Water Project Toolkit
Download the pdf version here (55MB)< or read it online here<.
HELP
How to use the Water Project Tool Kit ? Download now<
TRAINING COURSES
You can also be interested in the following training courses linked to the Water Project Toolkit on:
Gender water and development<.
Water supply and sanitation technology solutions in developing countries<
Monitoring, evaluation and auditing water development projects<
Introduction
The management of freshwater resources and related services is of critical importance to healthy social, economic and political well-being of a society. Stresses exerted on the world's water resources by the increasing demand from growing populations with changing consumption patterns and the destruction of water quality from pollution as a result of poor environmental management, are placing water increasingly higher on the international agenda, including that of climate change. Effective water resource management and developments impacting on water resources are recognised as key components of environmentally sustainable development. The negative consequences of poor water resource management on socio-economic development are more frequently arising. This is clearly apparent in the agricultural and other water-sensitive industries. However industries where water is less evident in the supply chain, and even other sectors such as energy, are becoming increasingly aware of the risks and consequences associated with a potentially unreliable water resource.
The European Union (EU), through the European Commission (EC) and the EU Member States, has made a significant contribution to the international debate on the impending world water crisis and the measures needed to address it. Their support has contributed to efforts at the international level with other state actors, through the UN system and in inter-ministerial councils, to promote new initiatives in water resource management.
The content of this Toolkit addresses the sustainable development of the Water Resources sector and contributes by translating the international consensus on sustainable water resources management into applicable development cooperation activities. The Water Project Toolkit is intended to be used by a wide range of stakeholders such as governments, members of the private sector including service providers, stakeholders in civil society, research, academia, other higher education institutions, and international organisations involved in development of water resources management.
The centrepiece of the Toolkit is a 'strategic approach for the equitable, efficient and sustainable management of water resources<'. The approach is based on internationally agreed-upon core principles concerning the need to protect the environment and ecosystems, to provide access to the health-giving and productive properties of freshwater resources equitably, efficiently and sustainably among populations, with special attention to poorer and under-served beneficiaries. It provides a comprehensive framework for all activities relating to water resources development. Its application involves a holistic attitude towards water management, and the introduction of best practices consistent with the internationally agreed-upon core principles. The strategy covers the full cycle of the water resource management activity, from national policy-making through to implementation of programmes and projects and includes the subsequent operation and maintenance of services.
The application of the strategic approach facilitates an open and flexible programme process in which sensitivity to changing trends and local economic, social and environmental circumstances can be reflected. At each stage of the programming process, the Toolkit provides a set of practical checklists to enable the policy principles at the heart of the strategic approach to be put into effect in different programming contexts, to identify problem areas likely to be encountered and potential responses to these problems.
A number of common core activities emerge from the checklists, stressing the importance and attention which needs to be given to what are known as 'software' or sometimes non-technical issues. The priority attached to software activities within the overall approach can be seen as part of a strategy which integrates the software component and raises its importance to the same level as the 'hardware' issues (such as infrastructures).
Almost all these activities relate to a certain degree to management and institutional strengthening. They have been grouped under priority themes for action as follows: institutional development and capacity-building; participatory structures and gender< equity; natural resource management; expansion of the knowledge base; demand management< and sustainable cost-recovery; awareness-raising and communications. The application of such activities will contribute to making the design and management of water resources interventions more cost-effective, efficient and sustainable.
The Water Project Toolkit opens with a presentation of the rationale< for the elaboration of the strategic approach. The strategic approach itself first identifies policy principles< for policy development and practical action; it then clusters programme activity into six Focus Areas<, within which the policy principles are to be applied; and finally it provides an overview of priority themes for action< implied by use of these frameworks.
The Water Project Toolkit's core practical material (Part 2) consists of step-by-step suggestions for the planning and implementation of activities. The approach is progressive, entailing the raising and resolving of issues throughout the different phases of the programme process by systematic application of the principles. The overall intention is to equip those involved in water-related decisions with a framework of principles and operational philosophy to facilitate informed decision-making on water-related development.
In relation to water resources, as in other areas of development activity, policy and practice are constantly evolving. The practical suggestions contained in this Toolkit do not provide exhaustive instructions on how to proceed in every project planning and implementation situation, nor do they offer answers to every problem likely to be encountered. Rather, they articulate a holistic perspective and strategic approach whose accompanying practical 'what', 'why' and 'how to' suggestions illustrate policy and programme directions consistent with this approach. The suggestions are an aid to achieve effective problem-solving within the Project Cycle Management process, not to be used as a prescriptive manual (Project Cycle Management, or PCM, is a system for project development, funding and evaluation used by the EC in its development cooperation activities).
The third part, The policy approach, gives a non-exhaustive summary of the last development policies and tools relevant to the development of the water sector with several references. If needed, these allow the reader to deepen a series of concepts cited throughout the Water Project Toolkit.
The Water Project Toolkit will enable users to benefit from the current trends in development cooperation involving water resources. In addition, this Toolkit aims to facilitate the application of sustainable water management in national and sub-national policies, programmes and projects.
The Water Project Toolkit is designed to be used on its own, or in tandem with supplementary tools and data. In the interests of brevity and ease of application, the Toolkit provides a summary rather than a full review of the global situation relating to water resources and implications for agriculture, public health, energy and other water-related sectors.
Emerging trends have been treated and highlighted throughout the Toolkit. New experiences and references have been included in order to make this document an updated tool for water sector practitioners. In addition, the online version (http://www.aquaknow.net/watertoolkit<) of the Toolkit allows a high level of contribution and interaction, resulting in a live and continuously updated reference.
Part 1 - Rationale And Key Concepts
Chapter 1: Water resources management: the challenges
Environmental stresses imposed by population growth, urbanisation, industrialisation and climate change have become a prominent theme of international concern, especially since the 1992 Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro. One of the most affected of the natural resources is that of freshwater. Demands upon the world’s supply of freshwater resources are increasing the threats and risk to both the quantity and quality of a natural resource essential to human life, health, social and economic activities. These risks to water resources have raised political attention which has been translated into political commitment, within and between countries, for the protection of this vital resource. Growing concerns related to climate change highlight the urgency of the freshwater situation. Climate change impacts are expected to affect populations directly by more frequent extreme events such as floods and droughts, rising sea levels, changes in the seasonal distribution and amount and type of precipitation such as snow and rain, Climate change is also expected to impact on the storage components of the Water Life Cycle such as glaciers, snow pack and groundwater via recharge.
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), established by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and the World Meteorological Organization (WMO), is an intergovernmental body with the aim to provide the world with a clear scientific view on the current state of climate change and its potential environmental and socio-economic consequences. Relevant reports produced by the IPCC and others cover all continents and regions, with focus on developing regions such as Africa, Asia, Latin America and the Caribbean and South East Asia where most vulnerability to climate change is perceived. To provide a framework within which nations can act in concert to address climate change, the United Nations hosted the formation of a Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). Article 4, paragraph 1(e) of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change commits Parties to develop appropriate and integrated plans for coastal zone management and water resources management for the protection and rehabilitation of areas affected by drought, desertification and floods. While the initial focus of the Convention has been on CO2 emissions, the importance of water has been working its way firmly onto the international agenda.
There are large differences between regions and countries regarding the availability of fresh water resources, especially those in temperate and tropical zones. The majority of countries in the Middle East and North Africa can be classified as having absolute water scarcity today (Figure 1) while in Sub-Saharan African the water scarcity is more related to the economic situation (lack of human, institutional, financial capacities etc.).
Figure 1 : Areas of physical and economic water scarcity (source: IWMI, 2007)
As shown in figure 2a and 2b, according to a joint study by the International Food Policy Research Institute and Veolia water (2011), the water stress, intended as percent of total renewable water withdrawn, is supposed to increase dramatically in the countries with a stronger projected economic growth such as China, India, South Africa and USA. According to the same study the population living in water short areas will increase by 90% by 2050.
Figure 2a: Water stress in 2010 (IFPRI et al., 2011).
Figure 2b: Water stress in 2050 (IFPRI et al., 2011).
Some major urban centres already face serious water shortages compounded by water pollution crises, the latter often originating from water-dependent and water-impacting agricultural and industrial activities. Questions relating to water resources management and usage cut across many economic and social sectors, including agriculture, fisheries, industry, urban development, energy, environment, tourism and public health. Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM) principles and concepts are presently used to manage competition between users and even to mediate in disputes over access to water resources and its use.
With increasing economic and demographic demands coupled with climatic change stresses, the prospect of increased competition and serious disputes within and between states and sectors over water resources in the not-too-distant future become more conceivable.
Water’s special character of being essential to health as well as a key component in social and economic activities, has resulted in a special cultural status and consequently a special position in public policy. Freshwater resources have traditionally been regarded as something to which all members of the human community have rights to access. Access to clean water –and sanitation - is considered by many current international agendas and platforms as a basic human right, indispensable for leading a healthy and dignified human life. Most existing water supply systems are the result of public investments for social improvement, and as such are invariably subsidized. The use of water in the various social and economic contexts has typically either been unregulated by tariffs, or at most very low-cost; the contributions by consumers usually not able to cover the costs of operation and maintenance.
There are important implications of subsidies and cost recovery in an era of water stress, among which are water profligacy and wasteful practices, or mismanaged water services and infrastructures. In the face of water shortages and environmental concerns, discussions in some international fora have called for water to be regarded as a social and public good and not to be available for the marketplace. However, regardless of where the responsibility of management is placed, costs must be met to ensure sustainability of services. There can be a clear distinction between the rights-based “value” of water and the value as represented by charges or tariffs for diifferent consumer groups, but herein lie the roots of a dispute. The view which upholds water as a commodity to be bought and sold, in which the community and especially its poorer members might thereby lose their rights, cuts across deeply held beliefs and long-established ideologies, now upheld in some areas that access to water is a human right.
Lack of a holistic perspective regarding water has led to dispersed and sometimes disorganised systems of water management. Responsibilities for the management of the resource in areas such as water transport and the construction of dams, pipelines, pumping stations, treatment plants, sewerage systems, and maintenance, are often allocated to a variety of different administrative departments. Water-related activities and their management are also present within a wide range of user sectors, are subsequently managed by that sector’s institution, and result in often uncoordinated management. As the water resource is finite and its utilisation needs to be equitable, efficient and planned, the challenge will be to bring all sector strands of management together.
The need to examine collectively the entire range of uses to which freshwater is put, and to design services which neither squander precious resources nor fail to respect other competing and complementary water needs, was translated into a policy and programme principle and strategy known as Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM). This principle is the response to the growing pressure on water resources resulting from growing population and socio-economic developments. It comprises a holistic approach that makes the management and protection of water resources compatible with the development of systems serving all types of consumers. It is a vital part of the challenge facing water-related development cooperation today. IWRM contributes to the quantitative and qualitative sustainable management of interlinked surface waters, groundwater and aquifers and coastal waters, thus ensuring the social and economic development that is also dependent on vitally important ecosystems.
However, a change in strategic direction on water is underway. Given the complexities implied in the implementation of IWRM especially in sub-Saharan Africa, the concept of IWRM has been joined with the concept of ‘Water for Growth and Development (WfGD, see part 3)’. This concept re-emphasises that water cannot be dealt with in isolation, but requires a high degree of collaboration and engagement between the ministry responsible for water ministries and the ministries responsible for driving social and economic development, such as ministries of infrastructure, energy, mining, agriculture and trade. Water is therefore seen more as a horizontal cross-cutting issue within many facets of development, rather than as a stand-alone ‘sector’ The concept of WfGD also aims for a better interfacing between water resources and water services issues with a strong focus on how both can together support growth and development. At the forefront of the concept is the assumption that links exists between the scale and range of investments in water and successful economic development, and therefore barriers to financing measures for water development must be overcome (World Water Council, 2011).
The acceleration of progress in meeting basic water needs
Survival and health
When water first rose to international importance in the 1970s, it was identified as one of the ‘basic needs’ common to all humanity – alongside food, water, shelter, means of livelihood - whose fulfilment had become a stated goal of international development policy. The fulfilment of population’s basic needs for access to a supply of safe drinking water and a safe disposal of human waste, remain important parts of today’s social and economic challenges. There has been some progress towards satisfying these two basic needs, but the challenge still remains today, with 900 million persons not having access to safe water and 2.6 billion people who do not have access to adequate sanitation facilities (WHO, 2011).
The UN’s ‘International Drinking Water Supplies and Sanitation Decade’ of the 1980ss was declared by the UN Water Conference at Mar del Plata in 1977. Despite the increase in attention and resources generated by the Decade, achievements in quantifiable terms fell short of stated targets (Choguill et al. 1993). Only in the context of rural water supplies did coverage manage to outstrip population growth and urbanisation. International commitments were reiterated in 1990 within the goals of ‘Water and Sanitation for All” by the Year 2000. In September 2000, during the UN Millennium Summit eight developmennt goals to free people from extreme poverty and multiple deprivations by 2015 were adopted by 189 nations and signed by 147 heads of state and government. Relevant indicators to measure progrress towards the Millenium Development Goals (MDGs) were selected by national and international statistical experts. These indicators are followed up by the WHO/UNICEF Joint Monitoring Programme (JMP) for Water Supply and Sanitation, which is the official United Nations mechanism tasked with Millennium monitoring progress towards the Development Goals relating to drinking-water and sanitation (MDG 7, Target 7c).
In 2008, the UN General Assembly declared the year 2008 the International Year of Sanitation, the goal being to raise awareness and to accelerate progress towards the MDG target to reduce by half the proportion of the 2.6 billion people without access to basic sanitation by 2015. Given the curreent technologies, approaches and skilled human resources, the targeted goal is in principle reachable. The present estimated cost to halve the proportion of people without basic sanitation by 2015 is estimated at USD $10 billion.
Figure 3: Inequity in access to sanitation and clean water. Source: Joint Monitoring Programme (JMP), 2012.
Calls for increased prioritization in development cooperation for drinking water supply and sanitation systems have been more frequently repeated in recent years.
In spite of its shortcomings in meeting its set quantitative targets, the Water Decade - at least at the non-technical level - did succeed in changing the perception of the international development community concerning cooperation in domestic water supplies and public health initiatives. The Water Decade highlighted the then-existing shortcomings in policy and practices. These included: over-emphasis on costly and sophisticated (inappropriate) technology, which produced services beyond the capacity of management bodies to maintain and sustain; lack of a sense of ownership by service stakeholders and users and thhe consequent neglect of services; a lack of gender analysis and reccognition of the role of women in water-transport, plus their influence in domestic water quality and hygiene; insufficient emphasis on environmental sanitation, on health educaation and hygiene promotion to enable uneducated service users to appreciate the implications of water and waste disposal for family health; and finally the need for cost-effectiveness in all areas of activity in order to use scarce resources wisely. The latter is being reinforced more and more by best practices which include more efficient techniques of water storage and transportation, greater efficiency in water use in industry and agriculture, and promoting behavioural change among water consumers to minimize excess consumption, wastage and water loss.
Food and livelihoods
Although water is also needed to support other basic needs- especially food and livelihoods- issues relating to the use of water for economic production have not been accorded the same level of discussion and scrutiny. While water use in agriculture accounts for more than 75 percent of water consumption in the developing world, in the developed world the sectors of industry and even energy are having very strong impacts on water consumption and more specifically water quality. With the promotion of economic development as a solution to poverty in some developing countries, such as many in Asia,there will also come an increasing evolution of the water consumption profile which will be less agricultural and more industrial.
This evolving profile of water usage will differ among the world regions as a result of their available resources. Water withdrawal as a percentage of renewable water resources varies from a minimum of 1% for Latin America to a maximum of 51% in the Near East and North Africa, as shown in Table 1.
| Total renewable water resources(km3) | Irrigation water requirements(km3) | Water requirement ratio | Water withdrawal for agriculture (km3) | Water withdrawals percentage of renewable water resources |
Latin America | 13409 | 45 | 24% | 187 | 1% |
Near East and North Africa | 541 | 109 | 40% | 274 | 51% |
Sub-Saharan Africa | 3518 | 31 | 32% | 97 | 3% |
East Asia | 8609 | 232 | 34% | 693 | 8% |
South Asia | 2469 | 397 | 44% | 895 | 36% |
90 developing countries | 28545 | 814 | 38% | 2146 | 8% |
Table 1 Comparison agricultural waters vs. water resources.
Source: FAO Aquastat, 2011.
Concern for world food security is growing and the productivity of agriculture will have to be increased to meet the increasing demand for food. Since 2006, developing countries have leased from 15 to 20 million hectares of farm land to foreign companies, investment funds and foreign governments with a turnover between 20 and 30 billion dollars, but not all of this land is allocated towards food production. While alternative economic land use could bring new opportunities to local populations, they could also over-ride important local issues such as priorities for land allocation or even unresolved land ownership issues. These competing land-uses also impact directly on water consumption and therefore water management requirements. This highlights the need for a sustainable and also consultative management process which takes into account due consideration of local populations’ land and water needs, ownership issues, environmental issues, the competing demands of other sectors, and the future challenges of climate change. While Governmentss have a vested interest in promoting foreign investment, they also must balance this with the responsibility to address the needs of the population and maintain an agenda of good resource management.
Although less pertinent to the fulfilment of basic needs, the growth of industrial and manufacturing processes which depend on water cannot be left out of the management picture. It is expected that the annual water volume used by industry will rise from 752 km3/year in 1995 to an estimated 1,170 km3/year in 2025 i.e. about 24% of total freshwater withdrawal worldwide (UNESCO water portal)
Increasing urbanization and population growth and the need to expand water supply services for an increased consumption will escalate competition for water allocation between urban, agricultural and commercial/industrial users. Urban and industrial environments are also known sources for creating severe upstream pollution, often with far-reaching implications for rural livelihoods, agricultural production and public health in rural areas. The necessary investments in wastewater treatment and the needs faced by cities to tap freshwater resources from ever further distances result in rising costs and increased competition between rural and urban users. Increased urbanization is often accompanied by economic growth but this is not only an urban phenomena. The demands to intensify agricultural production, accompanied by crop fertilization practices, are also becoming a serious threat to the groundwater environment. In addition, primary resource sectors such as mining and forestry also have huge impacts on the use and quality of water resources and are also in competition with the urban and rural areas.
The challenge, therefore, in terms of improving access to water and sanitation services to satisfy basic human needs is not simply one of maintaining a high profile of water needs and reversing a political trend which has led to under-resourcing of the sector. Lessons learnt a number of which were highlighted by the Water Decade, must incorporate all water users and uses – such as agriculture, urban and industrial, as well as public health – within one strategic approach.
