Bachelor Thesis
Water Resource Management
Social Behavior, Cultural Norms and Societal Structures
Author: Olivia Sjögren
Supervisor: Lennart Wohlgemuth Examiner: Heiko Fritz
Date: 2015-08-27
ABSTRACT
Water shortage is one of the greatest challenges that the world faces today. International and national water initiatives are increasing simultaneously with the number of implemented drinking-water projects. The provision of sustainable safe drinking-water supply is here conceptualized through the Sustainable Livelihood Approach with the view of helping poor people secure their essential basic needs, improve their quality of health and increase their livelihood opportunities. However, a lot of drinking-water projects do not end up with satisfactory outcomes. Widespread results have demonstrated low quality water resource management, worsened access to water supply, constructions shutting down and not the least, that consumers have not been able to take advantage of their new basic drinking-water systems. Projects have often failed in remote rural areas in developing countries where strong social norms, cultural values and power structures prevail.
The research is based on identifying and analyzing to what extent past drinking-water projects have addressed public participation and been aware of social, cultural and structural surrounding factors. By using Gunilla Åkesson’s sociological framework the research also addresses the role and value of sociological aspects in drinking-water projects. It is found that past projects have often failed to include public participation and lacked situational awareness to a sufficient extent. The research show the importance for projects staff, managers and technicians to take into account social behaviors, cultural norms and societal structures in the local environment and to provide local people with health awareness and education. By taking this into consideration it would enable people to change their behavior and take advantage of the improved drinking-water systems provided for them.
In conclusion, there is a need to address more sociological aspects in water resource management in order to promote sustainable safe drinking-water supplies in remote rural areas in developing countries. It can be argued that this is not only applicable in drinking-water projects but also in other areas of fields within grass root development work.
Key words: development work, water resource management, sociological factors, sustainable solutions
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
First of all, I would like to express my deep gratitude to my tutor Lennart Wohlgemuth.
I am thankful for his dedication and positive attitude that have encouraged me to keep on track and continuously improve my efforts. It is Lennart’s genuine support and guidance that have helped me to carry through and complete this thesis.
I am also keen to show my appreciation to Gunilla Åkesson who developed my understanding about sustainable livelihoods and inspired me to write about the sociological aspects of development work. I am very grateful for the possibility to use her report in this thesis, which has been of high value as structure and for analytical guidance.
The faculty of Social Science and Peace and Development at Linnaeus University and the professors there has given me the background knowledge and tools to conduct this research on my own and therefore deserves my appreciation.
Last but not least, the completion of this thesis would not have been possible without my family and friend’s continuous support and encouragement from the beginning to the end. They have on a daily basis showed their faith in me to carry through this thesis which has motivated me to continue working hard.
CONTENT
ABSTRACT __________________________________________________________ i ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ______________________________________________ ii LIST OF FIGURES ____________________________________________________ 1 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ____________________________________________ 1 1 INTRODUCTION ____________________________________________________ 2
1.1 Problem identification ... 2
1.2 Research problem ... 3
1.3 Research objective ... 3
1.4 Research questions ... 4
1.5 Method ... 4
1.6 Thesis structure ... 4
2 CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK _______________________________________ 6 2.1 The Sustainable Livelihood Approach ... 6
2.2 Definitions ... 8
2.3 Literature review... 9
3 METHODOLOGICAL FRAMEWORK ________________________________ 10 3.1 Qualitative method ... 10
3.2 Abductive mode of inference ... 10
3.3 Desk research ... 11
3.4 Material ... 12
3.5 Analytical framework ... 13
3.6 Hermeneutic model... 15
3.7 Limitations ... 16
4 BACKGROUND CHAPTER __________________________________________ 18 4.1 Local to global impacts of water ... 18
4.2 Positive opportunities ... 19
4.3 Dilemma of securing water... 20
4.4 Public participation and situational awareness ... 20
5 RESEARCH RESULTS ______________________________________________ 22 5.1 Presentation of evaluation reports ... 22
5.2 Identification of community involvement and addressed social, cultural and structural conditions in past drinking-water projects ... 24
5.2.1 Public participation ... 24
5.2.2 Awareness of local conditions ... 26
5.2.3 Provision of public support ... 27
5.2.4 Political influence and involvement ... 30
5.3 Sociological factors ... 32
6 ANALYSIS _________________________________________________________ 35
6.1 Analytical review of research result ... 35
6.2 Further analysis about the sociological role within water resource management 38 6.2.1 Misleading methods ... 38
6.2.2 Socio-cultural understanding and education ... 38
6.2.3 Beliefs and attitudes ... 39
6.2.4 Rational choice ... 40
6.2.5 Power relations ... 40
6.2.6 Gender structures ... 41
6.2.7 Capabilities to take advantage of drinking-water projects ... 42
6.3 Re- contextualization of the sociological role ... 42
7 CONCLUSION _____________________________________________________ 44 BIBLIOGRAPHY _____________________________________________________ 46 Literature ... 46
Academic journals and reports ... 46
Web pages... 48
Figures ... 49
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1 The SLA Framework p.6
Figure 2 The Hermeneutic circle p.15
Figure 3 Linkages between water and improved livelihood conditions p.18
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
DRC Democratic Republic of Congo FAO Food and Agriculture Organization
GLAAS Global Analysis and Assessment of Sanitation and Drinking-Water IGO Inter Governmental Organizations
IWRM Integrated Water Resource Management MDGs Millennium Development Goals
NGO Non Governmental Organizations
Sida Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency SLA Sustainable Livelihood Approach
UN United Nations
UNDESA United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs UNDP United Nations Development Program
WASH Water Sanitation and Hygiene WHO World Health Organization
1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Problem identification
Shortage of water is a growing challenge around the world which threatens the capacity to secure sustainable supplies and sources of safe water and provide people with their essential basic needs. The water stress impacts many of today’s global issues because of its effects on poverty, food security, economic growth, climate, inequality, conflicts etcetera. (GWP 2014: 5) Its impact on poor people’s livelihood makes water shortage an important target towards poverty reduction and the achievement of sustainable development. Therefore, is the global water issue an important target in the United Nations (UN) Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) and the post-2015 development agenda. (Prüss-Üstün et Al 2008: 5) Its direct and long term effects on both household, national and global level makes shortage of water a vital part of the peace and development imperative (UNESCO 2014-10-17).
