative behaviour in ways that the government or markets are unable to do because community members are privy to ‘insider’ information about other members’ behaviours.⁽¹⁶⁾ As Bowles and Gintis note, this information is “most frequently used in multilateral rather than centralised ways, taking the form of a raised eyebrow, a kind word, an admonishment, gossip or ridicule, all of which may have particular salience when conveyed by a neighbour or a workmate whom one is accustomed to call one of ‘us’ rather than ‘them’.”⁽¹⁷⁾ For instance, if communities take an active role in education and awareness campaigns on water demand management, there is a strong incentive for domestic water users to refrain from excessive water consumption on the grounds that it violates community norms and might be ‘punishable’ through ridicule by other community members. Furthermore, unauthorised water use through illegal connections can be sanctioned by community members when people recognise that the unregistered users are benefiting from the resource without contributing to its cost.

Capacity building is vital in empowering local communities to become agents of change. To this end, the service provider should facilitate training of community representatives in leadership, communication and management. Furthermore, the service provider should involve these representatives in water resources planning, development and management as a step towards increasing transparency. In turn, these representatives would be tasked with formulating and championing water conservation campaigns. They would also provide regular feedback to community members on issues such as bill payment, water quality and efficient water use, as well as facilitating information exchange between community members and the service provider through workshops and meetings. In addition, community representatives would also act as the primary channel of communication in reporting customer complaints.

The establishment of a sustainable partnership requires that both parties participate in formulating mutually beneficial objectives and in the development of clear communication networks. Each party should then be able to hold the other accountable for failure to adhere to these objectives and mechanisms should be put in place to deal with divergence from the approved goals. There is an urgent need for water authorities to embark on recognisable institutional reforms geared towards enhancing the service provider’s functional capabilities, operational strength and institutional readiness to handle water challenges - both present and in the future.⁽¹⁸⁾ Specifically, there is need for an improvement in infrastructure planning and management and, in some cases, a review of the water pricing structure, to align water prices with the cost of supply. In addition, there is a need for increased efficiency in revenue collection and managing unauthorised water use.

Public-private partnerships: Build-operate-transfer schemes

As noted above, the development and maintenance of water infrastructure has traditionally been the primary responsibility of public utilities. However, because the latter are not bound by the discipline of the market, they tend to be inefficient in the provision of basic services. In addition, they often face major financial and managerial constraints which hamper infrastructure construction, upgrade and maintenance thereof. With the deepening of the water crisis, it is becoming widely recognised that there is scope for harnessing private sector competencies through financing and capacity cooperation between public and private entities, by means of PPPs. In addition to providing much needed capital investment, private sector involvement promotes financial discipline and technology and skills transfer. Furthermore, private entities exhibit stronger capacity in infrastructure design and maintenance, innovation, management and marketing skills.

Specifically, the use of Build-Operate-Transfer (BOT) schemes in water supply and wastewater treatment is gaining traction. Under this model, the public and private sector enter into a partnership with a clear agreement on shared objectives for the delivery of public infrastructure or a service that would otherwise have been provided by the public sector.⁽¹⁹⁾ The host government awards a concession contract to a private sector partner to finance, design and construct a facility which the latter operates and maintains for a specified period (usually 20-30 years), during which it collects user charges and is thus able to recoup the cost of its investment. At the end of the concession period, the company hands over the infrastructure to the government.

The BOT modality has several advantages. Perhaps most importantly, it facilitates the construction of a facility or acceleration of a project that would not have been developed otherwise or would have been delayed. In addition, it reduces public sector borrowing and direct spending, facilitates technology transfer and training of personnel, reduces project construction costs and improves operating efficiency.⁽²⁰⁾ Examples of successful BOT schemes in the water sector include China’s Chengdu water supply project which was made possible through external funding from the private sector operations of the Asian Development Bank (ADB). The project saw the construction of a treatment plant and establishment of a 27 kilometre transmission line to provide Chengdu residents with an additional supply of 400,000 cubic metres of treated water, daily.⁽²¹⁾ Another example is the expansion and technological upgrade of the As-Samra wastewater treatment facility in Jordan, which is being financed by the Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC) and private debt and equity sources.⁽²²⁾ In Africa, an example of a BOT scheme that has been successfully implemented in the water sector is South Africa’s Durban Wastewater Treatment project, which was commissioned in 2001. The water recycling plant, which is South Africa’s first private water recycling project, operates on a 20 year BOT concession and produces high quality reclaimed water for both domestic and industrial use.⁽²³⁾ 

Cooperation inside and outside the water box

Forging a comprehensive water resources management strategy requires a holistic approach that fosters cross-sectoral collaboration. As the IWRM concept highlights, a fragmented approach is not an effective strategy in tackling water issues. It is increasingly understood that working together towards a common goal makes the entire effort greater than the sum of its parts.⁽²⁴⁾ As such, there is a need for the creation of a platform which promotes the integration of knowledge, skills, and expertise of academics, policy-makers and professionals from diverse backgrounds. Through this platform, professionals can commit to mutual objectives and collectively formulate water resources management strategies. This would serve as a means for stakeholders to gain a collective understanding of the various dimensions of prominent water issues and enable them to discuss strategies from different angles. Indeed, the merging of professionals from different sectors promotes the development of new ideas on how issues can be tackled differently.