International thinking on water: the consensus
A number of concerns, in addition to those surfacing as a consequence of the Water Decade, have subsequently exerted a significant influence on international thinking about water. Some - such as environmental stresses, water scarcity, climate change and potential conflict - have already been touched upon. Others need to be mentioned here in the context of a path to a new international consensus on water.
In recent years, economic, environmental and ‘common good’ perceptions of water resources have come to assume greater importance. Concerns over poverty reduction, democracy and human rights have increased the emphasis on equity and participatory approaches. According to the Development Assistance Committee (DAC)) definition, aid to water supply and sanitation includes water resources policy, planning and programmes, water legislation and management, water resources development, water resources protection, water supply and use, sanitation (including solid waste management) and education and training in water supply and sanitation. Aid for water supply and sanitation has increased since 2006; for the period 2006-2007, the DAC countries’ bilateral annual aid commitments to the water supply and sanitation sector was of USD 4.7 billion. The bilateral aid to water increased at an average annual rate of 19% for the period 2002-2007 whereas multilateral aid rose over the same period in about 11% annually.
Figure 4: Trends in aid to water supply and sanitation 1971-2009, 5-year moving averages and annual figures of commitments, constant 2008 prices. Source: OECD-DAC, 2010.
The poor achievement of objectives and goals within development cooperation, coupled with similar shortfall of results associated with structural adjustment programmes, prompted a systemic analyses of the context and modalities of development cooperation overall. The need to improve efficiency and cost-effectiveness in the application of Official Development Assistance (ODA) rresources, both from the perspective of intended beneficiaries and from that of donors, became compelling for pragmatic reasons (such as financial)as well as an evolving geopolitical and ideological framework.
The Paris Declaration off 2005 is one of the major steps in recent years to address these ODA shortcomings. It was endorsed by over one hundred Ministers, Heads of Agencies and Senior Officials who committed their countries and organisations to increase efforts in harmonisation, alignment and managing aid for results, with a set of actions and indicators to be monitored (OECD, 2005). It laid down a practical, action-orientated roadmap to improve the quality of aid and its impact on development. The Declaration is organized on five principles: ownership, alignment, harmonisation, managing for results, and mutual accountability; it has twelve indicators to monitor progress in achieving results and its aim is to create stronger mechanisms for accountability.
The importance of the ownership principle is linked to an increased focus on poverty reduction and is seen as a key component in the Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers (PPRSPs). The comprehensive country-based PRSP strategy was launched in 1999 by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) aand the World Bank (WB), aiming to provide the link between national public actions, donor support, and development outcomes in order to meet the United Nations' MDGs. AAlthough the overall purpose of development cooperation remains the same - to redress imbalances and create opportunities for underprivileged and under-served populations - a number of new concerns have emerged. They now reflect the importance and the need for good governance, institutional reform, administrative decentralisation, and the participation annd involvement of both the civil society and the private sector. Water-related development cooperation and the new international thinking on water address these concerns and form an integral part of this Water Project Toolkit.
While the debate on water in the 1980s was largely focused on water and sanitation as essential for public health, the scope of the debate in the 1990s expanded, and the wider objective now includes the management and use of water as an important component of environmental management and sustainable development. This wider approach generally embraces water resources management and reflects environmental and economic concerns as well as good governance, transparency, and cross-cutting issues such as gender annd poverty alleviation.
Consequently the afore-mentioned overlapping and complementary trends have prompted the development of an integrated approach to water resources management. This approach encompasses the following criteria: environmentally sound water management; support to food security; appropriate technology; private and public sector involvement; challenges in cost recovery and pricing; decentralisation of decision-making to the lowest appropriate administrative level; user participation inn management of services; and reform of institutions and regulatory frameworks.
The backbone of the consensus
The backbone of this path to a new consensus has its origin in the key principles articulated at international meetings held in Copenhagen (the Copenhagen Informal Consultation on Integrated Water Resources Development and Management, November 1991), and Dublin (the International Conference on Water and the Environment, January 1992), in the run-up to the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro in 1992. The Dublin principles formed the basis of Chapter 18 (oon freshwater resources) of the Earth Summit’s key discussion document, Agenda 21
Dublin Principles
| Agenda 21
|
Box 1.1 Dublin and Agenda 21 principles
These initial principles have been consistently cited by all the major international organisations involved in water-related development policy, including the Development Assistance Committee (DAC) of the OECD. Theey contribute to a stated determination to identify actions consistent within a framework of integrated water resources management.
The drive to operationalize these principles began initially with the UN General Assembly Special Session (UNGASS) in June 1997, whiich called for urgent action in the field of freshwater. In its 2000 Millennium Declaration the UN set an ambitious agenda for improving the access to water and sanitation by 2015. In 2002, at the World Summit for Sustainable Development in Johannesburg, the “European Union Water Initiative” EUWI--Water for Life was launched “to create the conditions for mobilising all available EU resources (human & financial), and to coordinate them to achieve the water-related Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) in partner countries”. In 2003, the United Nations General Assembly, in resolution A/RES/58/217, proclaimed the period 2005-2015 International Decade for Action 'Water for Life' with the primary goal to promote efforts to fulfil international commitments made on water and water-related issues by 2015.
These discussions at the macro level represent an indication that water had gained significant international political ground. More efforts are needed on an inter-governmental level, especially in promoting good international management. International freshwater resources management will only yield the necessary policy recommendations and institutional restructuring at national level if the international community is willing to provide the necessary financial resources to support such recommendations.
The original statement of water as a commodity i.e. “economic good” as is mentioned in Principle 4 of the Dublin Declaration is still under ddebate: in 2002, UNESCO declared water as “a human right” and stated that “water is a social and cultural good, not merely an economic commodity”. The General Comment No. 15 on the Right to Water, adopted by the UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights at its twenty-ninth session in November 2002 (UN Doc. E/C.12/2002/11) and further revised in November 2005 has increased the pressure for national and international legislation to recognize water as a human right stating that “the human right to water is indispensable for leading a life in human dignity. It is a prerequisite for the realization of other human rights”.
The growing international unanimity of vision concerning water is an important feature for the policy-making level. It provides force and recognition to the view that the development approaches applied in the past were unsustainable. They not only failed to address water scarcity and environmental issues; they also lead to a wider gap between served and under-served populations. A gap still remains between ideas, policies and actions endorsed in the macro-level debate, and their translation into policy-making structures and programmes in developing countries. While some projects stand out as beacons illuminating positive results from implementing new directions in development strategies, many programmes and projects are still challenged to change policies and ideas into actions. This Toolkit is intended to assist this process, especially in locations where there is an absence of services, service inefficiency, and poor results and benefits to individuals, communities or larger populations.
The promotion of river basin cooperation
The principle of Integrated Water Resources Management has led to the promotion of tthe river basin as the logical geographical unit for its practical realisation; notably by the EU, the World Bank and other Development Funding Agencies. The river basin offers many advantages for strategic planning, particularly at higher levels of government, though difficulties in their application should not be underestimated. Groundwater aquifers frequently cross catchment boundaries and, more problematically, river basins rarely conform to existing administrative entities or structures. To attempt to address these challenges, a number of river basins around the world are the focus of river basin organisations whose membership is usually composed of by a wide range of stakeholders from different sectors, levels and geographic representation. Although river basin organisations should not be seen as a panacea, they do provide a sound geographical basis for integrated water management.
|
In many parts of the developing world, major rivers traverse two or more countries and their transboundary character complicates the practicalities of river basin management. Water sharing between states which host major rivers such as the Ganges, Nile, Jordan and Mekong is an important political and strategic issue for the states concerned. Historically there are numerous examples of projects designed to meet national objectives but which ignore their impacts on the river basin as a whole; not acknowledging potential conflicts of the needs of downstream users other national or sub-national states. The 1997 Convention on the Non-navigational Use of International Water Courses provides a basis for establishing commmon user rights and obligations along transboundary rivers and a framework for the management of international river basin systems (UN, 2005). The importance of mechanisms for promoting river basin cooperation is now widely recognised as is illustrated by the creation of the International Network of River Basin Organisations (INBO) forum for international transboundarry policies.
Further information can be found at : International Commission for the Protection of the Danube River ICPDR, Nile Basin Initiative, Zambezi River Commission, Lake Victoria Basin Commission, Mekong River Commission, Lake Chad Basin Commission, Amazonas Commissions, La Plata River Basin Treaty, Autoridad Binacional del Lago Titicaca.
The creation of new partnerships
Until recently, water service provision has been primarily the exclusive concern of governments and municipal authorities, often in accordance with standard philosophies and belief systems concerning a ‘free’ resource essential to human health and well-being. However, the increasing challenges in some settings towards government-delivered services, coupled with a new appreciation of water scarcity, water value (including also as resource development) and the shortage of financial resources, have led to a reappraisal of the roles of potential actors. The building of alliances and partnerships with a wider range of stakeholders has become an increasingly acceptable theme within development cooperation for water-related activities as well as in other areas of development.
The commercial private sector
From the programming perspective, one of the sector actors whose role gained importance in the last twenty years is the commercial private sector especially that of private water companies and service providers. The two last decades have seen a growing acceptance that the state is not the only owner and operator of water-related services, including sewerage and irrigation works. There is now wider consideration that the traditional water department or public utility mode of supply is only one of a range of options.
The theme of public/private sector partnerships, with government assuming a facilitating and regulatory role instead of a provisioning role, and of privatisation of components of service delivery, is increasingly present in water policy today. This theme has gained some popularity due to the premise that involvement of the private commercial sector can overcome problems as budgetary shortages, poor management and lack of effective cost recovery. Governments have considered that a delegation of the management of public services to private companies could offer a potential solution to financial constraints and systemic problems of inefficiency.
Among the shortcomings of publicly-owned and run utilities in many developing countries that gave a strong impulse to privatisation it was emphasised that, beyond the stage of implementing projects that are funded or supported, by donors, authorities have often not been able to commit adequate resources to future operation and maintenance. These bodies may, in addition, suffer from weak technical and managerial capacity required to run existing and new infrastructures effectively. Meanwhile, tariffs for service provision have often been set at financially unsustainable levels; there is extensive leakage from systems due to poor maintenance and upkeep; and existing tariffs are not always able to be collected. Service infrastructures consequently fall into disrepair due to a lack of resources required to implement a proper operation and maintenance strategy. Unless specifically mandated to do so (and supported by sufficient resources), water authorities - often in urban areas - are also deficient in reaching poorer communities. The prospect of their being able to expand services is reduced where service management is economically and technically inefficient and cannot generate the required financial or water resource surplus. When trying to solve these series of shortcomings through the establishment of public-private partnerships, this approach led to a variety of results with sometimes limited success. This shows that the development of the water sector has no easy solutions. In the urban areas tariffs were sometimes set too high with the public budget covering anyways the differences, the rural areas continued not being served because often they are seen as unprofitable investments. The problems of governance were not solved above all in countries with limited free markets (as often happens in developing countries) in which the experience shows that the issue of privatisation has to be treated carefully.
In the last years the role of the private sector of “introducing fresh capitals” for the development and the growth of the water sector was also increasingly taken over by the investment banks, such as the European Investment Bank, the African Development Bank, the Asian Development Bank, etc.
Technically speaking there are many alternative options to full public ownership and operation of water services, involving to a greater or lesser degree the participation of tthe private commercial sector. These options range along a spectrum where at one end the government retains full responsibility for operations, maintenance, capital investment, financing and commercial risk; to the other end where these responsibilities have been devolved to autonomous, commercial utilities or companies. In between these options are those whereby the management of existing systems, or the construction of new installations, has been organised through private operators under various kinds of contractual arrangements including leases (affermage or delegation of public services), concessions and build-own-operate-transfer (BOOT) schemes.
Most of these options apply principally to the context of municipal water and wastewater treatment, but are also used in the context of major irrigation works and environmentally sensitive activities such as recreation and tourism, transport and waterway management. The role of the public authorities as regulator is to ensure equity and to monitor subsidy levels and tariffs paid by water consumers. The public authorities are also responsible for determining, or at least approving, investments to be made, and for ensuring the control of private management within the framework of partnership. This requires a clear separation of roles between the public and private management.
The community-based and informal ‘private sector’
Unless specific efforts are made to increase service coverage to poor and under-served communities, their domestic needs usually remain unmet by expansion of conventional water supply and sewerage schemes. Many governments undertake or facilitate special efforts for rural areas, but less often for urban and peri-urban areas. Service provision to poorer populations often depends on partnership with local community-based organisations, whether administrative entities - such as Village Councils - or non-governmental organisations.
Local NGOs, supported by their international counterparts, have attracted considerable attention recently due to their relative effectiveness in reaching the poor, and in particular for their knowledge and experience of working closely with local communities. They also have a reputation - in many cases deserved - of achieving large results with limited resources, and their methods have therefore attracted interest from a cost-efficiency perspective. Local NGOs have become increasingly key actors in promoting the willingness, and measuring the ability, to pay for water and sanitation services, even in the most economically marginal of communities. Because of the pioneering role they have played in demonstrating the practicability and essential role of user participation in the management of community improvement schemes - including food production, catchment dams, small-scale irrigation, disease control and public health - NGOs are now regarded as mainstream actors in water development cooperation. However, the size of their contribution is often proportionately small, and not all NGOs have the capacity to operate effectively without technical or financial support.
Thus, although the involvement of the ‘private sector’ is also advocated internationally as a way of reaching poorer communities with basic water supply and sanitation services with little additional administrative expenditure, the participation of civil society implies the involvement of a very different kind of ‘private sector’. Their motivation is usually community benefit; commercial profit plays almost no role except at a very marginal economic level such as in the manufacture by village artisans of latrines or local cost recovery for spare parts. Indeed, the perceived lack of opportunity for cost recovery, often seen as an automatic corollary of expanding services for the poor, is one reason for the dependence of many developing country governments on external cooperation for such schemes. Even schemes which do involve user fees and participatory management often still require governmental or extra-governmental support for components such as human resources, capacity building for local governnment departments and NGOs, and perhaps a continuation of tariff subsidies or pro-poor tariffs.
Some schemes are operated by NGOs and community associations independently of government-run services and without their support, albeit with their knowledge and within an established administrative framework. These are in the minority; local community associations more often occupy a partnership role with either the authorities or with private commercial mini-enterprises, depending on their particular situation. Many of these NGOs have recognised that, even among the poorest communities, basic cost recovery is needed to provide services and ensure efficient O&M; and they have managed to implement user fee systems. In some cases this can be in contrast to government services that may still provide free or heavily subsidised services following the principle of water as a ‘public good’, but which can still fail to serve the poorest populations. As with the private sector, the challenge here is to recognise the potential of partnerships with NGOs and incorporate their role appropriately into project design and implementation.
In towns and cities, the informal private service sector plays a supplementary role. Residents of slums and shanty-towns often have to fend for themselves outside the reach of government services; their water is often supplied by small-time vendors and water-carriers, and human and solid waste disposal services are operated by ‘sweepers’ or carters. The fact that these consumers of water (and sanitation) services often pay rates proportionally more expensive than those charged to customers receiving services from the main infrastructures, is often cited as proof that the poor can, and will, pay for water supplies and/or sanitation. In reality, they have no alternative to this dependence on informal sector provision. This ‘willingness to pay’ is rarely, if ever, the taken into account during the design of investment by authorities and formal sector companies in such areas. Meanwhile, the private service providers who do supply them are unregulated and often exploitative.
There is undoubtedly scope for the incorporation of manufacturers and suppliers from the informal private service sector into water supply and sanitation services and small-scale irrigation schemes. A range of artisans, masons, mechanics, well excavators and local handymen are often informally involved in the provision of water and sanitation services. The challenge is to build on these available skills resources and incorporate their activities into programme and project frameworks in an appropriate, equitable, and well-regulated manner. As is the case with the private commercial sector, it is necessary to ensure that the participation of the informal sector is not exploitative, and supports rather than supplants efforts to extend good quality services to poor and under-served communities.
Multilateral donors including the UN system
The member countries of the European Union are among the largest donors to development cooperation, both bilaterally and through multilateral channels including the EC. Many European countries have longstanding experience in the developing world and close historical ties with many countries and regions where water-related issues are critical. Countries in Africa, the Caribbean and the Pacific (ACP) have an innovative partnership arrangement with the EU under the Cotonou Agreement (negotiations for the secondd revision were concluded on 19/03/2010). This unique relationship enables a shared vision of policy priorities to be promoted between EU and ACP partners.
The most influential multilateral lending organisation offering support to water resources development and management is the World Bank. The World Bank is active within the full range of economic and social water-related sectors and has been a leading exponent of the new agenda in water policy. The World Bank’s own water policy emphasises the adoption of a comprehensive policy framework, decentralised management of services, economic pricing of water, and a greater participation by stakeholders. A major role is foreseen for community organisations and the private sector in planning, financing and delivering services. The regional Development Banks echo the World Bank prescriptions, only with a regional focus. By its declaration of an International Drinking Water Supply and Sanitation Decade (1981-90), the UN acted as catalyst in promoting the international drive for improved basic water supply and sanitation services. The ‘Water Decade’ was spearheaded by the UN Development Programme (UNDP), and a number of other UN organisations actively participated. Since the UN Conference for Environment and Development - the 1992 Earth Summit - which precipitated a major re-thhinking about water as an essential natural resource, the UN has also provided the key fora where the new agenda for water resources management has been articulated. After the 1992 Earth Summit the UN set up a new international mechanism, the UN Commission for Sustainable Development (UNCSD), in which the interrelated dimensions of water management and environmental sustainability can be addressed.
Within the UN system, a number of funds, programmes and specialised agencies have long been involved with water-related activities, usually by providing technical expertise or material assistance to a wide range of projects. At the highest level, UN involvement in water is co-ordinated by UN-Water (since 2003) whose purpose is to “promote coherence in, and coordination of, UN system actions aimed at the implementation of the agenda defined by the Millennium Declaration and the World Summit on Sustainable Development”(UN-Water, 2003:1).
UN organisations offer a range of partnership possibilities with other multilateral and bilateral donors in all areas of programming. The full range of UN involvement in water is very broad; only the relevant and specific aims and objectives of the principal organisations and frameworks are highlighted here.
The key players are: UNDP, (economic production, technology and infrastructure); World Health Organisation (WHO) and >UNICEF (the UN Children’s Fund), (public heallth and community development); the UN Environment Programme (UNEP) and UNCSD, (environmental considerations); the UN Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO), UN regional commissions (UNECE, UNECA,, UNESCAP, UNECLAC, UNESCWA) and the World Meteorological Organisation (WMO), (hydrology and climate); the Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) and the International Fund for Agriculttural Development (IFAD) (water use in agriculture). In keeping with their mandates and operational modalities, UN organisations interact with the governmental policy-making and administrative apparatus at different levels, some only at the macro level, a few right down to micro. There are obvious areas of common goals and objectives, most evidently in the context of addressing basic human needs, infrastructure, community development, food security and public health.