Poor people are particularly sensitive to shortage of drinking-water in their efforts to maintain sustenance; especially those living in remote rural areas in developing countries. Today 770 million people have still not recieved better access to safe drinking water sources and 35 million people die every year from water-related diseases often due to contaminated drinking-water. (GWP 2014: 6) When women and girls need to walk far every day to collect water, which is their responsibility, it physically strain them and take many hours which hinders them from getting an education or working on income generating activities. (Domestos, WaterAid and WSSCC 2013: 5) Lack of education and low productivity often leads to reduced household income, increased vulnerability and impedes people’s livelihood opportunities (Krantz 2001: 16).
Many strategies have been developed to target the challenges of water shortage and to enable successful and sustainable water resource management.
Participatory methods that focus on including stakeholder influence in drinking-water projects are particularly discussed in current water programs. The Integrated Water Resource Management (IWRM) approach is an example which promotes stakeholder participation, social value and the important role of women. (Dungumaro and Madulu 2002: 2)
However, in spite of that participatory methods have been used in drinking-water projects for a long time numerous projects continue to result in unsatisfied outcomes. For example, in 2011 the Global Analysis and Assessment of
Sanitation and Drinking-Water report (GLAAS) estimated that only 20 percent of the sanitation and drinking-water projects in Sub-Saharan Africa resulted in satisfactory outcomes (WHO 2012: 10).
1.2 Research problem
In spite of the implementation of water resource management through constructing basic drinking water systems by using public participation, vulnerable people who are exposed to water shortages, are often not able to take advantage of improved drinking- water supplies.
It can be argued that current water resource management is insufficiently implemented and that there is a need to address other factors as well in order to achieve successful and sustainable outcomes in drinking-water projects. For example, there could be underlying mechanisms in the environment where water programs are taking place that hinders people from taking advantage of the provided services. It seems as if local people’s adaptive capacity is limited. The question refer to whether it can be explained or deeper understood by analyzing to what extent social, cultural and structural conditions in the surrounding environment influences peoples adaptability to new behaviors and structures.
It could therefore be important to analyze and provide a re-conceptualized understanding of factors that have not yet been fully or deep enough addressed, but that could have central impacts on the outcomes of drinking-water projects. Analyzing past drinking-water projects and identifying factors that seem to highly influence the outcomes can therefore provide an insight into the failures/shortcomings of some drinking-water projects.
1.3 Research objective
The objective of this research is to analyze how a couple of past drinking-water projects in developing countries have been executed and identify to what extent these projects have followed principles and recommendations for public participation. The objectives will be met by analyzing, on the one hand, evaluations of past drinking-water projects and, on the other hand, impacting dimensions of social behavior, cultural norms, power relations, attitudes etcetera related to these projects. The aim is to gain a deeper
how they could be approached better in the future. The purpose is to get a better insight into how to execute development work more appropriately so that it leads to successful and sustainable outcomes. The goal is to promote sustainable development, through developing better ways to implement basic drinking-water systems in remote rural areas in developing countries. That enable households to improve their capacity to achieve sustainable livelihoods and rise out of poverty.
1.4 Research questions
1. How and to what extent have past drinking-water projects addressed public participation and social, cultural and structural factors in the surrounding environment?
2. In what way can sociological aspects in drinking-water projects be analyzed and better taken into consideration?
1.5 Method
This thesis is a desk research based on comprehensive strategies in order to achieve valid and reliable results. Furthermore, it is based on a data collection process where the material originates from collected data, published or printed, that is gathered, interpreted and analyzed. The strategic selection of data is made by choosing internationally recognized sources whose motives and backgrounds are commonly known and that provide data which is relevant to development work. The size of data is decided to be relatively small in order to fit the structure of an in-depth impact study. Patterson and Williams explains that richness of fewer sources can potentially provide a better in- depth interpretation process than large source representativeness (Patterson and Williams 2002:41). However, in order to avoid selection bias and to increase validity and reliability of the research material the selection will be based on data triangulation (George and Bennett 2005:23).
1.6 Thesis structure
Altogether, the thesis consists of seven chapters. Chapter 1 presents the introduction in which the objectives, aims and purposes of the research are outlined. In addition, the context of the research problem together with the research questions and a brief explanation on how the material is gained is presented. Chapter 2 presents the
theoretical framework and provides a clarification and explanation of definitions that are used in the text. It also consists of the literature review. Chapter 3 addresses the methodology of the research and presents the mode of inference. The analytical framework is also presented as well as additional tools for textual analysis are also described. Chapter 4 presents a brief overview about the context of the research problem, and chapter 5 presents the research results by reviewing past evaluated drinking-water projects and describing the sociological aspects of development work.
Chapter 6 provides an analyzed review of the results and presents an analysis on the specific subjects of gender, power, and social behavior among others. The conclusions are presented in chapter 7 with a brief summary and concluding remarks.
2 CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK
2.1 The Sustainable Livelihood Approach
The conceptual framework of this research is represented by the Sustainable Livelihood Approach (SLA), developed by Robert Chambers and Gordon Conway and is presented in Figure 1 (Chambers and Conway 1991).
The framework of the Sustainable Livelihood Approach is meant to support and inform the research about the connections between poverty and vulnerability due to water shortage. It is used throughout the research as a conceptual way of reasoning and as a mean to understand how water stress affect vulnerable people’s livelihood opportunities and what impact successful and sustainable water resource management could have on people’s living situation.The framework is not represented in a practical sence as a structure for the research but more as a conceptual way of viewing the research problem to point out the dichotomy.
Figure 1: The SLA Framework (Agriwaterpedia 2015-06-29)
The SLA was originally established at the Brundtland Commission and developed at the UN Conference on Environment and Development in 1992 as a tool to eradicate poverty. The framework addresses poverty reduction by looking beyond income level in order to include a more holistic and complexed perspective on poverty. (Krantz 2001: 4) The founders argue that a livelihood comprises assets, activities and capabilities that affect the households potential to cope and recover from shocks and constrains and are
influenced by structures and processes within the society. They explain that if a household is capable of maintaining and improving their assets on a long term basis, it becomes possible to improve their well-being and achieve a sustainable livelihood.