For instance, there is scope for increased cooperation between economists and policy-makers on issues such as water pricing. Similarly, input from science and technology experts is vital in developing low-cost technology solutions to water supply challenges. In addition, the expertise of political scientists is valuable in understanding issues such as the political economy of water. The challenge is creating a cogent framework of collaboration where various actors, with different approaches and competencies, can cooperate in a mutually beneficial manner and can be held accountable for their actions. In addition, it is vital for the government to underpin efforts by civil society organisations in whatever way necessary. Certainly, workshops that promote information exchange between individuals from diverse backgrounds are conducted from time to time. However, there is scope for greater participation, and rather than being once-off events, these meetings should become regular sessions where actors provide new insights and feedback on mutually approved tasks.

Concluding remarks

Water is a vital social and economic resource, access to which is considered a human right. Regrettably, millions of people in Africa still do not have access to safe drinking water. In recent years, the situation has been exacerbated by increasing climate risks and growing urban populations; a combination which has placed tremendous strain on scarce resources. Because of the increasing interconnectedness of water uses, and the associated conflicting demands, stakeholders at all levels of decision-making have a shared responsibility for ensuring the management of water resources in an equitable, efficient and sustainable manner.

Specifically, community governance is becoming an increasingly important water resources management strategy, as communities are empowered to become agents of change, with the capacity to manage their own quality of life. With the support of local government, there is scope for communities to assume an active role in formulating and implementing effective water demand strategies. Furthermore, there is scope for financing cooperation between the public and private sector through public-private partnerships. By agreeing to mutual objectives, PPPs provide much needed funding for infrastructure development and service provision, and facilitate the transfer of technology and skills to the public sector. In addition, the need for collaboration between water professionals and those outside the water box is widely recognised. Cross-sectoral collaboration brings different competencies, ideas and strategies to the table, thereby enhancing our capacity to tackle water issues effectively. Indeed, water resources management is everyone’s business.

Written by Feri Gwata ⁽¹⁾

NOTES:

(1) Contact Feri Gwata through Consultancy Africa Intelligence's Enviro Africa Unit (enviro.africa@consultancyafrica.com). This CAI discussion paper was developed with the assistance of Angela Kariuki and was edited by Liezl Stretton.
(2) ‘World Water Day: The EU helps more than 32 million people to gain access to safe drinking water’, European Commission, 22 May 2012, http://ec.europa.eu.
(3) Briscoe, J., ‘Managing water as an economic good: Rules for reformers’, Keynote paper presented to: The International Committee on Irrigation and Drainage Conference on water as an economic good, September 1997, http://cdi.mecon.gov.
(4)  Fjeldstad, O., 2004. What has trust got to do with it? Non-payment of service charges in local authorities in South Africa. The Journal of Modern African Studies, 42(4), pp. 539-562.
(5) Raje, D.V., Dhobe, P.S. and Deshpande, A.W., 2002. Consumer’s willingness to pay more for municipal supplied water: A case study. Ecological Economics, 42(3), pp. 391-400.
(6) ‘Cost recovery, equity and efficiency in water tariffs: Evidence from African utilities’, Africa Infrastructure Country Diagnostic, Working Paper 7, May 2008.
(7) ‘Status report on integrated water resources management and water efficiency plans’, UN Water, May 2008, http://www.unwater.org.
(8) ‘Vision 21: A shared vision for hygiene, sanitation and water supply and a framework for action’, Water Supply and Sanitation Collaborative Council (WSSCC), 2000, http://www.wsscc.org.
(9) Ibid.
(10) Ibid.
(11) Ibid.
(12) Sachiti, R., ‘Harare water woes. No solution in sight – 75 years later’, The Herald Online, 11 October 2012, http://www.herald.co.zw.
(13) Fjeldstad, O., 2004. What has trust got to do with it? Non-payment of service charges in local authorities in South Africa. The Journal of Modern African Studies, 42(4), pp. 539-562.
(14) Ibid.
(15) ‘Education and awareness campaign strategy for water demand management’, Institute of Water and Sanitation Development (IWSD), 2012.
(16) Bowles, S. and Gintis, H., 2002. Social capital and community governance. The Economic Journal, 112, pp. F419-F436.
(17) Ibid.
(18) Saleth, R.M.  and Dinar,A., ‘Evaluating water institutions and water sector performance’, World Bank technical paper No 447, http://documents.worldbank.org.
(19) ‘Public private partnerships and Build, Operate and Transfer (BOT) and such like schemes’, Forum Economic Ministers Meeting, Pacific Islands Forum Secretariat, 3-5 July 2006, http://www.forumsec.org.
(20) Ibid.
(21) Ibid.
(22) ‘MCC completes first major Build-Operate-Transfer project financing in Jordan’, Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC), http://www.mcc.gov.
(23) ‘The Durban Recycling Project’, eThekwini Municipality, 2011, http://www.durban.gov.za.
(24) ‘Vision 21: A shared vision for hygiene, sanitation and water supply and a framework for action’, Water Supply and Sanitation Collaborative Council (WSSCC), 2000, http://www.wsscc.org.