All of the UN organisations’ water policies subscribe to the Rio principles and position their activities within the ‘sustainable development’ framework. All equally echo the need for a comprehensive policy towards water which considers the protection of the resource, and its management and use in the light of competing demands. There have also been a number of joint initiatives between UN organisations, often with World Bank partnership. The Water Supply and Sanitation Collaborative Council, set up in 1991 in the follow-up to the Water Decade, has a wide-ranging membership and enables governmental and non-governmental players to take part in the ongoing policy debate.
International networks and expert bodies
A number of other international and national bodies exist which can offer research and technical assistance in development cooperation activities relating to water. Many countries have ‘centres of excellence’, whose specialists, research programmes and training courses are designed to make available the latest technical and operational information to those involved in water-related programmes and project activities. Other categories include partnership and networking bodies such as the Water Supply and Sanitation Collaborative Council; the international NGO community; and academic and scientific institutions based in different parts of the world who act as repositories of technical and professional expertise.
The long established international networking initiatives are the Global Water Partnership (GWP), supported by international and bilateral funds and the World Water Council (WWC). The GWP was set up in response to the Dublin and Rio conferences to encourage members to adopt consistent and complementary policies and programmes for water resources management. It provides a forum in which to share information and experience, offer technical advice, and facilitate collaboration among partners. The World Water Council (WWC) acts as a think-tank to promote awareness at all levels, including the highest decision-making level, of critical water issues and their relationship to environmental sustainability. More recent international networks are the EU-African partnership, Sanitation and Water for All, and the Global Donor Platform for Rural Development for example.
A number of academic institutes and research centres have an influence on the direction taken by international agencies and governments; they, or experts employed by them, are frequently engaged to contribute their expertise in policy-making or technical contexts. Some of these are at the forefront of innovative solutions and awareness raising and run training programmes for engineers and other specialists from developing countries, and thereby help to promote ‘best practices’. Ultimately many ‘centres of excellence’ associated with water resources management disciplines influence the international water agenda, but there is no single institution that covers water in its entirety.
Among the variety of experts and practitioners associated with organisations which contribute to programmes and projects, consultants of different profiles have an important role to play. Sophisticated technical expertise, only available at the international level or from ‘centres of excellence’, may be one obvious requirement. Sometimes the missing skills or knowledge gap is actually at the micro-level. Programme or project implementation, especially in the early critical stages, can be facilitated by the involvement of consultants from NGOs or neighbouring countries with extensive experience of - for example - health education, capacity-building among user groups, or project support communications and social mobilisation techniques.
Different perspectives: North and South
Climatic conditions and water priorities
Although there is growing evidence of a global consensus on the critical importance of water, there are nonetheless wide differences between regions - and within them - concerning the priority issues for development. At the global level, this is reflected in a broad dichotomy of view between North and South about priorities.
The idea that water must be seen as a highly-valued natural resource is now common international thinking in developed countries - is far from new to the majority of developing countries. Many developing countries are located in semi-arid areas, have semi-arid regions within their borders, or suffer from dry and wet season extremes. In some countries - India, Iraq, Sri Lanka, China and others - ancient civilisations’ foundations were built upon hydraulic engineering to manage water flows, and water management still remains central to social, political, and cultural life. Problems of water scarcity, overabundance at times of seasonal flood, or both, are accepted as on-going realities and not as extreme events. For countries in these regions water has always carried political weight; and its management and conservation together with sector financial investments remain essential to their development and economic policies.
Of the OECD countries, those such as Australia, Mexico, Western USA and parts of southern Europe experience water stress problems. From the Newly Industrialized Countries (NIC) China has 7% of the world’s water and 400 of China’s 660 main cities face water shortages with one-third of the rural population still drinking unsafe water ; by 2020 India’s demand for water is expected to exceed their current sources of supply. Most industrialised countries are situated in temperate zones. Until recently, they have taken their water supply for granted and its volume has not been a matter of concern except during occasional floods or droughts. This lack of industrialised world concern has long influenced international attitudes; the 1987 Brundtland Commission Report on eenvironment and development - Our Common Future - did not even consider water resources as an issue. However, by the time of the 1992 UN Earth Summit at Rio de Janeiro, attitudes had begun to change and include water quality concerns. Although water was not prominently discussed, the inclusion of a chapter on Freshwater Resources in Agenda 21, the key Summit document, provided a catalyst for future actions.
Although the increasing frequency of water scarcity and seasonal flood events remain priority issues for much of the developing world, water quality issues and financial investments are beginning to intrude on this agenda, while at the same time scarcity issues are becoming more prominent in parts of the industrialised world. Rapid population growth and an increasing urbanisation in the South, have recently begun to exert new pressures on what is fast becoming an over-stretched resource. Cities in the Middle East, Asia and Latin America are facing critical water problems as a result of overloading demand on limited resources, improper waste disposal, contamination of rivers and streams and the unregulated extraction of water from increasingly depleted aquifers. Agriculture remains the major water user in many countries and the diversion of water to other uses has implications for agriculture and food security. While welcoming an overdue international recognition of the importance of water, some stakeholders in the developing world have expressed reservations on the sudden pre-occupation of the industrialised world with environmental issues. Resulting demands to impose global limits on the exploitation of the natural environment, to which the developed countries were not subjected during their own industrialisation process, are sometimes seen as unfair and inequitable. Since the Earth Summit, the views of North and South have indeed moved closer together, but reservations towards blanket global prescriptions for resolving resource management issues remain. These concerns need to be taken into account, and they underscore the challenge of matching the international consensus on principles to the realities of local situations.
Implications for water policy
Contained within the international consensus on principles that should govern the response to global water problems, is the recognition that problems must be identified within the local context, and solutions developed which take local specificities into account. However, the implications of putting into effect some of the most important features of the international consensus - given the particularities of water realities in the developing world - have not always been given due recognition by donors. The growth of international unanimity of view demands more flexibility concerning the practical application of policy principles. Global programming and models need to be viewed more critically, or the international consensus principles themselves will be seen to be less relevant.
Box 1.3 The risk of blanket prescription of development programs
The risks of blanket prescription of development programs: the case study of deadly wells. Water is essential to life but if not well treated it can be dangerous. Until the present much attention has been given to deadly diseases that contaminated surface water can bring, causing a significant burden of sickness and mortality in many developing countries. To solve this health problem many aid agencies since the 70’s invested massively in projects to install tube-wells to provide ground water that was presumably assumed as a safe source of drinking-water for the population. From the 80’s up until today some developing countries such as Bangladesh, parts of China, India and Sri Lanka suffer from the largest mass poisoning in history given the natural toxic substances that can be found in ground water such as arsenic and fluoride. This tragic case study illustrates a typical example of a well-intentioned development cooperation project that eventually went wrong due to a lack of knowledge of local realities and characteristics. Blanket prescriptions can be dangerous and have devastating consequences on local populations. Still today millions of people are dying and will continue dying because of national and international error in problem analysis. |
In the context of development cooperation, the implications of issues such as institutional reform, realistic pricing and user participation in serviice management, have ramifications - especially political ramifications - which pose special problems to many governments. Proposed reform measures can easily clash with customary views about rights, or undercut entrenched interests and existing systems of administration. There are also significant technical and resource constraints affecting the means whereby, and the degree to which, the consensus emerging at the international level can actually be made operational at sub-levels. Factors such as climate, hydrology, terrain, human settlement patterns, infrastructural capacity, investment requirements and financial procedures, economic considerations, and the socio-cultural setting all have to be taken into account. This list of factors required for successful operationality explains why moral commitment to, for example, the Dublin and Rio principles, still remains stronger than their practical realisation on the ground.
Developing countries tend to be more concerned with increasing supplies through new infrastructure rather than with water efficiency or managing water demand within existing services. However, with promotion from the international consensus, government officials are becoming more aware of the need to manage resources efficiently, and that the construction of new infrastructure has to take into account environmental and social impacts, and the fundamental need for systems to be economically viable for maintenance purposes.
There are differences of view concerning the involvement of the private sector. A perception has been developed that the turning over of state-run water-related functions to the private sector is a panacea for efficiency gains, but still many developing country governments are wary of doing so, reflecting a sometimes necessary degree of prudence on their part. In parts of Asia and in Latin America, the private sector is relatively developed; elsewhere, it is weak and poorly regulated and thus, it may genuinely be the case that transfers to the private sector is either not viable or is undesirable. Where regulation is limited or unenforceable, an uncontrolled private sector can be predatory, exploiting the vulnerability of the poor (Bakker et al. 22008).
While there is clear evidence that, under regulation, some kind of private sector involvement is beneficial to users, local circumstances have to be taken into account. This also applies to the involvement of community-based organisations in management of services. The ability of small-scale farmer associations and village groups to manage complex water schemes without expert help is normally limited. Their capacity is usually confined to the management of low-level technologies, such as small catchment dams, gravity-flow schemes, rainwater harvesting, hand pumps and simple sewerage systems. Through the mediation of NGOs and motivated water authorities, such approaches have been successfully implemented in many parts of the developing world. However, they are very difficult to integrate into a systematic area-wide or nation-wide framework.
For many reasons, therefore, developing country governments consider water resources planning and management to be a central part of government responsibility. This view is consistent with the international consensus that promotes the concept of government as facilitator and regulator. The challenge is to reach mutual agreement about the level at which, in any specific instance, government responsibility can be delegated or be partnered by autonomous water services management bodies and/or community-based organisations.
Chapter 2: Managing water resources equitably, efficiently and sustainably: policy principles
The centrepiece of the Water Project Toolkit is a ‘strategic approach for the equitable, efficient and sustainable management of water resources’. This implies the need to protect the aquatic eco-system and extend the health-giving and productive properties of freshwater resources, equitably and efficiently among humankind - with special emphasis on the poor and under-served people.
The policy principles elaborated here relate directly to the core principles already established by international consensus referred to in the introduction. Their most authoritative expression is encapsulated in the four over-arching core principles agreed upon at the International Conference on Water and the Environment in Dublin in January 1992 and in the subsequent international conferences such as the 2002 World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD) and the follow-up at the UN Commission for Sustainable Development (CSD).
While the core principles provide a basis for water-related policy, they are relatively remote from practitioner realities and offer little guidance for resolving the dilemmas and difficulties experienced in their practical implementation. Therefore, as part of the development of a strategic approach, and to aid administrative management and implementation of water-related policy, this Toolkit presents a series of policy principles applicable at the programming and project level. These are as follows:
- institutional and management principles
- social principles
- economic and financial principles
- environmental principles
- information, education and communications principles
- technological principles.
These headings reflect the wider range of issues essential for effective water resources management. Many of these principles are inter-related and interlinked.
The policy principles broaden the framework within which integrated water-related policy can be addressed in an organised fashion. As emphasised throughout this Toolkit, water is not a commodity like other economic commodities – it is a fragile natural resource and a public good which cannot be replaced. It must be protected and access preserved for future generations in order to maintain sustainable liveable environments on which societies and economies rely.
Sound water resources management affects development activity in economic, productive, infrastructural and social sectors Concerns outside an immediate programming and project environment – such as sustainability of the resource over the long term, protection of water- dependent ecosystems, sustainability of service management, and enhancement of the wider urban or rural environment – need to be taken into account. The positive implications of adopting a broader strategic approach to water cannot be underestimated. More governments are implementing a range of practical changes which are integrated and respond effectively to the core principles of the new consensus. Activities at the macro-level (integrated water resources management, water policies, legislation, and institutional change) and at the micro-level (user participation or community-level operation and maintenance, ) are given more weight proportionately compared to technical activities. Technological issues such as construction, which previously dominated programme strategies, still remain critical components but are now regarded as one set of considerations among many.
The policy principles are cross-cutting and applicable to all types and aspects of water-related activities – from surveys, to human resources development or construction of installations – whatever their physical, social or economic setting. Such principles form a foundation for a strategic approach that will facilitate clear thinking on objectives and actions.
Institutional and management principles
1. Roles of government and official bodies at all levels should be clearly defined and areas of responsibility officially established
Management and service delivery functions need to be clearly identified and institutional responsibilities demarcated. Governments should provide a sound legal and policy framework for water resources management and facilitate service extension and provision. Governments are responsible for establishing and overseeing regulatory bodies; these bodies must be independent, transparent, accountable, and empowered to enforce regulations. All uses of water (environmental as well as consumption), and the roles of institutions involved in managing resources and providing services, need to be enshrined in law (see Part 3, Glossary). Service and quality criteria need to be similarly established within a regulatory framework.
At national level, governments have a responsibility to develop an integrated water policy, meeting the needs of the various users within the limits of available financial and environmental resources. While financial resources can be quantified with financial tools, the geographical and hydrological nature of water resources needs to be taken into account; catchment areas have been adopted as the most effective scale of management for overall water resources (surface, subsurface and recharge).
Effort should be made to verify that water policy is co-ordinated with other policies that have implications for water use – such as those for agriculture, health, industry, energy, environment and urban development. To this end, a system of co-ordination among those responsible in the different sectors at national level is needed. An effective co-ordinating body will enable competition between water uses to be resolved, in accordance with the national policy and agreed water resources development plan. While such coordinating bodies are not easily created within government structures or administrations, river basin organisations have been used as the platform to facilitate a coordinated approach to management.
One model for achievement of an integrated strategy the Sector Wide Approach (SWAp), which provides a framework for collaboration, harmonisation and analysis that promises to lead to more effective implementation and delivery of water services and better integrated management of water resources. SWAp aims to deliver these benefits by providing a methodology for assessing the sector, which systematically considers all the interrelated factors that influence performance and sustainability. SWAp is wide because it recognizes that success depends on a coordinated response where no single actor is likely to be able to deliver all that is needed. But an efficient SWAp is no wider than it needs to be. SWAPs have been slow to develop in the water sector, since the sector is more complex than other sectors such as education and health where the sector wide approach is more developed. At the same time a successful sector wide approach brings many benefits to the water sector precisely because the complexity of the sector requires multi-stakeholder dialogues, collaboration and coordination, and participation by all stakeholders including the state, the private sector and civil society
Many countries still implement water codes or water legislation that are outdated and are not always relevant to the challenges of today. They often do not take into account integrated water resources management and conservation, nor have they always been established through a participatory process. New laws, ratification and implementation of national and even international agreements coupled with enforcement procedures are required. As far as possible, they should be formulated permissively rather than restrictively to enable application without undue cost and administrative burden. One approach to reduce these burdens is by decentralising the various types of decision-making to the lowest, most appropriate, administrative tier. However, even though faced with challenges, costs and burdens, common references and minimum standards are still required and should always form the basis of new legislation, regulation and codes.
2. The structures and systems of management should be designed in such a way as to facilitate involvement by the responsible authorities at different levels
Participation by all stakeholders is essential for successful water management and usage. (See Part 3, Glossary.) Structures and practices of the responsible authorities therefore need to be designed to facilitate participation of the various categories of users including: water companies, industries, SMEs, farmers, domestic consumers, energy utilities, fisheries, transport and nature conservation organisations – and in doing so involve all major groups (equity mainstreaming). The contribution of civil society organisations who represent cross-cutting categories such as gender or education must also be included.
Responsibilities for water-related services and resource management need to be decentralised to the lowest appropriate administrative level according to the concept of subsidiarity;; this allows the contributions of the various parties to be optimized. However, the necessary tools, capacity development incl. training and funds must first be allocated so that the resources are available for responsibilities to be fulfilled. Where responsible bodies have centralised and hierarchical command structures, they are often inadequately geared to consultation and interaction with stakeholders,, especially users down to the community or household level. In such cases, organisational transformation may be necessary. On the one hand, functional responsibilities are best devolved to officials and bodies close to the realities of the situation, including local authorities, private and public companies and NGOs/ CSOs able to facilitate participation of users in decision-making, planning etc. On the other hand, the role of the public authority as regulator, facilitator and moderator is to develop an organisational culture that is outward-looking, to facilitate timely communication with all stakeholders.. Therefore it is important that the division of responsibilities is well thought out and that decentralization does not become an automatic option that results in divesting central authorities of core responsibilities. The need and added value of capacity building to address administrative challenges is often a strong complement to redesigning management strategies for the central level and outwards.
3. Involvement of user organisations and the private sector, public – private and/or public/public partnerships should be encouraged
Partnerships with the private sector and or/public / communal sectors need to be encouraged and facilitated; this is especially relevant as government authorities decentralize progressively their responsibilities for the provision of services. In this context, the private sector is deemed to include informal or civil society groups involved in water services or management, such as Water User Associations, CCommittees or Farmer Associations.
The roles of the private sector actors will vary according to social, economic and environmental circumstances, but they should all be subject to regulation. A suitable relationship between public and private sectors needs to be defined which promotes the efficient operation of the facilities and collection of user fees while at the same time guarantees access and affordability to all users. Delivery of services and construction of installations may be organised through service providers which, whether publicly or privately owned and operated, can be autonomous, but still supervised and regulated by authority. At the same time, vulnerable populations – the under-served and underprivileged – need to be protected from exploitation by service providers operating largely for profit, since this sector of the population have little or no direct (consumer) influence. The principles of transparency, integrity, solidarity and equity are effective where all people and stakeholders are awware of their rights while at the same time acknowledge their responsibilities. Access to information allows users to make informed choices and to more effectively participate in the governance processes of water management and services.
Government-run water authorities and utilities companies can facilitate the transfer of technology to a wide range of private sector actors by promoting the development of local water supply, wastewater disposal and irrigation manufacturing and service industries. These industries can be large or small-scale and able to cater to the needs either of major publicly-financed schemes or micro-projects and private consumers. (See also Part 3)
Public-private partnerships (PPP) aim to combine the respective strengths of public and private partners. PPP projects are planned, financed and implemented jointly. The Private sector involvement is expected to achieve development policy objectives via the introduction of technological innovations, job creation, and improvement of production or delivery processes and thus contribute to the Millennium Development Goals. The Public sector involvement optimally maintains ownership and responsibility to ensure water services are equitably delivered and transparently managed. PPP schemes have faced some setbacks in the recent years mainly due to a lack of governance in the PPP process, including a lack of transparency compounded by unclear definitions of roles and responsibilities.