(Chambers and Conway 1991: 6)
The SLA can be connected to water resource management by visualizing that drinking-water projects are a part of the private and governmental structure and processes presented in Figure 1. The figure demonstrates that the structures and processes influence the household’s assets, for example through an improved drinking- water supply, which in turn impact other assets. An improved drinking-water supply could for example lead to more time available for women and girls, who otherwise need to walk very far to collect water. It enables women and girls to work in the formal labor market or get an education which thereby strengthens their socio-economic role in the household and social sphere (UNDP 2015-07-30). Increased productivity and education can simultaneously lead to higher income which can be invested in housing conditions or higher education. This in turn can reduce poor people’s vulnerability to stress, changes and shocks. For example,household’s might be able to pay for medical care or have an economic buffer in case of a flood. This enables poor people to continuously improve their well- being which eventually can lead to maintaining a sustainable livelihood and rising out of poverty. (Carney 1988: 5)
One of the SLA’s main objectives is to improve the access and management of natural resources by facilitating access to infrastructure of drinking- water supply. Drinking-water can therefore be seen as an important tool for maintaining a sustainable livelihood and, thus, reducing poverty. (Carney 1998: 12) The framework also emphasizes to build on people’s strengths and take advantage of indigenous knowledge and skills. Carney states that project staff needs to be culturally sensitive when managing assets or constrains, and set aside preconceptions of what they think is the best way to handle things.(ibid: 7)
Taking all this into account the SLA arguably shares the same perspective as this research on development work. The SLA is chosen as the conceptual framework as it provides a clear understanding about the water value and how water stress and drinking-water projects can impact vulnerable people’s livelihoods. It also enables one to understand the opportunities that appropriate water resource management can contribute with, in terms of sustainable livelihoods, poverty reduction, human
2.2 Definitions
Throughout the thesis there are some different concepts that are used repeatedly in the text which adds value and understanding to the research. In order to understand the meaning of the concepts it is important to present the definitions and therefore a couple of the most frequently used concepts are presented below.
Adaptive capacity is individuals/households ability to respond to changes that enables them to take advantage of opportunities or benefits. It often includes changes in behavior, attitudes and resources. (IPCC 2015-08-06)
Basic drinking-water systems is the general construction of rural water supply projects where hand pumps, storage tanks, rainwater collection and distribution systems for shared usage, are used (WHO 2012:57).
Improved drinking-water supply means when a particular water source have become safe from contamination through implementation of piped water by constructing public taps, rainwater collection and dug wells (WHO 2012: 83).
Public participation is the process where the public is directly engaged in the decision- making and is provided with influence (EPA 2015-08-06).
Supply enhancement is the practical intervention to increase water supply by constructing water infrastructure or natural water resource development, for example re- use of treated wastewater or purification of sea water (FAO 2012: 70).
Unimproved drinking-water sources are particular water sources that have not received interventions to improve the quality or access to water which often include unprotected wells, springs and surface water (UNICEF and WHO 2011: 11).
Water resource managementis the process of planning, developing and managing the optimal use of water resources (UNEP 2012: iv).
Water shortage occurs when there are insufficient water resources due to low level of water supply at a particular place and given time. It is often caused by climate or poor maintenance of infrastructure. (FAO 2012: 72)
Water stress is a symptom of scarcity or shortage of water. Limited access and use of water, increased tensions between users, increased vulnerability and food insecurity are examples of water stress. (FAO 2012: 72)
Water values are the benefits of using water and can often be valued in economic terms for example for household use, irrigation or for industrial purposes (FAO 2012: 73).
2.3 Literature review
A number of researchers have addressed the problem of drinking-water projects resulting in unsatisfactory outcomes and has found that it often results from lack of capacity building, low maintenance and political opposition among other things (Dungumaro 2006, Hamdy, Abu-Zeid and Lacirignola 1998, Jeffrey and Gearey 2006, Rammelt 2014). For example, Dungomaro has found that the main reason is the gap between theory and practice. He has also analyzed how IWRM have been defined and implemented based on the definition and came to the understanding that unsuccessful projects results from unclear visions, principles and roles of stakeholders. (Dungumaro 2006: 36) Other researchers claim that weak capacity building is the main reason for unsatisfied outcomes in drinking-water projects and therefore analyses failures in policies and organizational structure (Hamdy, Abu-Zeid and Lacirignola 1998: 126) Jeffrey and Gearey argue that there is a lack of concrete management tools and objectives in order to implement improved drinking-water supplies. They also discuss impacts of natural uncertainties and continuous changes in drinking-water projects and state that it is necessary to develop new tools, techniques and perspectives in order to approach water resource management in a better way (Jeffrey and Gearey 2006: 4).
Rammelt, on the other hand, point to potential structural and social factors as causes for failed drinking-water projects (Rammelt 2014: 202). However, it can be argued that the sociological role has not been deeper analyzed or led to re- conceptualized conclusions or understandings. Potentially, social and cultural behavior of local stakeholders has a large role in contributing to that drinking-water projects becomes adapted and sustainable. Therefore, it is relevant to further study the value of social, cultural and structural factors that can have an impact on the adaptation and implementation capacity of drinking-water projects. The research can contribute to the development discourse with a deeper understanding about more sustainable and successful ways to incorporate grass root level development work within the water sector and potentially in other development sectors as well.