The Public-public partnerships (PUPs) involve two or more public authorities or organizations collaborating to improve the capacity and effectiveness of one partner in providing public water or sanitation services. PUPs should not be considered as an approach which is opposed to PPPs but rather as an alternative for achieving improvements in water management
4 Ongoing capacity building is neeeded within institutions and for participant groups at all levels
Capacity building, especcially the development of human resources, the enhancement of skills, the adoption of up-to-date thinking, and improvement of the knowledge base, are needed in many institutions responsible for water resources management and services. Capacity building should extend to all levels of an organisation and to as wide a selection of stakeholders as is necessary. If a more active role in service design and implementation is envisaged for water users, the capacity of intermediary bodies, such as NGOs and local councils, may also need to be enhanced. This can include training in technical and organisational activities which allows actors to be able to make more effective decisions in management or maintenance as required.
An emphasis on ‘software’, as opposed to ‘hardware’, components of water-related projects requires that an orientation towards capacity building in these areas should be built into project design. Interpersonal skills such as communication, negotiation and leadership, as well as knowledge of project management, or environmental and public health activities are equally as important as the functional skills relating to building and managing installations. With the right encouragement and training, engineering staff can adopt more of a partnership approach to service delivery rather than a proprietary attitude towards schemes. However it is also important to understand that for capacity building on skills and knowledge to succeed, there will be required a minimum of resources and materials, or hardware, in order to realize the benefits of these skills. The point of balance between hardware and software is often in a process of movement and requires regular review by the management to ensure the best combination of the two.
5 Management systems should be transparent and accountable and appropriate management information systems should be established
Conditions for good water governance require participation, accountabilitty, and transparency in order to achieve successful economic, social and environmental outcomes. This requires transparency and accountability from both formal and informal sectors associated with water management: be they governments, private sector, or non-governmental organisations
The responsible authorities, their partners and water users need to have confidence in their management systems and operating procedures. This can be addressed with training and information to promote the necessary understanding, but this is not always viable at all levels for all procedures to all stakeholders. Some elements of management may always remain internal but they must always be accessible. A balance needs to be struck between flexibility and accountability.
Consequently all financing and auditing procedures must be transparent. Tariff systems, systems of financial and quality control need to be rigorous in order to avoid the mismanagement or misapplication of funds that can be associated with large-scale investments in major construction works but also are relevant at village level water supply committees.
Management information systems are very useful but they need to be suitable for the organisational level at which the relevant data collection and analysis activities are conducted. Data collection needs to be monitored in such a way that it provides information of value to managers when they require it. Regular monitoring reinforces understanding of processes, helps to engender a sense of ownership of the system and ultimately ensures that it is effectively used. However one should not look for the solution in the technology of systems. Consideration needs to be given to the level of information technology required for different functions, given cost and human resources constraints. Not all systems have to be based on computer technology, though such technology does offer obvious advantages.
Social Principles
1 A sufficient supply of water and an adequate means of sanitation are basic human needs to which everyone should have access
Water is a fundamental social resource since it is essential for human health and life itself. It is also an economic resource and a fundamental component of economic activities such as agriculture, fisheries or industrial activity, upon which the populations’ livelihoods depend. Water shortages or excesses, drought and flood-prone environments have profound implications on these activities and thus for human well-being. Poverty reduction, quality of life and equity considerations therefore need to be seen as priorities in the conceptualisation and planning of activities relating to water.
The lack of safe water and sanitation in many poorer parts of the developing world is a cause of continuing concern especially for those un-served or under-served and who most at risk from water-related diseases are. It is therefore important to prioritise the extension of basic water and sanitation services to the population in both rural and urban areas. Sanitation is often neglected, although it is as important for health impacts as is access to clean water. Equal priority should therefore also be given to sanitation, whether it is community, domestic, or waste water management, an equal emphasis with water supply in the provision of essential services.
Definitions of access to sanitation and water (i.e. distance to the supply and personal security) and adequate coverage (i.e. per capita served) need to take into account the type of the installations and their use, as well as willingness and ability of users to pay. The ability of households to access water in sufficient quantity for their needs and to have access to improved sanitation are important determinants of their capacity to adopt hygienic behaviour and participate in measures for controlling water-related diseases.
The management of water as a collective/ public good is often an integral part of community life and is deeply embedded in social, cultural and livelihood strategies and behaviours. An understanding of attitudes and practices regarding water use, human waste and solid waste disposal at the household and community level, whether for economic or domestic activity, is critical to formulation of all strategies and activities intended to provide sustainable and appropriate services.
A critical review of domestic water supply schemes should pay attention to the quality of water/water safety at the point of supply, in the method of transport and finally for storage and use at the household or user level in the context of domestic hygiene . WHO water quality standards can be applied at all points of the collection, distribution, storage and use process.
2 Users have an important role to play and their involvement should be fostered via a participatory approach
The involvement of users in water management is central .to the development of water and waste management services. This can include the provision of community labour in the construction of schemes, decision-making about siting installations, collection of tariffs, and operation and maintenance. In low-income areas or small population groups such as villages, this involvement is likely to be through community-based organisations such as water user or management committees.
The extent of community involvement in the management of water supply or sanitation services will vary with the context, the technical design of the installed systems, and the resources available at community level. Both the capacity and the limitations of community involvement need to be taken into account. Long-term sustainability of facilities in low-income communities cannot be guaranteed without a strong sense of community responsibility and ownership.
Implementing a community-based approach involves training of field and administrative staff in participatory techniques, gender and equity and adopting a flexible approach to project implementation. Local knowledge – traditional or otherwise - cultural values, indigenous practices, lifestyles and habits relating to water management and their application need to be analysed, respected and, where possible, supported (See also Part 3).
3 Gender implications should be examined and taken into account at all stages of the planning and implementation process
The central role played by women, especially in the developing world, in the provision, service management and husbandry of water, primarily in the domestic, small and medium enterprises (SME) and small holding farms, is widely recognized. Women’s participation annd gender isssues should be accorded special consideration in relation to water management and use.
In both rural and urban environments, much time and energy is spent by women and girls in water-hauling; time and energy that cannot be devoted to other family or economic activities. Consequently water resources management is an important factor in determining women’s availability to participate in these activities. Gender impllications need to be considered at all stages of the planning and implementation of water-related activities, with consideration given to the different social, economic and cultural roles assigned to both men and women. Not only do gender impllications of proposed interventions have to be considered, but women users and beneficiaries of services should participate in defining those implications. Given existing power and responsibility structures within families and communities in many parts of the world, a targeted effort is often required to enable women to take a meaningful role in the consultation and decision-making process relating to water and waste disposal. In many traditional cultures, women’s perceived roles in water resources management are often for carrying and storage of domestic supply. Domestic hygiene, whether it is care of children or food preparation, is also usually regarded as the woman’s responsibility. Issues such as the location and the ownership of installations; knowledge of operations and maintenance procedures; and membership of Water Committees or similar bodies are often allocated to men. The absence of women from decision-making in water resources management and service delivery is essentially inequitable, and severely hinders the possibility of realising good domestic and public health, food management and quality of life programme objectives.
Because of their domestic roles, women are also logical key candidates for educational activities concerning water use and hygiene behaviour. However, men should also be included since their attitude towards – for example – hygienic disposal of human waste and their willingness to pay for services or installations may be decisive within the household and community.
4 Mainstreaming HIV/AIDS in the water sector
For People Living with HIV (PLHIV) their suppressed immune systems make them highly vulnerable to any disease that may be carried by unclean water and sewage. HIV affected people also need more than average amounts of clean water (Ngwenya and Kgathi, 2006). Big amount of water are essential for purposes of hydration, taking medicines, maintaining personnel hygiene and washing personal articles and clothing.
Unfortunatly, PLHIV often have reduced access to clean water and basic sanitation: despite their greater need, they are also often subject to stigma and discrimination that limits their access to otherwise readily available clean water and sanitation facilities (Magrath, 2006).
Women usually carry out almost all water-related activities and HIV-positive mothers need clean water for the preparation of formula milk for their babies (UN Secretariat, 2007, USAID, 2008). The fatal disease is therefore a considerable burden for girls who are responsible of fetching water and taking care of PLHIV. – often while HIV-infected themselves (GCWA, 2006). Inadequate water and sanitation make home-based HIV care extremely burdensome and time consuming.
At project level attention shall be given to internal and external mainstreaming which are often interlinked to each other. The former focuses on the reduction of susceptibility of sector employees to infection and on giving support to those already infected by HIV, including workplace policies and guidelines that regulate day to day activities. Related activities often consist of preventive education, treatment, care and support. External mainstreaming refers to actions such as developing partnerships between government departments/ministries, and between the public sector, the private sector and civil society. It also promotes considering HIV/AIDS as a development issue that has implications in all areas of policy making, insufficient access to water and sanitation, current health and hygiene education. Furthermore external mainstreaming adequately addresses issues of best practices and the search for methods to assist individuals, households and the community at large to cope with the impact of HIV/AID.
5 Mainstreaming waterborne and water related diseases in the water sector
Water related diseases are primarily the result of poor access to sufficient quantities of clean water and are also usually related to environmental conditions. Problems due to water scarcity are on the increase, and at the present global pattern consumption; two out of three persons will be living under water stress conditions by year 2025. However, as has already been mentioned, poor access can also be linked to poverty, poor services, security issues and extreme events. Water related diseases are often associated with the aftermath of natural disasters such as earthquakes and floods. Water diseases can be categorized with Environmental Classifications:
- Faecal-Oral
- Water-Washed (or water-scarce)
- Water-Based
- Water-Related Vectors
Faecal-oral diseases are the result of pathogens transmitted by human excreta and then ingested. They can be water-borne or water-washed. The result is infection of the intestinal tract which can cause extreme illness and death. The diseases can be diarrheal or dysentery type with cholera, shigela and amoeba; can include enteric fevers such as typhoid; or also include hepatitis A, polio or leptospirosis.
For water-washed diseases the quantity of water is often more important than the quality and there are strong links between personal and domestic hygiene and these illnesses. They include skin and eye infections such as skin sepsis, scabies, fungal skin infections and trachoma/blindness.
Water-based diseases are those where the pathogen spends part of its life-cycle in an aquatic animal such as a water snail (e.g. bilharzia) or infections is by a parasitic worm that requires an aquatic intermediate host in the life-cycle (e.g. guinea worm).
Water-related vectors carry diseases that are spread by insects that breed in water bite near water. Examples of diseases spread by insects breeding near water include malaria (anopheles mosquito), dengue and yellow fever (aedes mosquito), and onchocerciasis or river blindness (simulium black fly). Insect vectors that bite near water include the glossina tsetse fly which transmits trypanosomiasis or sleeping sickness. Malaria is by far the most important disease, both in terms of the number of people annually infected, and whose quality of life and working capacity are reduced, and in terms of deaths. Worldwide, some 2000 million people live in areas where they are at risk of contracting malaria. The total number of people infected with malaria is variably estimated to range between100 to as many as 200 million, with between 1 and 2 million deaths per year, with almost 90% of the cases in Africa.
Further information:
WHO, Water, health and ecosystems linkages
Info for health : Water-borne diseases
UNESCO - facts and figures water and health
WATER conservation portal on water-borne diseases
>UNICEF campaign :don't wash your hands of children
AFDB : call for action at the 5th World Water forum
IRC : How to promote mesures to prevent water-borne -diseases?
Economic and financial principles
1 Water has an economic value and should be recognised as a social and public good
Recognition of freshwater as a finite resource has led to the emergence of the principle that water is a social and public good but one to which a price for provision services connected to it can be attached. The application of this principle becomes increasingly critical as water becomes more scarce. However, this principle should not over-ride the social imperative of providing a basic supply of safe water for every human being.
Applying an economic value to water can require the attachment of different values linked to different uses of water. These values will vary from setting to setting depending upon the user population, although it is invariably the case that survival and public health uses will be of high value; whereas recreational uses are often comparatively lower value. Where water is scarce, it is often good management to discourage low-value uses. The objective of reallocating sufficient water from low-value to high-value purposes should be investigated as an alternative to, or in parallel with, developing new sources of supply. In this context, the use of water markets< can be appropriate. Some estimates of high and low-value uses of water may benefit from considering the importance of “virtual water” i.e. the non-evident water embedded in imported food crops, and “water foot printing”. However water foot printing remains largely an accounting process, and elements of environmental and ecological responsibility as well as governance principles need to be included in evaluating the water resource.
Allocation of values to water uses helps in the following areas: balancing scarce resources with increasing demand; focussing attention on reduction of wastage and loss; conservation of the resource; and shifts in consumption towards higher value uses.
2 Charging tariffs for water services is an important component of any strategy for sustainability
Charging for water services (water supply, irrigation and wastewater disposal and re-use) is essential in order to generate funds for operating, maintaining and investing in systems; ensure that scarce supplies are allocated to essential purposes; and serves as a signal to users that a real financial value can be applied to the resource. Theoretically, a service which provides water to customers should not do so for free, even to the poorest customer. However, this principle poses a dilemma: how to provide a basic service to those who are extremely poor and yet ensure cost recovery, especially in areas where the costs of water extraction and delivery are high and/or continually mounting due to pressure on the resource.
Some basic solutions exist. For households’ consumption, a certain minimum volume necessary for basic needs can be provided at an affordable price, with higher-level volumes subject to higher tariffs (soliddarity principle / cross subsidising). This will ensure that higher levels of consumption are not subsidised. Public subsidies are legitimate when applied to achieve certain social benefits (for example, provision of supplies to the underprivileged and under-served). However, these subsidies need to be transparent, targeted, and budgetary practical and sustainable (for example, covered by surpluses generated elsewhere).
The weighted average of the tariffs shouldd be high enough to recover, at a minimum, recurrent operations and maintenance costs. Where water charges have been increased for this purpose, the aim should be to raise them progressively, and with due regard for continuing to meet basic needs and to the full marginal cost (equivalent to the average incremental cost of future supply) in order to also generate resources for expanding or modernising the system. Industrial water tariffs need tto take into account the volume of water they extract, and the volume and quality of water returned to public water bodies. For example, OECD members have accepted the principle that ‘polluters pay’: those who dispose carelessly of wastewater should be charged for their actions.
If the tariff structure is progressively higher for increased consumption levels, they provide an incentive to conservation. Higher tariffs also generate extra resources for expanding services, although the practicalities of recovering costs for service installation and extension will depend on conditions (physical and socio-economic) operating in a given setting. The same principles apply to wastewater disposal and management.
3 “Demand management” should be used in conjunction with supply provision
Demand management seeks to maximmise the usage of a given volume of water, by curbing inessential or low-value uses through price or non-price measures. In water-scarce areas, it is necessary to gain political support for demand management over supply-leed solutions (the latter referring to solutions which are based on indefinite expansion of services and supplies).
A number of demand management measures can bbe considered, including market-based incentives such as water tariffs, pollution chaarges, water markets, water bankingg; and non-market incentives, such as leakage control, restrictions, quotas, norms, licenses and promoting re-use and recycling practices Alternative technologies, such as promoting dry sanitation methods of water conservation, can also contribute.. All options need to be systematically identified and appraised. These appraisals need to be conveyed to the end-users and local authorities so informed choices can be made, leading to effective demand driven solutions.
In its policies towards key sectors such as industry and agriculture, a government and the population should be made aware of the potential negative impacts from developing water-intensive industries or agriculture in regions where water is scarce and estimates of different water values suggest that it should be applied to other uses.
Environmental principles
1 Water-related activities should aim to enhance or to cause least detrimental effect on the natural environment and its health and life-giving properties
Water-related activities need to be planned and implemented with due regard for all their environmental implications. Programmes and projects requiring the disruption of water flows can reduce the productivity of aquatic ecosystems, necessitate resettlement of affected populations, and devastate fisheries and grazing lands. Pollution degrades water supplies and increases the costs of water treatment. Integrated river basin management can provide a solution for surface waters since it allows all competing interests to be taken into account for one water-defined environment.
The protection of aquifers from pollution and over-exploitation should be addressed. This is especially important since the effects of mismanagement are not immediately visible and can thus be overlooked. The use of fossil groundwater must be avoided.
Water resource management systems should take into account the implications of all development activities related to the environment. These include industrial, commercial and agricultural development which lead to discharges that endanger water quality; changes in land use, such as road construction, mining or forestry activities; settlement and cultivation of floodplains and other riverine environments; and the impacts of freshwater use and pollution on estuaries and coastal zones. Water resource management objectives therefore must be carefully balanced against parallel long- and short-term development objectives. Water issues must be taken into account in (urban) planning policies (for example avoiding settlement on floodplains). Every effort should be made to capitalise on better knowledge of the water environment derived from historical as well as recent experience. With climate change impacts and environmental extreme events arriving in shorter cycles, historical knowledge becomes more relevant. Integrating the environment into the planning activity is the desirable strategy. Technical methods using local materials, and bio-control of vegetation and disease vectors, have environmental advantages and build on natural capacities for pollution control and regeneration within ecosystems.
2 The allocation and consumption of water for environmental purposes should be recognised and given appropriate value
Programmes and projects for the development, management and use of water mostly entail modifications to the natural environment in order to improve the quality of human life. Certain water-related activities, such as flood control and drainage schemes, have as part of their central purpose an environmental objective.
Maintenance of the natural water environment is important both for its intrinsic value and for supporting life. Water has an ‘in-stream’ value for fish but also supports co-existing aquatic eco-systems. Eco-systems in wetlands and coastal zones depend on a certain volume and quality of water for their sustainability. Rivers and wetlands function as wildlife reserves, navigation routes, and areas for recreation. They also help to support natural biodiversity. In order to plan water use priorities it must be accepted that areas such as wetlands “consume” large quantities of water through evaporation. All uses, consumptive and non-consumptive, have to be considered for their ecological value and not automatically regarded as secondary to human and economic priorities.
3 Environmental changes should be monitored so that improvements can be encouraged and detrimental impacts minimised
Effective systems to monitor environmental changes throughout a project cycle and beyond will be required. Appropriate expertise is needed from the outset to ensure that environmental aspects are properly assessed. Care should be taken to adopt systems that allow flexibility of action where some environmental costs may have to be accepted in in exchange for greater social and economic benefits (see part 3).
Emphasis on environmental considerations is particularly appropriate in water-stressed areas, where the environmental and other implications of using alternative sources of supply – surface as opposed to groundwater, for example – need to be assessed. The inextricable connections between land and water management need to be recognised; land use and soil quality have a major influence on water flow and water quality, and vice versa.
4 Climate change
According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC, 22008) “Freshwater resources have the potential to be highly impacted by climate change, and human societies and ecosystems will both feel the consequences”. Climate change is expected to increase the frequency and magnitude of extreme events such as floods and droughts, and changes in the seasonal distribution and amount of precipitation. It is evident that more attention needs to be given to adaptation measures and building resilience throughout the water sector. As with other aspects of water resources management, the principles of IWRM are important for addressing climate change and water. All sectors who utilize or impact on water resources must also contribute to addressing climate change discussion on mitigation and adaptation.
The greatest impact due to climate change will be on the world's poorest people, who are most vulnerable to their surrounding environment (e.g. subsistence or small scale agriculture, small stock farmers) for their survival, or the poor in urban and peri-urban environments whose population’s capacity and resources to adapt are very limited, making them extremely vulnerable. It is thus critical that climate change and risk management are integrated into water governance and development cooperation. From the perspective of the EC, the mainstreaming of climate change into development cooperation addresses four main objectives (EuropeAid, 2009):
- Identifying and avoiding harmful direct and indirect environmental impacts of programmes and projects in the different co-operation sectors, which can undermine sustainability.
- Recognising and realising opportunities for enhancing environmental conditions, thereby
bringing additional benefits to development and economic activities and advancing environmental issues that are a priority for the EC.
- Promoting improved environmental dialogue with partner countries, based on the technical, economic and social arguments in favour of a more environmental approach to policies and programmes.
- Identifying potential risks of a project or programme by assessing its exposure and sensitivity as well as response capacities in place to deal with existing or anticipated climate variability and change.
Climate change adaptation measures aim to offset negative impacts but also to take advantage of positive ones, where they exist. Adaptation should not be seen just as a constraint and an additional financial and economic burden. In almost every sector, climate change intensifies already existing problems. Climate-related concerns may provide the impetus needed to implement many of the environmental and developmental ‘best practices’ previously neglected and in this way make programmes and projects both more effective and more sustainable.
Information, education and communications principles
1 A sound information and knowledge base is needed for effective actions within all water-related activities
Many developing countries lack sufficient data on the hydrology of their surface water resources, the groundwater resources and overall water quality. Without a full range of scientific information concerning climate and the ecosystem, it is not possible to evaluate the resource, balance its availability against demand, or reach scientifically-informed management decisions in key areas of water policy. Thus, the development of a water resources knowledge foundation and information data base is a precondition for any effective water policy.
Government authorities and agencies involved in water-related activities need proper information in order to function effectively. This information includes data on technologies, strategies, approaches, organisational models, and management information of all kinds. Data collection systems need to be established, and integrated with one another, so that activities can be continuously monitored, impacts be assessed and adjustments made.
Surveys and research projects are needed to generate and collect socio-cultural and economic as well as usual technical data. Where projects are intended to benefit low-income communities, prior information is needed about attitudes and practices surrounding water supply ownership, access and use, and traditional methods of waste management. Effective hygiene promotion depends upon thorough knowledge of existing water-and sanitation-related behaviours and beliefs. Baseline data on the prevalence of water-related diseases is also an important aid to needs identification, on-going monitoring and useful for post-intervention evaluation of public health impacts.
2 Education is a vital component of water-related schemes if health and life enhancement benefits are to be achieved and sustained
Demand for water in low-income communities is associated with survival interests, and improving quality of life with a reduction of time and labour spent by men, women and children in water-related tasks. Beneficiary definitions of social well-being relating to water may not coincide with those of donors and programme agencies, whose principal concerns are usually linked to public health (or in economic improvement schemes such as irrigation for agricultural). There is usually a higher demand for water supplies than for sanitation, although sanitation is often more essential to control water-related diseases. Therefore, education and awareness-raising of the linkages between unsafe water, inadequate excreta disposal, and disease should be integral to all schemes. This should not just be limited to low-income communities, since there are some water-related diseases which easily traverse the poverty line. Education and information programmes for sanitation and personal hygiene may sometimes need to be targeted towards women, given their special role in household water management and use. Children and teachers can also be targeted by school-based programmes.
Education is similarly needed in the environmental implications of water-related activities in the agricultural sector. Farmers need to learn the value of water and the importance of water saving in irrigation, as well as implications of irrigation and use of chemicals and fertilizers on water quality. Without an understanding of the essential need and purpose of water resources management, user group participation in management decisions, especially in negotiations over competing user groups, cannot be obtained; and if obtained, cannot effectively contribute.
3 Communication and awareness building are essential ingredients in all forms of water resources management
The accepted best practices in water resources management and the delivery of services include extensive awareness-building among political leaders and decision-makers, professionals and academics, donors and members within civil society such as NGOs. Initially this consensus was largely limited to members of the international water-associated community, but this has now become commonly accepted practice at national levels.
Communication mechanisms, in the form of educational activity and public awareness and information campaigns, are tools regularly used to increase community-level understanding of the linkages between water and health, to manage demand for water-related services, and generate motivation and impart skills for service maintenance. Awareness-raising also reaches down to the level of users to create a climate favourable for community management of water supply and sanitation systems, local participation, good operation and maintenance, collaborative systems of cost-recovery and household management (see part 3).
Technological principles
1 A balanced approach towards ‘hardware’ and ‘software’ components of projects should be adopted
Providing a reliable supply of water for domestic or agricultural purposes requires careful attention to ‘hardware’, suitably balanced by attention to ‘software’ aspects. Technological innovation and adaptation are integral to many of the water-saving measures, service extensions and system improvements urgently required. Technical issues largely determine the costs of a given water-related project, and thus remain of paramount importance.
The present water-related project cycle can, in many settings, still be characterised as ‘build, breakdown, rebuild’. Where the technology deployed is beyond the level of the users’ capacity to maintain, operate or cover costs, the prospects of sustainability of the service are equally beyond reach. Thus the development and use of water resources including waste management infrastructures or irrigation works needs to take technological considerations, as well as local management capacities and community resources into account.
Technology itself needs to be applied within an integrated framework. A project designed to provide a new supply of water should, for example, take into account requirements for disposal, treatment or recycling of run-off and used water. Irrigation works should take into account the potential for soil degradation, return flow problems, mobilization of pollutants from agriculture or other water-related health hazards such as standing water and vectors for water-related diseases.
2 Choice of technology should be governed by considerations of its efficiency, appropriateness, cost, and suitability for local conditions
Technical solutions need to be selected according to criteria which include efficiency, appropriateness, cost and their potential for adaptation to the local environment. The desired approach can be summarised by the term ‘appropriate modern technology ', which captures elements of capacity for operation and maintenance as well as cost-efficiency (see part 3). There have been numerous examples of poor project outcomes due to the selection of costly and inappropriate technology, whose infrastructure and management systems have fallen into disrepair because maintenance was too difficult, or of projects which have resulted in unanticipated environmental damage.
Infrastructure projects have too often imported technology from industrialised countries unsuited to the physical, economic and social conditions in which the system is being applied. While awareness of this issue has grown considerably in recent years, the application of best practices is not yet consistently applied due to lack of resources or capacity linked to insufficient priority being placed on appropriate levels of technology. Professional technical and social advice is useful to guide the choice of technology – whether it is to be ‘high-tech’ or ‘low-tech’. For example the choice of materials should receive careful consideration regarding health security of users, impact on supplying the resources, as well as their environmental suitability. Technical decisions must take into account the social, institutional and economic context within which infrastructure will be maintained. Long-term affordability and sustainability often hinge upon the choice of technology, type of abstraction and methods of delivery. Thus, critical social and economic considerations about the viability of a technology in a given setting should not be ignored. As a general rule, technologies should not burden operators or tie them into costly and unreliable supply strategies; and finally consideration should also be given to the prospects of technology transfer and capacity building at the local level, be it supply or manufacture.
To facilitate cost-effective operation and maintenance, upgrading technologies that permit well-judged and carefully stepped development are desirable, especially in settings where systems, services or specific technologies are being introduced for the first time. These can be developed by incorporating indigenous technologies and local knowledge, scaled-down versions of larger systems or considering alternative choices for water and sanitation services.
To facilitate effective operation and maintenance, availability of spare parts, and appropriate training of operatives including local community workers – men and women- the standardisation of technology being applied is of high importance in order to reduce fragmentation of a strategy. These issues can be addressed within the regulatory framework of water resources management.
Chapter 3: Managing water resources equitably, efficiently and sustainably: Focus areas
The water-related programming and project activity shall be aligned with the National Sector Framework i.e. the set of national policies, laws, strategies and guidelines together with the institutions and systems that make them work; including budgets, strategies and programmes that guide the expenditure in the sector. In the previous chapter, sets of policy principles have been presented as a foundation for a strategic approach for water-related programming and project activity. These principles provide an operational philosophy and framework for sector development in areas relating to water resources management and service delivery. In this chapter, the programming contexts for the application of the policy principles are presented. These have been called ‘Focus Areas’, in keeping with terminology adopted in the Earth Summit document, Agenda 21.
These Focus Areas allow programming contexts to be grouped according to six broad types of activity: Water resources (WR) which includes all activities designed to assess the availability of the natural resource, protect its quality, and plan its use; Basic services (BS) , which covers service provision in rural areas and marginal or poor urban areas, often consisting of low technology systems managed by local authorities, community structures or both; Municipal services (MS) , which covers urban and industrial installations and systems, including wastewater treatment and sewerage systems; and Agricultural (A), which covers installations and activities related to agricultural use of water, especially for irrigation; Energy (E), which, for this guideline, covers water use for energy from hydropower energy only, and Sector Performance (SP), covering mainly how the national sector framework is conceived and how it functions. No pre-determined priority is given to any one Focus Area as compared to any other. The programme activities covered by the Focus Areas are explored more fully below.
The application of policy principles is intended to be carried out in all Focus Area contexts. This should pre-empt the possibility that any one Focus Area could be treated in isolation from any other. While the limits between sectors can be artificially defined, there are in reality many overlaps, and the same can be said for the sub-sectors, resulting in many linkages between Focus Areas. For example work directed towards provision of basic water supplies should also include sanitation, and waste water management should consider agricultural water management activity and vice versa. Activities related to Water Resources (WR) will, by definition, impinge upon activities in all the other Focus Areas. Any grouping of activities should contribute to the need to view water holistically and foster an integrated management approach across usages and programme activities.
The programming contexts occurring within the six Focus Areas aim to accomplish a number of objectives. In the first place, they reflect a broader range of programming activity by viewing water as a resource whose protection and usage must be comprehensively planned. Secondly, they allow programming contexts with similar social, economic and technological characteristics to be grouped together: Basic services, for example, will include both rural, poor or peri-urban settings where small-scale installations managed and operated on a local basis are likely to be the norm. Thirdly, they allow for the integration of major water supply works with those of sanitation and wastewater management. Finally, this type of programming transcends simple technical categories such as ‘irrigation’ in favour of broader concepts such as Agricultural water management; incorporating land management, flood control, and environmental protection.
The Focus Areas offer a framework broadly matched to sectors, but they do not correspond precisely with standard administrative sectors (see figure 4 below). As has already been pointed out in previous chapters, the term ‘water sector’ applies to water-related activities that transcend many sectors, including primary resource sectors such as forestry or mining, productive sectors such as agriculture and industry, social sectors such as public health and urban planning, and sectors such as environment which themselves include water resources and general environmental management.
Box 3.1 Focus Areas - possible administrative departments:
Water resources: co-operating administrative departments are likely to be: Planning, Environment, Water Resources, Hydrology, Energy, Transport, Forestry, Mining. Basic services: co-operating administrative departments are likely to be: Public Health, Rural Water Supplies, Community Development, Education, Local Authorities, Urban Planning. Municipal services: co-operating administrative departments are likely to be: Public Works, Urban Planning, Municipal Authorities/Local Government, Health, Industry, and Transport. Agricultural: co-operating administrative departments are likely to be: Agriculture and/or Irrigation, Water Resources, Fisheries, Public Works, Land-Use Planning Energy (Hydropower): co-operating administrative departments are likely to be: Water Resources, Hydrology and Hydraulic, Industry, Energy, Public Works, Planning Sector Performance (SP): co-operating administrative departments are likely to be, e.g. Ministry of Finance, Ministry of Planning, Water Resources, Ministry of Agriculture, Environment. |
The variety of administrative arrangements for water-related activities, both between sectors and at different levels of national, local and municipal authority, makes it easier to distinguish between categories of activity rather than to classify water activity by sector use. It is a part of the operational philosophy expressed in the Toolkit that, even in countries where there is a separate Ministry of Water Resources – which is the case where scarcity of water or some other factor makes water politically important – water-related policy still requires integration with other ministries, sectors and administrative departments.
Even with the existence of a Ministry of Water Resources; water-related activities can and do have development projects in common with other ministries (or a public sector body answerable to a ministry) such as public health, agriculture or transport. The concept of Focus Areas for programming activity suggests the most appropriate administrative aegis for any given project. Certain water-related projects, especially in the context of basic water supply and sanitation services, may be carried out in direct partnership with community-based organisations and NGOs or be part of a school improvement program within the Ministry of Education. However, even in these cases it will be necessary to consider which government administrative entity or entities need to be involved, or at least kept informed, during the planning and implementation process. Even micro level projects should be integrated where possible with larger water-related development policies, plans and programmes in order for results to be complementary.
Focus area 1: Water resources (WR)
The lack of an integrated approach to the management of water resources has led in the past to isolated investments in water-related activity, some of which have inadvertently resulted in negative consequences on other users or on the environment. This Focus Area allows for special attention to be given to macro-scale planning for water resources management.
Surface water resources are often derived from rivers which may originate outside national and state boundaries. They contribute to the recharge of aquifers (or may themselves be charged by aquifers) which can also traverse administrative and in some cases river basin boundaries. Even where river basins are not transboundary, they rarely correspond to existing administrative boundaries within countries. Groundwater is also not confined to particular administrative localities. For both surface and sub-surface water resources there are many cross-sector considerations to be taken into account alongside the geographical nature of the resource, such as the location of human settlements and their economic activities. Water use is therefore closely linked to land use but to add to the management complexity, freshwater also has significant impact on coastal zones and waters.
At the national level, activities within this Focus Area are designed to develop and support a co-ordinated water resource management strategy within the national sector framework. The main purpose of such a strategy will be to ensure sustainable water resources use and development for all water-related sectors in the various regions of the country in order to minimize competition. Where weather disasters such as drought or floods occur more frequently than historically usual, this strategy must also incorporate environmental risks and disaster preparedness.
Some water-related activities can be multipurpose. Linked to dams are activities such as power supply, recreational use and flood control. All of these uses will be reconciled within WR activities. This is also the context in which the demands of energy production (hydropower), water for recreation purposes or the need for flood control will be jointly considered.
However, projects covering these activities are likely to be administered by agencies concerned with energy, transport or land-use but who are not directly involved in water resources management. An integrated approach is therefore needed to incorporate these different actors and ensure that non-consumptive activities are also included in the management of water resources which will address their impacts on other sectors and the environment.
An integrated approach is equally essential to enable higher levels of authority to set limits on activities where the implementation may neglect a broader view. Consequently, decision makers require access to adequate information such as resource quantity and quality, consumption and demand in order to make informed decisions on policy, allocation, investment and cost-recovery in parallel with other issues which have a direct impact on sustainable socio-economic development.
WR interventions are less likely to address infrastructure but will more often consist of studies and analyses to promote institutional strengthening. Issues to be addressed include: policy and legislation regarding ground and surface water, transboundary planning and negotiation, river basin planning and management (including the interaction between water and land use), environmental management, optimum allocation of responsibilities for resource management, designing regulation of the water sector (e.g. for service providers), and the management of water resource competition.
This Focus Area is also concerned with information and data collection, storage and use concerning water resources. This can include: hydrological and hydro-geological data, climate data, consumption, calculation of demand, establishment of standards, or use of information and data for guiding research and evaluations of monitoring systems and techniques.
Box 3.2- Project Activities and Project Example Focus Area 1
Possible project activities in Focus Area 1 include the following:
|
The region of Latin America represents one of the most significant sources of renewable water in the world, accounting for some 30% of the global total. The spatial distribution of water resources, however, varies considerably across the continent. The considerable disparity in regional distribution, the need for cross-border management and the variability brought about by Climate Change mean that for Latin America water is one of the key strategic and political elements for stability and sound governance in the region.
Within this context the EUROCLIMA project was identified between the Latin American (LA) governments and the EU at the last LA-EU Lima summit. The project’s aim is to help improve the knowledge of Latin American decision-makers and scientists regarding the impact of climate change in the region, and so facilitate integration of the issue within sustainable development strategies. Government representatives of the 18 beneficiary countries play a fundamental role in guaranteeing synergies and promoting the impact of results in decision-making.
Relevant to the water resources planning context, one of the ongoing activites within EUROCLIMA is the “Analysis of the variability and frequency of components of the Water Balance in Latin America”. A group of LA experts supported by the EC is analysing the variability and frequency of the components of the Water Balance at the regional level (precipitation, temperature and evapotranspiration).
One of the expected outcomes is the characterization of the variability in terms of the frequency of occurrence of extreme events, which would in turn serve as the basis for establishing the risk of disasters caused by extreme hydro-climatic events. This approach furthermore complements and enriches the efforts made with the International Hydrological Programme (IHP: http://www.unesco.org.uy/phi/aqualac), foor the development of National Water Balances in Latin America, which will provide data for decision-makers in response to the effects of variability and climate change. It is similarly expected to strengthen networks for cooperation in the sector within the region and with the European Union towards sound scientific based sustainable water resources policies.
Adapted from: www.euroclima.org
Focus Area 2 : Basic services (BS)
This Focus Area covers programmes and projects which address the extension of basic water supply and sanitation services to unserved and under-served populations in low-income communities in rural, peri-urban and urban environments. These extensions usually consist of low-technology, often community managed schemes, in which local authorities play a facilitating and/or supervisory role. In large towns and cities, the municipal authorities usually play a larger role with the responsibility for provision and regulation of services.
In most programming exercises, schemes for rural and urban areas are usually differentiated. This is partly because the administration of rural and urban areas falls under different authorities. There is a perception of an imbalance of economic and political priorities associated with rural areas, and one of comparative wealth, capital investment and higher political leverage in urban areas. This perception has an inherent blind spot for poverty in the urban areas and consequently has led to neglect of urban poor populations for provision of water, sanitation, health or other services. The pursuit of the Millennium Development Goals since their launch in Johannesburg 2002 have produced a significant improvement in coverage rates, at least as far as drinking water supplies are concerned. Sanitation coverage, however, has not improved at the same rate and now more development policy attention is being given to sanitation and waste management, especially in densely-settled low-income urban and peri-urban areas. Due to infrastructure costs, public works such as water supply, sewerage and urban drainage have difficulty to provide service outreach to poor or economically marginal urban areas. Statistics of marginal and informal populations are often not available and urban coverage figures often do not include coverage in marginal communities. As a population group, the urban poor are the fastest growing in the world. The risks to their own health, and the potentially high public health costs of the spread of communicable diseases to neighbouring populations, can often outweigh the costs of basic service provision.