3 METHODOLOGICAL FRAMEWORK
This part clarifies how the utilization of different research methods can improve the analytical process and give more structure to the research. It is important that the methodology is applicable to the purpose and topic of the research in order to answer the research questions and come to a conclusion. (Danermark et Al 1997: 7)
3.1 Qualitative method
The research is based on a qualitative method by analyzing the underlying meaning of a social phenomenon. It is especially important in a qualitative method to analyze and interpret the collected data in order to again more knowledge and understanding of the deep rooted causes to the research problem. The qualitative analytical design includes investigating complex mechanisms and meanings of a problem through a floating and flexible procedure. (Creswell 2009:4) This method has been chosen since it is common that researches within social science are based on qualitative methods (Danermark et Al 1997:158). It also provide the research with the most suitable ways to interpret values, behaviors and power structures to achieve a holistic and deeper understanding of the problem (ibid: 159). It is the qualitative emphasis on interpretation and analysis, instead of the empirical verifiability through statistical calculations, which explain the rejection of using a quantitative method (ibid: 162).
3.2 Abductive mode of inference
The research is characterized by an abductive mode of inference. This means that the objective is to analyze general structures and re-contextualize the understanding of a social phenomenon. The chosen mode of inference also emphasizes the need to use theoretical and analytical frameworks in order to fully interpret social meanings and underlying mechanisms which is highly applicable to this research. (Danermark et Al 1997:88) Abduction highlights the importance of potential pre-understandings about the phenomenon in order to avoid biased or wrong conclusions since it can influence the analysis (ibid: 95). The choice of this mode of inference over others depend on its objective to gain a deeper and re-contextualized understanding and not to develop a new theory (induction) nor verify structures or relations (deduction) (ibid: 91).
In addition to a qualitative and abductive approach, the research is characterized by a general perspective on drinking-water projects and the role of social,
cultural and structural factors in water resource management. However, it is concentrated on water resource management in remote rural areas in developing countries. A general perspective is relevant since the research objective is to analyze the most common and central sociological factors and not for example specific cases exclusively (George and Bennett 2005:19). A qualitiave and abductive research with a general perspective can be achieved by conducting a consistent research that distinguish factors and features from similar situations according to the author (Danermark et Al 1997:162).
3.3 Desk research
It was explained in the introduction that this study is based on a desk research. It is also known as secondary research and is a technique used by researchers to get hold of necessary material from existing pre-published data by sitting by a desk and coduct reseach. The traditional sources for collecting data are libraries and the Internet where it is possible to get hold of academic literature and journals that addresses the research problem. This desk research is based on using the University Library to gather useful books and its online services to obtain academic journals that are peer reviewed. It is also based on searching for internationally recognized and reliable sources on the Internet through using governmental data bases and google scholar. In addition to these two desk techniques the data is also gathered from previous course literature that have been appropriately chosen by course leaders and that are relevant to the subject of development work. The basic method is to search for data that has relevant information about the research problem. However, since it is very difficult to find the exact desirable information, it is recommended to search for a broad view of information about the subject. (MSG 2015-08-17)
A desk research is chosen instead of a case study or field study since the purpose is to investigate and analyze the general perspective of water resource management from different times and places. Therefore, the necessary material is in this case acquired from published reports that have evaluated past projects and discussed sociological aspects. Because of this reason and hence the limited scale and scope of the research, the material is not based on interviews or observations but on various desk sources.
3.4 Material
To obtain the necessary information, the material for the research is primary based on interpreted findings from evaluation reports of past drinking-water projects. Evaluation reports are chosen because it can be argued that they provide the most suitable original material which makes it possible to answer the research questions. These reports provide interesting and valuable information on strategies, executions and outcomes which arguably are the most desirable findings to support the material with. (Sida 2014- 23-05) By interpreting and analyzing findings from evaluation reports it is possible to recieve facts and perspectives about the research problem and therefore make it possible to develop a greater understanding about the role of sociological aspects in drinking- water projects.
The selection sample includes eight different reports that have evaluated past attempts of water resource management in developing countries. The reports have been thoroughly chosen with the purpose of providing a broad perspective of the research problem. The selection therefore includes reports that have evaluated drinking- water projects in different countries, regions and through different methods and strategies. Most of them are from different sources and authors and have been published in different years from 1972 to 2012. It is important to keep in mind that the authors have different purposes and objectives in their reports and that they evaluate different levels of water resource management, from country to community level. However, they have all been chosen because they can be argued to contribute to the research and because they seem to be valid and reliable. Besides these varities, all eight reports have evaluated past drinking-water projects in remote rural areas in developing countries which this research is about. This kind of selection is made with the intention to provide broad findings that represent a general perspective of the water resource management in past drinking-water projects. The eight chosen reports are all presented and concisely described in chapter four, before the review of the findings from them are presented.
To make a more comprehensive research that takes into account different angles and perspectives and to increase the analytical validity of the material, it is important to include a secondary collection of data. Therefore, the additional data collection is mainly based on three different data sources. The first includes former course literatures that have relevance to the field of development work and subject of public participation and sociological aspects. These literatures are chosen because they can provide the material with expertise facts about certain concepts and way of
reasoning. Secondly, the research utilizes trustworthy reports from various Inter- Governmental Organizations (IGOs) and Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) that are internationally recognized to be legitimate and reliable. These reports are regularly published every second or fourth year and are providing updates, recommendations, statistics and analysis that can add particularly rich findings. Finally, the research includes data of different academic journals. These journals discuss and criticize, for example, the context of water shortage, power and gender structures and the Sustainable Livelihood Approach among other things. The use of the journals adds analytical expertise about the role of sociological factors to the material.
3.5 Analytical framework
The report “We learn from you, you learn from us” from 1989 by Gunilla Åkesson is used to establish the analytical framework as a method for textual analysis in this research. Åkesson’s report will here be the main tool to interpret and analyze the findings from the different evaluation reports of past drinking-water projects.
The report about the sociological work of family farming in Beira, Mozambique, interpretably intends to help future development projects to operate with more reality based methods to achieve more long term outcomes (Åkesson 1989: iv). It has been chosen as the analytical framework because the report contains many relevant and valuable arguments about how different participatory strategies and sociological aspects can influence the implementation capacity of natural resource management projects.
Åkesson especially presents seven recommendations for public participation that she claim is important for development projects to address in order to achieve positive long term outcomes (Åkesson 1989: viii). These have been interpreted and suggest that projects should;
Include local needs, experiences, knowledge and skills from the beginning
Provide the people with reality-based benefits that are applicable to the local situation
Be determined from local material, methods and conditions
Give the main decision-making power to local stakeholders
Implement strategies that proceed from local conditions and situations
Integrate and inform local authorities to take responsibility
She also points at nine categories of factors that influence vulnerable people’s possibilities to participate in extensive rural activities. Åkesson state that when people do not have the knowledge, will or possibility to use technical services that are provided for them, reasons can be found in the environment of the individual, surrounding community or the social structure. (Åkesson 1989: 76) By interpreting the different categories it can be explained that;
Some people do not have the knowledge, skills or understanding to participate
Marginalized people in isolated communities have difficulties in accessing services
Societies lack political prioritization and resources which limits operations
Some people do not recognize the advantages and benefits to participate
Cultural norms, social influence and traditions affect the possibility to participate
Vulnerable people’s influence in the society affect their interest to participate
Some people lack capabilities and resources in order to participate
Socio-economic and structural conditions in the community limit people to participate
Lack of sufficient public funds makes people afraid of the risks to participate
These different recommendations for public participation and individual, social and structural factors from Åkesson’s report will be used when reviewing the eight evaluated drinking-water projects. The objective is to identify and analyze if they have integrated similar strategies for public participation and addressed social, cultural and structural factors in the surrounding environment which Åkesson suggests. Through identifying recurring gaps between theory and practice and their awareness about individual, social and structural factors, connections can be found that seems to impact the execution and outcomes of drinking-water projects. By understanding central characteristics in past drinking-water projects and the value of sociological factors makes it possible to answer the research questions.
Since some of the seven recommendations and nine factors are relatively similar and for practical purposes they have been interpreted, simplified and adjusted in order to suit this research. They have instead been narrowed down to four headlines
which intend to cover them. The meaning and principles of Åkesson’s recommendations and influential surrounding factors will be further described in the background chapter to clearly explain the importance and relevance of analyzing these aspects and using it as a structure for the review of past drinking-water projects.
3.6 Hermeneutic model
As a complement to the analytical framework, the hermeneutic model is used for textual analysis in the research by concentrating on the interpretation process. The use of this model is not practically visible throughout the report, instead it is guide lining the structural process and reasoning of interpretation and presentation of data. Hermeneutic represent qualitative research and aims to develop a new pre-understanding of a social phenomenon which also is the objective of this research (Danemark et Al 1997: 160).
The model is based on the normative commitment to study the underlying mechanisms and internal relations of a social phenomenon through evaluation (Patterson and Williams 2002: 12).
Figure 2: The Hermeneutic circle (Communication Theory 2015-06-30)
Figure 2 demonstrates that the Hermeneutic circle can be viewed as an ongoing dialogue with the text (Patterson and Williams 2002: 2). The model shows that your pre- understandings of a social phenomenon can create an interpretation pattern that affects the dialogue with the text and thereby influence the analysis. Therefore, it is very
Al 1997:160)
The model is used as an underlying structure in this research and is executed through five procedures. These include a selection and adoption of a conceptual framework (Patterson and Williams 2002: 28), data collection and sample selection for providing rich findings (ibid: 40). It also includes choosing data representation, which is the ability to summarize and present results while maintaining reliability. The last procedure is data analysis which includes organizing the developed re- contextualized understandings. (ibid: 69)
3.7 Limitations
The research entails a few limitations to the validity, reliability and richness of the analysis, findings and result. It is important that these are outlined in order to be aware of and trying to minimize them as well as to clarify question marks in order to avoid assumptions.
The main limitation is arguably the limited available time to carry through the research which rather is a fact, than an excuse, to the limitation of scale and possibilities to deeper analyze the underlying mechanisms of the research problem. It is therefore important to outline the scope in connection to the time available and resources in order to provide an appropriate and well conducted research. Another limitation is that all the data is based on documents and not on case studies, observations or interviews. This might limit detailed, reliable and reality based findings.
This is met through conducting a valid and triangular data collection and through careful interpretation processes (Patterson and Williams 2002: 42). It can also be difficult to clearly structure the presented findings in a table or similar since all evaluation reports are so different. However, since this is a qualitative in depth study it is intentional that the results are presented through textual dialogue in order to create a more comprehensive review.
Concerning the eight chosen evalutation reports and findigs from them, a limitation can refer to that they have different objectives, even though it was an intentional choice. Since some reports takes up sanitation or agricultural water managementin, besides drinking-water, the validity can be questioned. However, this has been carefully considered when interpreting the findigs by only taking into account drinking-water related facts. Also, even though most of the reports are from various countires there are still many countries that are left out and some who are
overrepresented. Another limitation refer the 40 year time span between the different reports which risks to limit the final results. It can be understood that perspectives and strategies of water resource management looked different a couple of decades ago, the objectives might not have been the same as they are today. This leads to question the satisfactory of the outcomes. For example, even if projects did not contribute with improved drinking-water supply and better health, they can still have resulted in satisfactory outcomes if their purpose solely was to implement new drinking-water systems regardless if they became sustainable or taken advantage of by the people.
However, all chosen reports describes intentions for community involvement which in one way implies their objectives and purposes. Besides this, there is also a possibility that the evaluation reports leave out unfulfilled targets to avoid presenting failures, which would limit the findings of the result, however unconsciously. It is therefore especially important to include source critique and quality evaluation (Pelli, Lidén and Svensson et Al 2008: 33).
4 BACKGROUND CHAPTER
This part presents a brief overview about the context of the research problem. In order to explain and understand the reasons for why there is an urgent demand for effective solutions to shortage of water and unsatisfactory water resource management the following present an overview of the scale and impact of water stress and water value on both local and global level.
4.1 Local to global impacts of water
The scale of water as a resource, asset and essential daily need is demonstrated through its influence on sustenance, climate, security, finance, energy, social equity etcetera in every nation’s economy. The different sources and usages of water are mainly represented by five sectors; food, energy, industry, human settlement and ecosystems (UNESCO 2012:45). It is estimated that there has been a loss of US$2.5 trillion from the devastating effects of especially floods and droughts during this century so far.