Basic services providing drinking water and sanitation in poor communities, whether rural or urban, are significantly different in concept from conventional mains connections and standard sewerage and drainage. They usually consist of low-technology installations. For water supply; hand pump –tube wells, rainwater catchment tanks, storage tanks and gravity flow to public standpipes. For sanitation; pit latrines and, where practicable, simplified sewerage systems such as septic tanks, or soak away pits.
Given that many such schemes are likely to be installed in areas where no services exist; preliminary activities may require a basic needs analysis, data gathering, and the establishment of monitoring systems to implement follow-up of operations and maintenance. This type of activity falls under the previous Focus Area Water Resources (WR).
Most Basic Services systems are less expensive to install than larger scale public services; but they also usually remain unconnected to a central operating or management system. Thus, their operation and maintenance (O&M) requires very different arrangements from centrally-run systems, and correspondingly different systems of tariffs for the users. The importance of gaining community participation and ownership in order to ensure O&M and cost recovery has led to approaches which increase the application of community-based service schemes for management.
National governments need to have specific strategies prepared for implementing basic services using community management approaches –which differ from standard service supply in their social, organisational, management, and financing dimensions. However, the main operational responsibility for basic services schemes is likely to rest with local authorities, local councils, local NGOs and community groups. Successful delivery of basic services programmes will depend on their relevance to local people’s existing beliefs and behaviours surround water use and human waste disposal, gender roles in relation to water-collection and storage, and the establishment and/or use of community mechanisms for participation and decision-making. In order to maximize the benefits of improved access to water and sanitation services, hygiene promotion and health education components must form an integral part of community based management (see Part 3).
The provision of services should be as participative as possible. Local populations can participate in the positioning of facilities, organisation of semi-skilled and non-skilled human resources for a construction phase, promotion of hygiene, health education and environmental awareness, and even the financial, operational and maintenance management of the service. However this degree of participation does not always arrive on demand or request; certain amounts of mobilization activities often need to be invested in, and there is no guarantee that all stakeholders in the community will come on board. This will require a certain degree of flexibility and robustness in the design which could include tariffs which are pro-poor or choices of technology which may be lower than preferred by some, are less expensive, but can be less maintenance intensive.
Box 3.3- Project Activities and Project Example Focus Area 2
Typical project activities for Focus Area 2 include the following:
|
Project example - Worm eradication in Northern Ghana (2007-2011)
Access to clean drinking water and proper sanitation is a continuing challenge for many people living in Ghana. Not only does this result in the occurrence of preventable water-borne diseases, but it also has a particular impact on women who must spend hours every day fetching water and on children who unduly miss school due to illness or to help their mother. In Ghana, guinea worm disease, a parasitic illness contracted through drinking contaminated water, has been affecting populations for as long as anyone can remember. Ghana is one of the four remaining countries (all in sub-Sahara Africa) where the disease still persists.
The project benefits from collaboration from a number of partners, requiring emphasis on co-ordination mechanisms’. These include the government of Ghana, the European Commission which is funding 75% of the project and UNICEF.
The principal aims of this project are to reduce guinea worm cases by 90%, reduce reported cases of diarrheal disease among children under 5 by 40% and finally increase sanitation coverage by 35%. The programme also seeks to increasing access to and the use of sustainable drinking water by undertaking district specific feasibility studies on factors affecting water delivery and financing options and stakeholder interventions.
Since the beginning of the project in 2007 up until 2010 some positive results occurred. In fact, the annual number of guinea worm cases fell from 3 358 to 8 (99%), 236 water schemes serving a total population of 147 916 people were created, more families could live in more hygienic environments and enjoy access to and use of improved sanitation facilities and finally a considerable number of women and children were finally relieved from the burden of fetching water and have more time to go to school or spend time with family.
Adapted from: EC case study, 2011
Focus Area 3: Municipal Services (MS)
This Focus Area covers major water- and sanitation- related activities undertaken within the municipal areas, usually under the auspices of the Municipal Authorities and with their support and facilitation. These Authorities will inevitably have an important role, if in some cases primarily a regulatory one, in basic services schemes for low-income urban and peri-urban areas covered in the previous Focus Area. But in Basic Services schemes, especially where informal or illegal settlements are concerned, community groups are usually the key operators of services. The municipal water and wastewater services encompassed by this Focus Area are primarily capital-intensive types of programmes and projects with more sophisticated technology and maintenance requirements as compared with Basic Services schemes.
Programmes and projects in this Focus Area include water supply, sewerage, waste water management, and management of waste from a wide range of industrial, manufacturing and domestic consumers. Given the rapid rate of urbanisation in many developing countries, one area of concentration will be the development of additional water sources (see also WR). The increasing distance of intakes from urban settlements, for example, is contributing to the escalation of costs and creating a growing awareness of the need for efficiency and a change in water consumption habits. Rehabilitation and repair of existing systems, including the reduction of wastage from leaking pipes and reservoirs, is an important area of activity. Optimal use of existing systems, including water efficient technologies, is the preferred option to the installation of new systems.
Water quality is also as important as managing the transport elements of water supply. Municipal Services are responsible for wastewater treatment and control of upstream and downstream pollution. In many coastal areas, especially in arid and semi-arid regions, the prevention of seawater intrusion into over-exploited coastal aquifers, is becoming a major issue in many developing country cities and towns. Changing water use habits to include recycling and re-use of water, and other water saving strategies are being seen has having as strong an impact as improved technology in optimizing water use. Cost recovery, regulation and demand management will be key elements of programme and project design.
The institutions, types of agencies and the allocation of responsibilities involved in provision and management of water and sanitation services will come under scrutiny in this Focus Area, to a greater extent than in the Focus Area Basic Services. There is likely to be more frequent involvement of private sector companies or public/private partnerships in the management of programmes and projects. Reforms of the institutional and regulatory frameworks for the provision and maintenance of services, increasing the efficiency of investment and cost recovery may also be the focus of programmes and projects.
A wide range of stakeholders, many with considerable vested interests, may need to be involved; especially if investments are required for establishing a preferred level of provision usually above that of basic services. These processes require a good participation supported by awareness-raising for informed choices and decisions in order that solutions are not too technically sophisticated or costly; but instead are efficient and appropriate.
Box 3.4- Project Activities and Project Example Focus Area 3
Typical project activities for Focus Area 3 include the following:
|
Project example - Water supply and sanitation project in Maputo
In 2005, Mozambique launched a water supply and sanitation project in its capital city, Maputo. The Greater Maputo sanitation provision is grossly inefficient, as in most cities in sub-Saharan Africa: most people do not have access to a hygienic toilet; less than a half of the population has access to adequate drinking water and 48% of the population lives in absolute poverty. In this context the project aims to rehabilitate water supply infrastructure, reduce water loss and wastage and extend services to the outer fringes of the metropolitan area of Maputo. By 2014, the target is to raise the number of people served, particularly the most disadvantaged, from 670,000 today to nearly 1.5 million. The project consists of an interesting blended financial mechanism with a mix of grants from the ACP-EU Water Facility, the Dutch government and French Development Agency, a loan from the European Investment Bank (EIB) and a strong national support from the Mozambican Government. The Maputo water supply project is implemented by the public asset-holding company FIPAG (Fundo de Investimento e Patrimonio do Abastecimento de Agua). The project had four specific objectives: (i) to increase installed production capacity to ensure constant supply to the 730 000 people presently connected to the existing water supply system (currently the system does not provide a 24-hour supply) and increase the population served by the international operator by 467 000 people in 2010 and by an additional 145 000 by 2014; (ii) to improve the system's performance by reducing unaccounted for water (so-called unmetered water or UFW) from 60% to 40%; (iii) to expand the water supply in the poorer areas on peri-urban areas with the support of small local private operators, in order to extend services to an additional 110 000 people; and (iv) to improve the promoter's capacity and financial sustainability, which will contribute to the improvement of water services in all cities under the promoter's responsibility. The key positive socio-economic benefits will be the result of the improvement of services to the currently served population and the extension of services to areas currently not served. Without the project, the extension of improved services would be blocked and the deterioration of existing services expected, as installations are working beyond design capacity. To ensure the realisation of socio-economic benefits the project focuses on meeting the populations' needs, with respect to (i) the selection of service and income levels to respect affordability, and (ii) the encouragement of participatory management structures, especially for shared water supply services (standpipes), strengthening the sense of ownership in local communities. A key impact of the project is the reduction of the time spent by families on long distance water collection. Water collection is generally the responsibility of women and young girls; the project should free time for them to engage in productive or educational activities generating substantial additional wealth and increasing the likelihood of girls receiving formal education. The project will also create opportunities for women to participate in water committees and other community-based organisations and so contribute to a fairer gender balance in the management of water services. A second significant impact is on health. Access to safe water is a dominant factor in the reduction of cholera and other water-borne diseases. In Maputo, studies show there are cholera cases every year and an epidemic every three years. In peri-urban areas there are an average of 3 000 cholera cases per annum, while diarrhoea cases are estimated at about 63 000 per annum. The project is expected to significantly reduce morbidity from these diseases. The economic analysis of the project, including consideration of direct and indirect benefits (tariffs paid by people for different services in different areas, as well as the value of time saved, of reduced morbidity from waterborne diseases, and of induced economic activity) shows a satisfactory and robust Economic Internal Rate of Return according to the EIB.
|
Adapted from: EIB, 2006. <
Focus Area 4: Agricultural (A)
Food security and agricultural development are closely linked to water resource availability and quality, and the increasing population and demand on food supplies means that many countries are interested in expanding their arable lands by irrigation. It is not only the demand for food; many developing economies also have a high agricultural component as their main economic activity for family-based livelihoods, local markets and export. Finally, a number of developing countries have a policy of agricultural autonomy in order not to rely on agricultural imports. Thus we arrive at agriculture as a population, economic and security priority. In many of these countries, irrigation is the main consumption of water, sometimes as high as 70%. It is no surprise that efficiency in the use of water in irrigation is a critical consideration and that the construction and repair of reservoirs, distribution systems and the development and application of water-efficient technologies and crops are priorities.
In the past, many irrigation projects have inadequately taken into account environmental impacts. The importance of drainage for irrigation return flow, soil salinity control and the prevention of water-logging were neglected. Similarly, the adverse environmental impacts of surface abstraction (e.g. Aral Sea for cotton exploitation) or over-pumping of ground water resources for irrigation have not always been factored into the planning for agricultural activities.
This Focus Area is intended to cover schemes relating to agricultural water use and management at all levels, from small-scale, community-based schemes to large-scale economic schemes requiring sophisticated engineering. In Asia, the tendency is for the rehabilitation and modernisation of existing systems to take precedence over the development of new schemes. In Africa, community based schemes were the usual scale applied and have long been the focus of agricultural development there. However the advent of larger commercial agricultural projects is becoming more common in both regions, including for economic cash crops such as cut flowers or bio-fuels.
Agricultural irrigation is a complex activity, and the water consumption is linked to land use, cultivation methods and cropping – issues not addressed in this Toolkit. However, water resources management for agriculture purposes must also take into account prevailing conditions, livestock needs, and grazing practices and impacts. Assessing the demand must include not only competition between agriculturalists and pastoralists but also other contemporary users. Depending on the scale of the activity and, where technically appropriate, the optimisation of existing small-scale systems and irrigation practices to improve irrigation efficiency is preferred over new, large-scale irrigation schemes given all the environmental and other difficulties attendant on macro-interventions. The use of surface and groundwater resources in combination, if effectively managed and not over-abstracted, can contribute to seasonal buffers and promote more reliable irrigation services in arid and semi-arid areas.
While infrastructure will remain important in project design, institutional, social, economic and capacity-building issues will be equally so. An understanding of gender roles and support for women farmers, community management needs, participative management and above all informed decision-making are increasingly recognized as important aspects of managing agricultural irrigation activities.
As competition between water users increases, there will be pressure to reduce the volumes absorbed by irrigation, at least for crops of relatively low social and economic value. At the same time, demand for food and higher agricultural yields will continue to rise. Thus the challenge is to raise crop production while consuming less water and operating within a more restrictive financial and economic regime. The social challenge which has often arisen is a tendency to increase agricultural efficiency by applying larger scale irrigation and cropping techniques which can reduce water consumption and increase production but not cost-effectively at the family-holding or small community scale. In choosing a strategy for improving agricultural activity, trade-offs may need to be made between the pursuit of large-scale efficiency over smaller-scale economic stability. These types of choices should be taken in an informed manner and made with the consultation and participation of all key stakeholders.
Measures to reduce water consumption, cost recovery and demand management will therefore be important concerns of programme and project activity in this Focus Area. As with the other Focus Areas, the need for re-orienting or restructuring Government agencies involved in agricultural water use and management is likely to be an important component in project design. The involvement of the private sector as a partner in construction or management of schemes is likely to be a recurring theme, as will the management role of Water User Associations, Farmers Associations or other expressions of civil society. The scale of the project or the management issue to be addressed will also reflect to what degree the relevant River Basin Organisation may become involved.
Many community development programmes and projects which include small livestock development, horticulture, mini-enterprises and community-based units for manufacture of food or craft products also include water-related components. These types of projects – at least as far as their water related components are concerned – can be regarded as falling into this Focus Area. Other projects falling into this category are land management type and include those for prevention of desertification, water harvesting, soil erosion control and flood control of agricultural land.
Box 3.5- Project Activity and Project Example Focus Area 4
Typical project activities for Focus Area 4 include the following:
|
Project example- Improving livelihoods and protecting the environment through community participation (2006-2009)
Sugarcane and cotton cash crops play an important role in Pakistan's economy. The impact that these crops have on the environment due to their maximum consumption of water classifies them as 'water thirsty' crops. To produce 1 kg of cotton lint 10 000–17 000 litres of water are needed. These are also crops on which a substantial amount of agrochemicals is used.
The main goal of this EC supported project is to provide sustainable sources of clean freshwater to support the livelihoods of poor communities in Pakistan. It aims to create a mechanism to increase water availability and reduce pollution by decreasing the amount of water and agrochemicals used in sugarcane and cotton production. This is achieved by:
- developing and implementing appropriate ‘on farm’ better management practices
- conducting farmer training and training of trainers for extension work
- establishing farmer field schools in Faisalabad and Bahawalpur
- working closely with research centres, target farmers, extension services and NGOs
The project activities have led to a reduction of water (30%) and pesticide (60%) usage for sugarcane and cotton crops, while improving the financial situation of small-scale farmers through increased profits and decreased input costs. The establishment of farmer field schools and farmer training of trainers has enabled the farmers not only to adopt better management practices but also promote and disseminate these to other fellow farmers. Formal collaboration has been made with different stakeholders such as the Punjab Agriculture Department, the Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Livestock (MINFAL), the Kissan Welfare Association (KWA), the Punjab Irrigation and Drainage Authority (PIDA). Working closely with government, research institutes and nongovernment partners throughout the project is a key to the long-term sustainability of the project.
Adapted from: EC case study, 2009.
Focus Area 5:Energy (Hydropower)
This Focus area covers water use for energy purposes, specifically hydropower. Biofuels production is not included in this Focus Area.
Large hydropower projects can adversely affect development in certain regions and have unwanted social and environmental impacts. On the other hand, they can also do much to promote human development in a way that is socially equitable, environmentally sustainable and economically viable. Deployment of hydroelectric power production, if undertaken in a responsible and equitable way, can significantly contribute to lowering greenhouse gas emissions. Its associated infrastructure development can help countries to managing water scarcity / flood protection / irrigation and thus, help countries cope with extreme events related to climate variability. However, adverse environmental and social effects of large hydroelectric projects could undermine the positive impacts of these projects.
The World Commission on Dams<[1]< set two objectives: 1) to review the development effectiveness of large dams and assess alternatives for water resources and energy development; and 2) to develop internationally acceptable criteria, guidelines and standards, where appropriate, for the planning, design, appraisal, construction, operation, monitoring and decommissioning of dams. These objectives comprise, but are not limited to, the following general aspects:
- avoiding and minimizing impacts on ecosystems, livelihoods, health and cultural (and religious) heritage,
- analyzing needs and options on the basis of many different criteria (multi-criteria analysis)
- improving the livelihoods of people displaced and affected by projects,
- ensuring compliance with the compensatory measures,
- applying the principles of corporate environmental and social responsibility and accountability[2]<,
A harmonized approach should help ensure the sustainability and environmental integrity of the large hydropower project activities.
Development of hydropower requires an enabling institutional and legal framework with clear legislation, regulations and guidelines. This process needs to be developed in an open and cooperative way, involving stakeholders at all levels. Key elements to be considered are the protection plans for water resources, the management plan for water resources, the industrial concession, the watercourse regulation and water resources law. In many cases, the legal framework shall include provision for mitigation measures of permanent socio-economic uplift for the population directly affected.
The strategic role of hydropower is defined at national and regional level. Its development requires an enabling environment that includes adequate resources, knowledge and skills across multiple levels of stakeholders. Hydropower project value is defined by the so called “triple bottom line” i.e. the combination of environmental, social and economic benefits generated by each project. Environmental and social impact assessments must therefore be integrated in the planning process and its full impact must be taken into account in the whole process.
Key constraints are high capital costs, lack of capacity throughout the industry and client countries, weak regulatory and policy frameworks, limited collection and/or weak analysis of hydrological data, and other environmental factors such as geology.
Social impacts are mainly linked to displacement of communities and breakdown in community cohesion affected by plant and reservoir construction, especially ethnic communities in remote areas. To mitigate these impacts it is important to identify the potential socio-economic impacts of projects through social impact assessments and the development of appropriate planning, monitoring and adaptation strategies for affected populations.
Water conflicts may arise on transboundary rivers between upstream hydropower use and downstream irrigation and/or hydropower use. Conflicts arise as upstream water release does not necessarily coincide with seasonal irrigation needs of the downstream riparian user. To avoid any conflict, hydropower needs to be implemented only on the basis of the results of international, independent expert examination so that the volumes and regimes of watercourse of these rivers are not upset and the ecological situation in the region will not be aggravated. Several agreements are already in place e.g. Plan of Action of the Zambezi river (ZACPLAN), Orange-Senqu River Basin Commission (OORASECOM), Lake Chad basin commission (CCBLT).