Water crises do not only affect the economy but also contributes to various social and security related deprivations for affected people. (GWP 2014: 6) Water shortage can therefore be seen to provide a risk for global security. On the other hand, the water value can be seen as an important mean towards achieving sustainable development.
However, the water supplies around the world are being increasingly challenged by climate change. At the same time, the demand for consumption of water increases along with improved living standards, population growth, rapid urbanization and food scarcity. (FAO 2012:1) This dichotomy has led to a water crisis with global impacts of deaths and diseases, hunger and thirst, conflicts over water resources, economic recession and environmental degradation. It is therefore that the local to global water stress currently is advocating for urgent solutions to the problem (UNESCO 2012:18).
A clear consequence from the water crisis is that 748 million of the world’s people in 2012 did not obtain the human right to clean drinking- water(WHO and UNICEF 2014:4). 1400 children dies each day because of limited access to improved drinking-water sources, making them depending on mainly unsafe surface water (UNICEF 2014-12-17). The World Health Organization (WHO) claims that the deaths are mostly caused by water related diseases, especially diarrhoea, which is estimated to take 1, 5 million lives each year and the majority are children. WHO also explains that many of these deaths can be prevented if improved access and purified drinking-water supply is provided. (WHO 2012:7)
4.2 Positive opportunities
By changing focus from the negative effects of water stress, it shows that improved access to sustainable safe drinking-water sources can have very positive effects on people’s livelihoods and the social structure. By looking at Figure 3 and interpreting Wohlgemuth’s report about rural water supply schemes in East Africa it shows that access to sustainable safe drinking- water supply and health awareness can lead to better health and human capital, with potential to increase household productivity and earned income. Improved physical and economic assets enable households to save and invest in housing conditions and children’s education which on long term can improve their chances of a sustainable livelihood. (Wohlgemuth 1974:15) Besides achieving a sustainable livelihood, improved health and education are key factors for human development and is important in poverty reduction. Increased productivity and investments are also key factors for economic growth. According to Todaro and Smith these are the basic indicators for development. (Todaro and Smith 2011: 44)
Figure 3: Linkages between access to water and improved livelihood conditions (Westman and Hedkvist 1992: 8)
Better water resource management can also increase women and girls’ productivity and school attendance because they do not longer need to walk far, risk being hurt or raped on the way, spend many hours a day and 85 percent of their daily calorie intake on
improved their school attendance from 43 to 53 percent (Mbugua 2006:15). This explains that gender structures are challenged through successful drinking-water projects when women can receive more time and knowledge to actively participate in the social sphere (ibid: 14). With increased social and economic responsibility, women’s role in the household can also become strengthened which means better management and safeguarding of water (GWP 2014: 26).
4.3 Dilemma of securing water
Much has been done to prevent the negative consequences of shortage and contaminated drinking-water, also to achieve the positive effects that can emerge from sustainable safe drinking-water supply. There is an increased global and international commitment and water programs are frequently initiated. (WHO 2011: 11)
However, while some drinking-water projects are successfully implemented many are not (Fuest 2005: 33). For example, a drinking-water project in Ghana led to continued unimproved drinking-water sources for 43 percent of the stakeholders after the project was implemented. It is explained that failed executions have resulted from lack of public influence and participation, malfunctioned maintenance as well as disfavored political prioritization and insufficient funds. (WHO 2012:6) Åkesson argues that there are additional factors in the environment of development projects that need to be taken into account, such as structural deprivations and individual limitations (Åkesson 1989: 76).
4.4 Public participation and situational awareness
Before presenting the findings from reviewing past drinking-water projects, it is important to understand why it is necessary and contributative to identify to what extent public participation has been included and if projects have been aware of surrounding social, cultural and structural factors. This can be explained by taking Åkesson’s arguments into account, where she claim that her recommendations for public participation and situational awareness is important in order for development projects to contribute with positive long term outcomes.
Åkesson argues that it is very important that local stakeholders are influencing the decision- making process throughout whole projects. From the initial investigation and target setting stage to implementation, maintaining, evaluating and
improving the new system. The objectives, methods and strategies should be determined from the needs, experiences, knowledge and conditions of the local community where the project is taken place. Åkesson explain that it is important to engage with the local people to gain mutual trust and respect in order to enable cooperation between the different parties. Project staffs are recommended to organize and participate in meetings with the stakeholder’s in their comfortable environment. They should also encourage local people to take ownership and strengthen their leadership roles to promote total local management and self-sustenance of the project in the end. She highlights that local people should be well aware and informed about the purposes and benefits of projects.
(Åkesson 1989: ix) Political authorities within the water sector should also be integrated and have a leading role to support the maintenance and conduct evaluations and improvements. (Åkesson 1989: ix) She explains that these participatory strategies are necessary in order to implement projects that suits the local needs, are maintained through local management and ends up with positive outcomes (ibid: viii).
Through dialogues, interviews and observations have she also found how certain individual, situational and institutional factors in the local environment can influence the execution of projects (Åkesson 1989: 76). She explains that if information, resources and services are unevenly distributed or if people are unable to read or understand information it can impact their ability to participate or adopt the new system (ibid: 77). She also argue that past negative experiences of development projects can impact people’s attitudes toward a new organization or project (ibid: 78). There are often people that lack time, effort and means to invest in a voluntary project and those who are vulnerable to changes are afraid to risk losing their only assets (ibid: 81). It is stated in the report that traditions and cultural norms also impacted the execution when religious or influential persons in the community opposed a project or organization.
Political decisions and prioritizations have also been seen to impact project’s implementation capacity (ibid: 83).
The presented recommendations and factors can be reasoned to have similar connections with general participatory approaches, although Åkesson’s approach includes more sociological knowledge (Åkesson 1989: vi). The following review of past drinking-water projects is therefore structured in line with her recommendations and surrounding factors.
5 RESEARCH RESULTS
After aknowledging the impact of water shortage, the increasing demand to provide successful and sustainable water resource management and the importance of public participation and situational awareness, this chapter presents findings that starts to answer the research questions, towards gaining a deeper understanding of the research problem. It presents a review about to what extent past drinking-water projects have included public participation and been aware of social, cultural and structural factors in the local environment, as well as the value of sociological influences in water resource management.