In terms of scale, small scale hydropower systems as a renewable and clean energy option, used extensively in the past for shaft power, and in modern times for electricity generation, should not be overlooked. Small hydro is a good decentralised option to supply energy and alleviate poverty. If properly installed, it can be a clean energy option based on indigenous resources, and can be reliable and affordable when appropriate technologies and approaches are used for its implementation, operation and management. It can be economically and socially viable, using local materials and capabilities for installation. It also has a much lower impact on the social and physical environment. As with large scale hydro, the small scale initiatives require a policy environment that includes development agencies, through international cooperation, and governments to put in place policy arrangements to facilitate activity.
Box 3.6- Project Activity and Project Example Focus Area 5
Possible project activities in Focus Area 5 include the following:
|
Project example 1- EU-China River Basin Management Programme
Despite China's enormous economic success, the country still faces considerable environmental challenges, particularly problems of water shortage, water pollution, soil erosion and deteriorating water ecology. The Chinese leadership shows great concern over this and has given directives to improve the situation. Water legislation and an institutional framework for implementation of the laws are being put in place.
The concept of integrated river basin management is an integral part of China's water law. China and Europe share a common concern over the environment. To assist each other in taking responsibility for sustainable economic and environmental development within the context of Chinese-European cooperation, the EU-China River Basin Management Programme has been formulated and is presently being implemented. It is hoped that some of the lessons of how advances in Europe have been achieved, what has worked, and what has not worked, can, together with facilitating technologies, be transferred to China to help manage the transition of river basin management practices.
The main objective of this project is to attain sustainable management and use of China's water resources compatible with current social economic and natural global change as well as to establish integrated river basin management practices in the Yellow and Yangtze River basins that are environmentally sustainable and address global environmental concerns as well as those of the local population. These practices will be replicated in other regions of China.
- A dialogue platform between Europe and China as well as links with the EU Water Framework Directive have been established to allow exchange of ideas on policy and management of major river basins and water resources
- Technical assistance provided to facilitate river basin planning training, exchange visits and internships; conferences, workshops and forums; research, studies and surveys
- Soil erosion control measures undertaken in poor mountainous areas in the upper Yangtze River Basin River Basin
- Increased efficiency of use of natural and local resources due to the installation of bio-physical structures and to other interventions.
Adapted from: EC case study, 2010.
Project example 2 - Mini-Hydropower Schemes for Sustainable Economic Development in Indonesia (1999 to 2008)
Indonesia has insufficient supplies of electrical power. This lack of energy supply limits the country’s development of businesses, social infrastructure and services.
However, Indonesia is a water rich country and against the background of rising oil prices on the world markets and the removal of large state fuel subsidies in Indonesia, mini-hydropower is becoming increasingly attractive as a competitive energy option.
In this context the GIZ project aimed at generating energy supplies through mini-hydropower plants in Sulawesi, Java and Sumatra areas. The purpose was to improve local economic cycles able to generate additional income to cover the costs of the mini-hydropower stations.
The results up to 2008 have been:
- 85 percent of the electromechanical equipment was produced locally as a result of technical training provided in respect of adapted mini-hydropower solutions.
- creation of employment opportunities
- Exports to eight countries in Asia, Africa and Europe evidence the quality and competitiveness of Indonesian mini-hydropower equipment.
- More than 100 installations of 7-250 kW used the standard design introduced by the project, supplying some 20,000 households, small-scale entrepreneurs and public utilities in Indonesia with clean energy.
- Compared to diesel generators, these mini-hydropower plants bring a reduction in CO² emissions of more than 4,000 tonnes per year.
The project also advised on the formulation and exemplary implementation of a law regulating the feeding of energy into the public grid. It ensured that NGO’s and Indonesian universities were involved in the project to ensure that the technical competencies were consolidated locally and to assure the sustainability of the program access to funding sources was taken into account thanks to the creation of financing models based on more commercial lines.
Adapted from: GTZ, 2008.
[1] By adoppting Article 11 b(6) of Directive 2004/101/EC, the European Union undertook to ensure that development of hydroelectric projects respect relevant international guidelines, including those contained in the World Commission on Dams November 2000 Report “Dams and Development – A New Framework for Decision-Making”.
[2] In accordancee with recital 15 of Directive 2004/101/EC.5
Focus Area 6: Sector Performance (SP)
Under this Focus Area, the overall performance of the water sector can address the sub-sectors identified in the preceding Focus Areas. Aspects such as Sector Wide Approaches, performance monitoring, institutional capacity and awareness-raising are discussed.
The challenge over the coming decades will be less one of dealing with the scarcity of water resources but more one of encouraging sensible water use. Despite the growing pressure on water resources, few countries have made progress in the rationalization of the water sector. In a sector as complex as the water sector, rationalizing the use of resources often raises another challenge: that of changing the mentalities and behaviours both of individual water users and, in particular, of agricultural and industrial businesses. In many developing countries, where the lack of coordination between the actors in the water sector and the lack of expertise of local stakeholders are highly evident, changing the mindset also involves strengthening national as well as local capacities. Economically and politically unstable countries are specifically challenged to fulfil their minimum responsibilities, such as providing and regulation of basic services.
As discussed in Chapter 2, Sector-wide approaches (SWAps) are processes aimed at developing coherent sector policies and strategies. The process is best led by the national government, in close collaboration with other national stakeholders and development partners, with a common objective of improving public sector performance in terms of service delivery as well as the efficiency and effectiveness with which internal and external resources are utilized. Under the sector-wide approach, the government is the driving force behind the sector’s development. It is for the government to provide leadership and ensure coordination between the national actors – both governmental and non-governmental – and donors. In the context of IWRM, elements of this leadership can be delegated to other actors in the sector. Whether totally government-led or delegated, the two approaches agree on the need for the sector to be well coordinated. Extensive consultations must enable local actors and non-State actors to get involved – the two groups which are often the most marginalized.
As an essential element of the sector-wide approach, performance monitoring is key to tracking the development of the sector and rectifying any problems. This is in line with the principles of results-oriented management set out in the Paris declaration on aid effectiveness. Three methods are generally used to provide such monitoring:
- Data collection and processing at State level, on the assumption that a reliable and organised structure exists to perform these functions. The data must in general be collected at local level and available at national level, and the more advanced the process of decentralisation the easier such activity will be.
- Data collection and measurement on a country-by-country basis concerning access to an improved source of drinking water and to improved sanitation, both of which are Millennium Development Indicators. The role of the local authorities and regions in data collection is fundamental.
- Specific studies to gather the data necessary to calculate the indicators the number of connections to a public sewage network, for example.
In so far as possible, preference should be given to a system of data collection and processing which is integrated within a ministry which has the competence and capacity to repeat studies regularly or for specific purposes. The institutional system may need to be bolstered to allow the State to perform this function. However, performance assessments conducted by independent bodies should also be undertaken on a regular basis (once a year should be the minimum, depending on the detail) in order to guarantee sector transparency.
The dynamism of the sector will be dependent on a strong political will, and the quality of the water service on the redefinition of the institutional and legal framework. However, these essential conditions are not enough: the actors must also have a vision for the sector and a genuine capacity to put into effect legal and institutional provisions. From an institutional point of view, it is important that the organization of public structures and any partners from the private sector or civil society is functional.
Accordingly, it is essential to understand the roles, responsibilities and resources of the various actors in the sector. Experience shows that the structures required to implement sector policy must take account of the existing institutions and their capacities, and that the establishment of new institutions and platforms is not always the best solution, let alone the simplest.
The various ministries, local authorities, agencies or associations of the country concerned and of neighbouring countries can benefit from joint training. The development of training channels in the beneficiary States and regions can make capacity building for Sector Performance a more sustainable process. These principles apply at both national and regional level. The particularities of cross-border management lie in the fact that it adds an additional institutional level – the river basin agency – as compared with less complicated national management. Joint training and exchanges can help to overcome these complexities.
In order to encourage the government to embrace the dynamic aspects of a sector-wide approach, the technical and financial partners, and in particular the development and donor agencies, must have a good knowledge of the governance-related issues, both in the country in general and in the water sector in particular. A methodical approach to arrive at this knowledge base is to apply a stakeholder analysis which can consist of 4 broad stages:
- evaluation of the context of water governance,
- inventory of the actors: interests, powers and motivations,
- evaluation of the relationships between those who govern and those who are governed,
- an evaluation of the sector’s readiness for governance reform.
Within these 4 stages of analysis we see clearly a wide range of stakeholder participation in what should be a participative and consultative process at a national level and forming a national dialogue. This dialogue can take the form of roundtables, public forums and institutional meetings. These allow all stakeholders in the water sector to meet and get to know each other, and to exchange views so that a consensus can be reached vis-à-vis the development of the sector, sometimes from a starting point of differing opinions.
For a dialogue to be effective it is important that all stakeholders have a minimum common understanding of issues to be discussed, and this usually involves open and transparent sharing of information and raising of awareness for the need for change. This is a pro-active process which requires facilitation usually by the Government Authorities, but in the context where they are themselves key stakeholders inside a process; this role can be taken up by development and donor agencies as external but pro-active parties to the dialogue process.
A national dialogue can be established only by government initiative and only when the government feels ready for such dialogue. This means that awareness-raising work at the national institutional level – on the part of the different actors driving forward governance identified in the course of the governance analysis (and in particular the donors) – may be necessary beforehand in order for people to realize that the way things are done must be changed.[1]
Box 3.7 Project Activities Focus Area 6
Typical activities for Focus Area 6 include the following:
• Capital budget for water supply and sanitation |
Case study: Strengthening Water Sector Monitoring and Information System in Ethiopia with GIRWI Project: Second Phase
Effective sector wide monitoring and the development and use of an information system to support the effective management and use of the water resource is a critical area of interest to the government and development partners in Ethiopia. The government wants to make more effective the development, utilization and management of the county’s water resources. This is in full in recognition of its critical role in the country’s economic growth and prosperity.
This project involves the development of a system of water sector monitoring and information through which data are collected, processed, report prepared for decision making.
The framework developed for monitoring and information system for water sector started with a simple consultative definition of the approach to be undertaken and then move gradually to a full-fledged support for using modern technologies such as a computerized and web based portal system. The following are key benchmarks for progress towards achieving the installation of the system.
Two levels of governance arrangements are proposed for water sector data and information system:
- A Centralized institutional structure for water resources information management system
- A Decentralized water resources management institutions
This project also recognizes the presence of very many institutions and organizations engaged in water sector data management as an opportunity rather than a threat. Their independence is also equally recognized as essential, less bureaucratic and which enhances wider participation, coverage and improves sector performance.
However, this could as well be a source for duplication of efforts and waste of investment unless carefully managed. Therefore, there is a strong need for a networking platform of water sector institutions and organizations involved in data management, standardization of procedures and quality control. This will allow a well-structured quantification, analysis and reporting of the data resource on a regular basis. (Strengthening Water Sector Monitoring and Information System in Ethiopia: GIRWI Project Phase II)
The establishment of a network of decentralized institutions allows and facilitates inter-linkages for information access and sharing. This is based on a protocol prepared, agreed upon and signed by participating organisations.
Based on the feedback from the assessment, adjustment is required for the healthy functioning of the network in order to improve data collection, analysis, reporting and information sharing among the networking institutions. This is expected to be through a centralized organ such as the Ministry of Water and Energy.
Integrated information management is a well-established tool enabling development activities to move towards sustainable development. Therefore, the established information system underscores the essential features of Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM) which in itself embraces fully the concept of integrated information management system in a centralized arrangement,
The effective management of the flow of information and management information by the networks require the equipping of network member institutions and organizations with state of the art Information Technology (IT) infrastructure. This entails designing the architecture for the information system and producing design requirements for the system. The management of water sector information by a centralized organ with strong linkages with the network institutions and organizations is at the center of this initiative design.
The development of sector wide monitoring and information system enhances the efficacy, efficiency, and equitable and balanced allocation and use of the water resources and improved sector investment in cost effective budgeting and decision making by the different users.
Adapted from: United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs (UN-DESA), 2011.
(1) Water Sector Development and Governance, Tools and Methods Series Reference Document N° 7, EuropeAid EC, 2009
Chapter 4: Priority themes for cross-cutting actions
The application of a Strategic Approach presented in Chapters 2 and 3 ultimately leads to decisions concerning actions. This entails identifying problem areas and appropriate responses at every stage of the cooperation process. During the course of developing checklists for this purpose - presented in Part II - a number of priority themes for action were identified and are presented in this chapter. Most themes are cross-cutting through Policy Principles and Focus Areas and almost all include actions in management or institutional strengthening. All themes described in this chapter present activities in the ‘software’ (intended as non-infrastructure related interventions) rather than the ‘hardware’ (infrastructure related interventions) arena.
Actions suggested will usually be carried out by governments often with the support of development partners; many require partnership approaches in which the public and private sectors, civil society actors, research, international and donor organizations will more often play a part together. The building of partnerships is key to the strategic approach.
Institutional development and capacity building
>The success of policies, programmes and services depends heavily on the resources, skills and technical expertise of the responsible institutions. These bodies need to be appropriately structured and provided with a legislative and administrative framework which promotes efficiency. Decentralization of administration of service delivery, updating of regulatory frameworks or partial devolution of service delivery are examples of institutional development. The capacity of institutions needs to be enhanced by means of human resources development and training as well as material and/or financial support. The process of capacity building is continuous, and applies to public and private sectors as well as to formal and informal bodies such as Civil Society Organizations.
Typical Actions include:
- updating policy to the circumstances of the country, taking into account lessons learned, and implementing integrated water resources management at national and international levels;
- review of existing laws, regulatory frameworks and customary practices, with a view to establishing a rational legal regime and control mechanisms for both public and private sector service providers;
- based on a comprehensive demand study, establishment of mechanisms for inter-sector liaison and co-ordination, to ensure equitable allocation of water resources between competing users
- install consultation mechanisms in the decision-making process to include inputs from commercial and agricultural water users, members of the civil society representing consumers, local communities or marginal populations, and parallel interests such as public health and education sectors;
- Foster the establishment of Sector Programmes by the government through the sector wide approach (chapter 11).
- establishment of a performance measurement framework that allows for effective monitoring of the sector including monitoring of equity and poverty indicators, as well as monitoring management approaches and strategies to be equitable, gender-sensitive and pro-poor ;
- promote public-private and public-public partnerships;
- reinforce and mainstream processes such environmental assessment, stakeholder analysis;
- setting up of river basin organisations where appropriate, within countries or trans-nationally;
- introduction of climate change issues such as mitigation and adaptation measures and developing resilience to climate change;
- introduction of capacity building via training and reorientation of managers and administrators at all levels;
- Facilitate the development of civil society organizations such as community-level organisations in order for them to play a role in the planning, installation, management and maintenance of local services and facilities.
Building participatory structures and gender equity
Participation by stakeholders in a given programme or activity is not only desirable as a matter of democratic right, but also to ensure that investments of money and resources correspond to demand for services, and to enable those services to be equitably managed in the interests of all. A participatory process allows stakeholders to take part in decision-making relating to policies and actions undertaken by formal bodies on their behalf, whereby they also accept a degree of responsibility for those decisions. Thus, mechanisms for the expressions of stakeholders’ views, especially those of service users, are needed. Within participatory management structures, the role of women in household food security, domestic hygiene and water management, and child education needs to be better recognised, and special attention paid to involving them at all decision-making levels.
Typical Actions include:
- establishment of user groups, farmers associations, water and sanitation committees, school hygiene clubs and other expressions of civil society to participate in water resources management at the local level; ensure that there is a good gender balance in the membership, and that all members play an active part in decision-making;
- adequate provision for promoting community mobilisation including funds, training and capacity building, gender empowerment, attention to child issues and most-poor community members;
- mainstreaming effective responses to water-related diseases and including HIV/AIDS;
- gender-awarenness training for administrative and service provision personnel at all levels; gender-balancced recruitment and promotion (see part 3);
- needs analysis that includes demands of most-poor users, ensuring that they have the opportunity to express their views and have equitable access to service provision;
- information sharing and awareness raising at the lowest stakeholder levels on public health issues as well as creation of livelihood opportunities-in order to develop demand for water and sanitation services and promote their participation in mannagement;
- identification of, and research on, local indigenous water management techniques and enterprises to develop ways to integrate and legitimise sound local practice into the standard service provision.
Integrated water and other natural resources management
The protection of eco-systems and the natural resources upon which all forms of life on earth depend should be regarded as an obligation. Water, as a key natural resource, is a strategic national asset and all policies related to it should be consistent and comply with environmental protection aims and legislation. The cooperation of institutions and agencies responsible for the management of water is crucial. Proper data collection, analysis and follow up of resource management should also involve the research institutions (e.g. Academic Centres of Excellence for Water, research institutions and agencies, institutions of higher education, international earth science observatories and international water research programmes)
Typical Actions include:
- advocacy at National Policy level on behalf of water as a priority and essential resource with a social and economic value, particularly in areas of water scarcity;
- advocacy of policies, regulations and tariffs that discourage wastage and pollution;
- policy and resource investments in protection of environmentally fragile and vulnerable areas such as wetlands, coastal marine zones, deserts, and areas vulnerable to flooding and/or soil erosion;
- support earth and environmental observatories, research on water resource uses, and promote cooperation between research and policy in order to support decision making systems by the inclusion of scientific knowledge;
- capacity building and support to strengthen environmental agencies and actors – including civil society- to support their role as ‘environmental watchdogs’ for monitoring to ensure that environmental management and regulations are respected, extraction and usage is controlled, and pollution and contamination does not go unobserved;
- mainstreaming of environmental impacts (see Part 3) at all stages of the development and implementation of water-related projects to measure the potential or actual effects of activities on eco-systems;
- awareness-raising campaigns for government officials, the education sector and the wider public including professionals, communities and NGOs on the importance of natural resource management; ensure the incorporation of water-related environmental issues into education curricula;
- identify, research and incorporate the elements and risks of climate change into the management of water resources (e.g. studies on regional variation in precipitation patterns and potential impacts on water resources such as wetlands and shorelines).
- Climate resilience actions such as mobilizing and managing knowledge for adaptation policy and planning, integrating climate change adaptation and mitigation into national sector policies and strategies
- Management for environmental sustainability ensuring that water resources are not extracted beyond their safe yields
Expansion of the knowledge base
Water resources development and management and delivery of water-related services can only be carried out effectively on the basis of real-time knowledge and information, including: knowledge of water resources availability: surface and groundwater as well as precipitation data; information on water quality and its impact on users and the environment; knowledge of water and water-related demands and needs of households, of different consumers and productive sectors; water requirements of the eco-systems, especially the aquatic eco-system; knowledge of good and bad performance in water and sanitation services, and the financial and social costs incurred from poor service delivery.