5.1 Presentation of evaluation reports
The following is a presentation of the eight chosen evaluation reports that are used for the research in order to gain the necessary material for the review of past drinking-water projects. The presentation of the different reports is intended to bring clarity, reliability and validity to the data selection.
Report 1: Global Analysis and Assessment of Sanitation and Drinking-Water Report (GLAAS)
The UN-Water report about “The Challenge of Extending and Sustaining Services” is from 2012 published by WHO and provides deep-going information about sanitation and drinking-water projects and global updates on challenges and achievements (WHO 2012).
Report 2: Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) Water Report
The 38th volume of the report called “Coping with water scarcity- An action framework for agriculture and food security” is produced by the UN FAO in 2012. The report confronts food scarcity through addressing water shortage by presenting experiences of past strategies. (FAO 2012: iii)
Report 3: “Water Supply in East Africa- Three scientific studies in brief”
The report is edited by Lennart Wohlgemuth in association with the Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (Sida) in 1974 and presents the results from three different scientific studies about rural water supply schemes in Kenya and Tanzania (Wohlgemuth 1974).
Report 4: “The impact of the rural water program in Tanzania”
The report is written by Bo Westman and Fred Hedkvist in association with Sida in 1972 and evaluates how the interventions to improve Tanzanian rural water supply have been carried through in practice (Westman and Hedkvist 1972).
Report 5: “Project on Reviving and Constructing Small Water Harvesting Systems in Rajasthan”
Pankaj Kumar and B M Kandpal have written the Sida evaluation report in 2003 about implementations of rural water systems in Rajasthan, India, and the impacts of using traditional strategies (Kumar and Kandpal 2003).
Report 6: “Policies, Practices and Outcomes of Demand-oriented Community Water Supply in Ghana: The National Community Water and Sanitation Programme 1994 – 2004”
Veronica Fuest has written the fifth volume of the Centre for Development Research Working Paper Series which present causalities of past attempts to implement sustainable drinking-water supply in rural areas in Ghana (Fuest 2005: 3).
Report 7: “Public Participation in Integrated Water Resources Management: the Case of Tanzania”
Esther W. Dungumaro and Ndalahwa F. Madulu have written the report in 2002 which analyses how the process of IWRM have been implemented in various drinking-water projects (Dungumaro and Madulu 2002).
Report 8: “Gender, Water and Sanitation: Case studies on best practices”
The report by United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs (UNDESA) from 2006 presents case studies about implemented drinking-water projects from various countries in Africa, Asia, Latin America and the Middle East (UNDESA 2006).
5.2 Identification of community involvement and addressed social, cultural and structural conditions in past drinking-water projects
The result of the findings from the different evaluation reports is presented below in line with Åkessons recommendations for public participation and social, cultural and structural factors, which has been interpreted, simplified and adjusted as a structure for the review. Findings from the eight different evaluation reports are represented in line by each of its number to provide structure and clarity. To make it clear, all eight reports are not always presenting findings about every subject in matter because it has not entailed information or facts about it and has therefore been left out.
5.2.1 Public participation
It is presented in Report 1 that public participation have been rather absent in many of the drinking-water projects, despite promotion of local influence. Stakeholders have often not been given the opportunity to participate in the initial stages when the decision-making process and the goal and objective settings are handled. Being included later in the process, more or less gives the stakeholders a chance to comment on targets and goals that are already decided upon. It is also less likely that projects are outlined from local needs, priorities and conditions or take advantage of indigenous experiences, knowledge and skills. It is estimated that over 70 percent of the participating countries from the survey have not included any forms of influence from stakeholders or local people throughout their drinking-water projects. It is demonstrated that only 28 percent of the countries had incorporated procedures and strategies to include public participation. (WHO 2012: 11)
Even though FAO highly encourages the use of participatory methods through the model of participatory rural appraisal, Report 2 demonstrate that inclusion of local influence is absent in their clearly defined strategy plans for water programs.
There is no description in the plans that highlight the importance to take into account local needs, priorities or suggestions according to the report. (FAO 2012: 34)
It is presented in Report 3 that the water programs had clearly outlined objectives for integration of local participation. However, the decision-making process was mostly centralized. (Wohlgemuth 1974: 8) The result of these rural water supply projects in East Africa showed that 55 and 45 percent of the population in each of the two villages did not receive sufficient improvements from the new drinking-water supplies. (ibid: 1) The report also shows that stakeholder influence was only included when the local people by themselves demanded improved drinking-water supply from
the water ministry, whereby it can be reasoned that stakeholder involvement became unavoidable. On the other hand, it showed that 75 percent of the local population in some way participated during the implementation of the drinking-water projects.
Overall, local people were more involved in practical procedures of constructing drinking-water systems, for example by digging ditches. (ibid: 9)
The authors from Report 4 claim that very few self-help groups have been established in spite of that projects planned to establish many, due to its positive effects on local owner and leadership. However, the few self-help groups that have been established achieved positive effects. Besides that, local stakeholders were often included during the first three months of the scheme by having discussions and practical demonstrations together with expert and project workers. This was followed up by organized distribution of local labour force made by the stakeholders (Westman and Hedkvist 1972: 6) Report 5 also demonstrates high level of public participation and inclusion of local needs and conditions (Kumar and Kandpal 2003:12). It is for example explained that as much as 91 percent of the financial donor support was spent on community structures targeting local needs and priorities, while only 9 percent was spent on private structures (ibid:14). Local influence was incorporated through dialogues and discussions between the project staff, experts and local people by conducting need assessments, resource mapping and semi-structured interviews as well as spreading information. Stakeholders were also included in the review stage of the final plan by having the possibility to comment and ask questions. Besides that a three days’ work shop was organized to work with problem identification and to set up objectives and targets. (Kumar and Kandpal 2003: 41)
Report 6 identifies that the evaluated drinking-water projects in Ghana lacked public participation in most of the decision-making processes. It is stated that 61 percent did not have any possibility at all to influence the strategies and methods. Only 22 percent are estimated to have been part of the initial stage of the drinking-water schemes where they have been able to comment on the planned location of the new drinking-water system and what techniques that should be used. It is explained that richer stakeholders had a lot more bargain power than poorer stakeholders in the decision-making process. (Fuest 2005: 37) In report 8 it is demonstrated that many drinking-water projects was executed with high public participation throughout the decision-making and planning process but less in the construction work (UNDESA
5.2.2 Awareness of local conditions
Report 1 note that only half of the estimated countries had carried through a fiscal decentralization, meaning that most drinking-water projects have been executed through centralized decision making without local management of the financial resources. By not providing synchronised resources that relate to the determined objectives it reduces the capacity to execute projects adequately. (WHO 2012:21) The report explains that projects that have been operated by formal experts often have been based on very little field experience or local knowledge. The report argues that project staff has often not been aware of the local situations or living conditions nor about the common values of the stakeholders. (ibid: 16)
According to report 2, many drinking-water projects have achieved unsatisfactory results because of poor understanding about the situational water balances, stakeholder’s social habits and their use of the community water (FAO 2012:
45). An inaccurate understanding of the local conditions and its origins can result in an underestimation of necessary resources which, in turn, can have an impeding impact on the execution and outcome of drinking-water projects (ibid: 25).
It is clear from Report 3 that the drinking-water projects in East Africa could have better taken advantage of local knowledge, material, resources and skills.
The report argues that the project staff often turned to experts and technicians instead of listening to the local community, for example about the location for new drinking-water systems. In one of the cases the stakeholders opposed a project where the strategies had been determined solely by the technicians, since the local people did not agree with the decided location. The well was located to an old burial ground which therefore was taboo to the local people. The project was still implemented according to the technician’s plan, and therefore failed in the end. When the project afterwards remade the water construction, they instead took advantage and listened to the local knowledge and skills and the project resulted in more positive outcomes. There were also occasions where communities faced even more shortage of water than before due to technical choices made by experts (Wolghemuth 1974: 9).
There was no consolidation or dialogue with the local people about suggested choices of local material, labour or transportation systems in the cases presented in Report 4. These choices were instead often decided by the rural development department, experts or projects staff. Local experience or knowledge was therefore not addressed neither methods that perhaps the stakeholders would have preferred better. The report demonstrates that the projects, as a result, often had
difficulties in organizing the right amount of needed material and human resources.
(Westman and Hedkvists 1972: 6)
Another perspective is presented by Report 5 which demonstrates that the projects incorporated traditional methods and the use of local resources and religious methods. The projects also took into consideration sacred environments and other local conditions. (Kumar and Kandpal 2003: 30) Besides taking advantage of traditional knowledge and methods they encouraged local production and consumption of resources as well (ibid: 50).
Report 6 found that many projects had conducted very low quality research about the place where the supply enhancement took place. Biased research and information gaps were identified as well as total absence of knowledge and understanding about the prevalent social, economic, political and cultural conditions.
(Fuest 2005: 52) An example of this is shown in Report 7 about a drinking-water project in Tanzania. At the beginning the drinking-water project was executed through various traditional strategies with the help of indigenous knowledge of the local conditions and current environmental situation. However, when the new water construction was destroyed in a flood, the project built it up again but through expert designed procedures. This resulted in a conflict between the local population and the project staff.
Eventually, the local community members eventually constructed a drinking- water system on their own instead, by using their indigenous knowledge and skills. The report also presents other projects in Tanzania that failed due to ignorance of local practices and materials. (Dungumaro and Madulu 2002: 6) According to report 8, similarities have been seen in Bangladesh where drinking-water projects have been executed whereby stakeholders have expressed their dissatisfaction because of unrelated methods to their local situation. These various cases present projects that were not developed to address the habits and conditions of the local community. (UNDESA 2006: 10)
5.2.3 Provision of public support
Report 1 show that most of the people in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) in 2001 did not know about the universal human right to drinking-water (WHO 2012: 45).
The poor spread of information about the health risks of contaminated water in DRC has limited people’s understanding about the benefits of a new drinking-water system.
This has led to people becoming resentful against projects and do not use the final
An estimation by a country survey from 2011 show that 75 percent of the people who do not obtain improved drinking-water lives in rural areas. However, only 25 percent of the financial budget is targeting the these areas. (ibid: 29) Local authorities’ favors allocating supply enhancement to wealthier districts instead of the poorest people who often need it more (ibid: 44). It is argued that urban areas are prioritized because rural areas demands more time consuming work and difficulties concerning institutions and infrastructure when implementing a drinking-water project. (ibid: 58) It has also been prevalent that many local people have not been able to participate in projects since they have not been provided with sufficient incentives. The report describes that many of the stakeholders do not have the capacity to take risks or provide a lot of efforts or time into additional activities such as participating voluntarily in a drinking-water project, since they are already busy securing their basic needs (WHO 2012: 40).
Report 2 takes up various water programs in Asia that have provided stakeholders with inadequate incentives since project staff has not understood the stakeholder’s habits and usage of drinking-water, or had knowledge about the local situation of water balances. By not providing applicable benefits to the stakeholders there is a risk that they will not use the new water system but rather use their old one.
(FAO 2012: 45) Low quality research and unreliable data of the local environment and situation have been seen to limit the amount of outside investors which reduces the chances that drinking-water projects receive sufficient financial funds. (ibid: 12)
It is presented in Report 5 that 86 percent of the supply enhancements have been implemented in only one district while the other 14 percentage has been implemented in 14 different districts. However, it is described that 72 percent of the targeted villages has included vulnerable farming communities in rural areas. (Kumar and Kandpal 2003: 16) The report has also demonstrated language barriers throughout the projects. At times this hindered local low skilled workers from actively participating in the decision-making or the construction since they were not able to understand the necessary information about the project. On the other hand, the water program made the local stakeholders aware about the intentions and benefits of the project by implementing a few quick demonstrations that demonstrated an increased water amount within a matter of months. This made people understand the benefits of an improved drinking-water source and made them gain trust for the organization and becoming more prone to participate in the project and use the final product. (ibid: 23) Another positive aspect is the high social commitment and community engagement these water