Typical Actions include
- supply of equipment, instruments and training in hydrological, hydrometric and hydro-geological data collection, storage and analysis;
- surveys of water and wastewater service usage and potential demands, including willingness-to-pay and capacity-to-pay, knowledge, attitude-practice surveys among potential users; capacity building in conductinng surveys and analysis ;
- equipment and training for baseline studies into ecological needs and for monitoring ongoing changes in the water-related environment;
- water quality monitoring, including provision of laboratory equipment and training; promoting the adherence to water quality standards;
- mechanisms for data exchange and sharing information between different administrative levels and between sectors, agencies and stakeholders involved in water resources management;
- establishment of monitoring and evaluation systems for water-related programmes, including provision of services for water and sanitation;
- research, data capture and modelling of climate change risks to permit their integration into national policies, plans and programmes;
- Indicators for monitoring and evaluation of occurrence and impacts of water and sanitation-related diseases including HIV AIDS;
Demand management and pricing
Demand management of water resources is the only viable alternative to indefinite expansion of supplies – a policy option not available in countries or regions facing hydrological limits. Demand management implies some form of water pricing which, above a basic subsistence supply, is correlated with high and low water values, creating conditions in which the available supply is more efficiently used. The implication of demand management is that users will have a high level of motivation to maintain services and keep them in repair to maximize service and minimize wastage. Actions under this theme are closely inter-linked with those relating to institutional development and capacity building, as well as with advocacy for a better understanding of water’s importance as an environmental resource.
Actions include:
- advocacy and awareness-building activities to create the necessary political and social climate to accept the principle that water is both a social and an economic good, and as such should be subject to equitable and adequate pricing for all uses;
- studies and surveys to assess demand, capacity-to-pay and willingness-to pay; support for tariff reform and appropriate pricing regimes where necessary;
- feasibility studies to determine tariff systems needed for achieve financial viability of the level (or expected level) of services provided;
- the establishment of a regulatory framework to monitor service providers (including autonomous public sector agencies) and protect the poor from exploitation;
- advocacy of appropriate reduction of subsidies, bearing in mind equity considerations regarding services for low-income communities or persons and other social or ‘public good’ considerations;
- promotion of economic analyses, including environmental economic analysis, ensuring that criteria of financial viability reflect true values of the resource and its amenity, environmental and health benefits (see Part 3);
- introduction of water saving technologies, leakage control, water re-use, rehabilitation and repair of existing systems;
- demand projections that take into consideration effects of climate change and other variations of demographic demand and social needs (e.g. impact of HIV/AIDS)
Awareness-building and communication
Building political, public and private sector awareness of the need to value the social, health, economic and environmental values of water is very important. As an aid to successful programme and project implementation, and to ensuring maximum health and other impacts of services, the role of communications and awareness-raising within programmes and projects is now widely recognised. A wide variety of techniques should be used to build awareness and provide for information exchanges between stakeholders. Without good communication, the development of strong participatory structures is likely to remain elusive. (See also Part 3.)
Actions include:
- seminars, events, and dialogue platforms which offer opportunities to promote the concept of water as a valuable resource to political leaders and senior administrators;
- social mobilisation involving all types of sectors and all levels of administration, in order to promote improvement of sanitation and public health;
- introduction of environmental and water-related components into administrative training programs, technical training and education curricula;
- educational and information campaigns directed at the general public on water-related diseases, sanitary behaviour, water storage and use, and the valorisation and promotion of the role of women in household water management; studies into existing knowledge, attitudes and practice (KAP – see Part 3) regarding water collection, use and management including waste-water management;
- local production and distribution of communications aids, and the use of internet, TV, radio, advertising and other media for communication of public health messages;
- international level of exchange of experiences, project models and best practices among managers and operators in different countries and localities;
- promotion of inter-state and inter-country trans-boundary information sharing mechanisms.
Part 2 - The Strategic Approach: application
Part II contains a description of Project Cycle Management (PCM), whose phases provide a time-line and project process framework in which to apply the strategic approach and checklists of key issues and potential responses. These are grouped according to both the PCM phases and the Focus Areas identified in Part I and can be studied either with respect to the project phase or the focus area:
-To examine checklists for all focus areas relevant to a particular PCM phase select PCM Phases.
-To examine checklists for all PCM phases relevant to a particular focus area select Focus Areas.
Or use the navigator on the right sidebar to read a specific section
Introduction to Part 2
Introduction to Part 2
Part 2 contains a description of Project Cycle Management (PCM), whose phases provide a time-line and project process framework in which to apply the strategic approach and checklists of key issues and potential responses. These are grouped according to both the PCM phases and the Focus Areas identified in Part 1.
The strategic approach presented in Part 1 of the Toolkit provides a framework of policy principles and programming contexts for water related interventions. Planners, officials, practitioners and development workers are expected to use it as a guide for decision-making. Part II of the Toolkit is designed to enable readers to put the strategic approach into effect.
The application of the strategic approach entails identifying problem areas and appropriate responses at every stage of the programme process. Thus the main content of Part 2 consists of checklists to assist users to put into practice the policy principles at each of the different stages of the programme process and in each of the Focus Areas.
The reader should bear in mind at all times that this is not a manual;, these checklists are not meant to be exhaustive, but to act as pointers towards strategies and actions. Each situation, each problem area for any given Focus Area and any stage of the PCM, not to mention the course of any project, is subject to so many variables that to produce a definitive set of checklists would not be possible, efficient nor practical.
The whole emphasis of this Toolkit is to avoid prescription, but instead to facilitate a questioning mode of project development, in which sensitivity to changing trends, local variety of economic, social and environmental circumstances, and especially the input derived from stakeholder and user participation<, can be reflected.
In parts of the PCM process, the key issues and possible responses are similar for all Focus Areas, whereas in others they differ. For some checklists, therefore, the material is generic and applicable for all Focus Areas, whereas for others, results for these Focus Areas are presented separately.
Chapter 5: Project Cycle Management (PCM)
Project Cycle Management (PCM)
Project Management (PM) methodologies in use around the World are definitions of project management processes aiming at standardizing and improving the quality of the project management lifecycle. Quality of the projects can be defined in terms of the relevance, feasibility and effectiveness of the impacts of the investment, including how well they are managed.
A project management methodology consists of process groups and control systems. The PM methodology aims at organising the project cycle structure and defining not only the content of each phase but also how it can be best accomplished.
Typically all project management methodologies imply a flow similar to the “Plan-Do-Check-Act” cycle with phases which are linked together by results – the result of one phase should become the input of another. Although, the way of defining the phases of a project can be subjective and often based on organizational procedures, each project management methodology approach should include well defined phases and the transition from one work phase to another should naturally involve the transfer of some sort of deliverable (a document, piece of software, invoice, report, an approval by committee, etc.)
The word ‘project’ as used in this Toolkit, should be interpreted as broadly as possible including sector planning. The term ‘project’ is primarily used for convenience and simply means the collection of related activities for which a contribution is provided to meet a specified objective.
Different project management methodologies have been adopted by several agencies such as the Asian Development Bank (ADB), the World Bank (WB), the EC, and national governments. In particular, the European Commission (EC) has produced a “Project Cycle Management” (PCM) manual, which has been subsequently adopted by other development partners as one of the systems for project development, funding and evaluation (EC, 2004).
Chapter 5 of the Toolkit focuses on the project management methodology adopted by the EC but aims in general at supporting good management practices and effective decision making throughout the project management processes of any organisation working in the sector.
The approach of the PCM
As mentioned, the way of defining the phases of a project can be subjective and often based on organizational procedures. In the case of the EC PCM, the project cycle presents five phases: Programming, Identification, Formulation, Implementation and Evaluation. In the case of the World Bank the phases would be similarly the following: Identification- Preparation- Appraisal- Approval- Implementation - Completion- Evaluation. The WB phasess are slightly more numerous, and this depends on the interest for highlighting some parts of the project management phases. The WB “Completion” phase, for example, can be found within the EC PCM “Implementation” phase. Besides these methodological procedural differences, the PCM approach is constructed around the idea of carefully planned phases leading logically from one to another with mechanisms of assessment and verification.
Another common analytical and management tool typically used in many project management methodologies and also by the EC PCM is the logical framework, which is prepared for every project in order to show the intervention logic as it evolves gradually through its various stages. The Logical Framework Approach (LFA) is designed to improve and streamline projects, making them more effective in realising their development objectives, including that of producing sustainable benefits. The LFA is used by most governments, multi-lateral and bi-lateral aid agencies, international NGOs, etc. to prepare sector development plans and/or project proposals. It is the principal tool used for project design during the identification and formulation phases of the project cycle. Using the LFA during identification helps to ensure that project ideas are relevant, while during formulation it helps to ensure feasibility and sustainability. However, it is not a substitute for experience and professional judgment and must also be complemented by the application of other specific tools (such as Economic and Financial Analysis and Environmental Impaact Assessment) and through the application of techniques which promote the effective participation of stakeholders
Four Key principles have been identified by PCM practitioners to improve the quality of judgment and decision making at all stages of the project cycle. These key principles interpreted from a perspective of sector development are:
- Projects are supportive of overarching sector policy objectives;
- Projects are relevant to an agreed-upon strategy and to the real problems of target groups/beneficiaries;
- Projects are feasible, meaning that objectives can be realistically achieved within the constraints of the operating environment, the given budget and the capacities of the implementing organisation; and
- Benefits generated by projects are likely to be sustainable.
These four principles are important measures of the quality of the project, and should provide information for judgements and decisions of managers and advisors not only during the planning stage, but at all moment during the project cycle when amendments and course corrections are indicated.
A particular mention is to be given to the last principle “sustainability”. In order to foster the sustainability of the benefits generated, a careful analysis of the other three principles is fundamental. Sustainability is in fact a delicate issue depending on the coherence with the overarching sector policy objectives, the ownership and the alignment with the target groups needs and capacities and a realistic feasibility assessment. The list of over-ambitious failed projects is long.
To support the achievement of these aims, the PCM:
- Requires the active participation of key stakeholders and aims to promote local ownership;
- Uses the Logical Framework Approach (as well as other tools) to support a number of key assessments/analyses (including stakeholders, problems, objectives and strategies);
- Incorporates key quality assessment criteria into each stage of the project cycle; and
- Requires the production of good-quality key document(s) in each phase (with commonly understood concepts and definitions) to support well-informed decision-making.
Project management in the context of water sector development
In line with international thinking on the water sector, development is seen nowadays as a process to which sector programmes and projects contribute; sector programmes and projects alone do not themselves necessarily constitute development. A project can be effectively executed in technical terms, but if it is not in line with national policies and plans or with social, economic or environmental realities, it may end up as a costly and unsustainable implementation exercise.
Concerning the macro level of the national policies and strategies, a coherent project management cycle, in order to increase its chances of bringing sustainable benefits to its target groups, has to take into account the sector building blocks and in particular the following elements:
- Sector policy and strategy: a sector policy is a statement of a government’s long-term vision (ten years or more) for the sector, setting out the government’s objectives for that period. The sector policy also specifies the institutional aspects (roles of different actors in the sector, division of responsibilities, financing, etc.), sets out the main principles of service management (state control, private operator etc.) and the priority action areas (geographical areas, maintenance or extension of the network) and explains which legal and regulatory decisions are deemed necessary. The sector strategy action plan, also known as the master plan, describes how, in terms of the physical and financial execution, the government intends to implement sector policy over a medium-term perspective (3-5 years). It may be necessary to set intermediate targets or priorities to meet policy objectives;
- The sector budget and its expenditure perspective: these two must form the financial expression, on an annual and multi-annual basis, of the sector strategy. They are drawn up in conjunction with the sector strategy and on the basis of the available resources in the sector;
- A sector coordination framework, through which the sector policy, action plans and budget are reviewed and updated.
Together with those three core elements, there are also two key components: the monitoring system and the institutional capacity. These two components are of equal importance and often pose major challenges for the sustainable development of the sector. Monitoring systems are common weak points, which can be detrimental to future management and programming, and call into question the use of sector budget support as a financing modality. As regards to institutional capacity, capacity building assistance must be targeted by a good needs assessement but often involves most national partners.
Not all these elements are present in all countries. Approaches and terminology can differ, but this list gives an interesting overview of a series of issues to be considered in the PCM phases.
Concerning the project level, to contribute effectively to development throughout the entire project management cycle, a process of dialogue with stakeholders and beneficiaries is needed inn order to foster:
- Ownership: From a user-beneficiary perspective, the project is viewed as the creation of assets over which they hold responsibility and will yield sustainable benefits after funding has ceased.
- Stakeholder involvement: ownership cannot be created without the involvement throughout the project cycle of all actual or potential stakeholders whether they are individuals, groups or organisations that have an interest in the project. Beneficiaries and implementing organisations are generally the most important stakeholders, but others of significance caan include faith-based organisations, NGOs, traders, developers, the private sector and agencies concerned with complementary or competing activities in the programme or project environment. Stakeholder interests may therefore be positive or negative towards the project. Effective PCM needs to take account of stakeholder interests at every phase of the project cycle, and make adjustments accordingly.
- Participation: the above elements eentail an overall concept: the need for participation. Much water-related developmennt activity depends heavily for its success on active and real participation by the intended beneficiaries.. It is recognised that effective participation, as opposed to an exercise in consultation or a communications campaign, can be a long process with less easily predictable results. However participation is regarded as a vital component of the stages of identification and formulation, and should be present to some degree in other stages of the project cycle.
These are amongst the most important concepts that are behind the guiding principles treated in this Toolkit. The application of the PCM tools must be sensitive and flexible to prevent other imperatives and procedures take precedence over the development imperatives of the project or programme. At any time during the project cycle, adaptations can take into account changed circumstances or previously unknown factors. The quality criteria of relevance, feasibility and sustainability should be used when collection information on how judgments and decisions about changes need to be made.
The five phases of PCM
The different phases of the Project Cycle Management are
Programming: defining the framework and establishing the general principles
Purpose
The purpose of Programming is to assess the main objectives and priorities of the sector, and thus to provide a relevant and feasible programming framework within which programmes and projects can be identified and prepared. The programming phase consists of an analysis of the situation at national and sector level to identify problems, constraints and opportunities. For the identified priorities, strategies are formulated based on the analysis and that take into account lessons learned.. Programming helps to: establish what other activities are ongoing and/or planned in the water sector, which are the sources of financing and in what areas; review existing water sector development policy; consider water-related activity across all development sectors; and identify the key areas for water-related projects.
Input
- National policies and strategies;
- Regional or transboundary policies, strategies and development plans (if relevant);
- Sector assessment studies with baseline data and situation analysis;
- Sector plans and strategy documents;
- Evaluations of policies, strategies and sector programmes;
- Case studies analysis of past projects;
- Demand analysis and resource assessment;
- Economic, financial, social, institutional and environmental analysis<.
Activities
A national water resources study may be useful to assess national and/or regional constraints, opportunities and priorities as well as determining the role of the different national and international actors. The process shall be consistent with the major elements of the LFA:
- Identify key stakeholders< and assess their needs, interests and capacities;
- Identify and analyse the priority of development problems/constraints and opportunities;
- Identify development objectives which address the identified priority problems possibly in a participative way with sector stakeholders and beneficiaries; and
- Identify a strategy for a possible intervention that takes account of the proceeding analysis, including capacity constraints, lessons learned from previous experience and the ongoing or planned activities of other stakeholders.
Outcomes
An indicative sector programme specifying:
- Global objectives
- Financial issues for each development area
- Specific objectives and expected results for each area
- How cross cutting issues are taken into consideration
- Programmes / projects to be implemented in pursuit of these objectives, including the targeted beneficiaries
Focus Areas Related:
- Water Resources (WR) Programming
- Basic Services (BS) Programming
- Municipal Services (MS) Programming
- Agricultural (A) Programming
- Energy Hydropower (EH) Programming
- Sector Performance (SP) Programming
Identification: identifying project ideas and verifying their feasibility
Purpose
The purpose of the identification phase is to:
- identify project ideas that are consistent with the sector national framework, the sector strategy, the sector programme (if existing) and partner development priorities;
- assess the relevance and likely feasibility of these project ideas consulting stakeholders (beneficiaries in particular) and other sector partners;
- assess the possibility of overlapping and other criticalities with other projects or programmes in the sector
- prepare a project identification document summarising the results of the ideas and the financial aspects; and
- determine the scope of the further work required for individual projects during the formulation stage.
Input
Most important information and data sources are from the national and local governments, non-state actors, universities and research centres, multi-lateral or regional development agencies. The priorities and targets identified in the relevant national sector framework and from relevant sector policy or sector programme objectives: local ownership of, and commitment to, potential projects are key quality assessment criteria.
Key inputs and documents are:
- the framework established during the programming phase;
- results from any relevant sector study;
- results of participative consultations with stakeholders;
- sector financing strategy (if any);
- national sector policy or strategy (if any).
Activities
The following assessments shall be carried out:
- Assessment of policy and programming framework;
- Stakeholder analysis, including institutional capacity assessment;
- Problem analysis, including scoping of crosscutting issues (e.g. gender<, governance, environment);
- Assessment of other ongoing and planned initiatives, and assessment of lessons learned;
- Preliminary objectives and strategy analysis;
- Preliminary assessment of resource and cost parameters;
- Preliminary assessment of project management, coordination and financing arrangements; and
- Preliminary assessment of economic/financial, environmental, technical and social sustainability issues.
Tools to be used are:
- Quality Assessment Criteria
- Logical Framework Approach
- Institutional capacity assessment
- Promoting participatory approaches and using facilitation skills.
- Economic and Financial Analysis<
Outcomes
- Policy and programme context
- Stakeholder analysis
- Problem analysis, including scope of cross-cutting issues
- Lessons learned and review of other ongoing or planned initiatives.
- Preliminary project description – indicative objective hierarchy
- Indicative resource and cost implications
- Indicative coordination, management (including financial management/control) and financing arrangements
- Preliminary assessment of economic/ financial, environmental, technical and social sustainability
- Follow-up work plan for the Formulation stage
Focus Areas Related:
- Water Resources (WR) Identification
- Basic Services (BS) Identification
- Municipal Services (MS) Identification
- Agricultural (A) Identification
- Energy Hydropower (EH) Identification
- Sector Performance (SP) Identification
Formulation: the detailed planning and preparation of the project
Purpose
The purpose of the project formulation stage is to:
- Confirm the relevance and feasibility of the project ideas as proposed in the identification phase;
- Prepare a detailed project design, including the management and coordination arrangements, financing plan, cost-benefit analysis, risk management, monitoring, evaluation and audit arrangements; and
- Prepare a proposal including all the documents above mentioned to be submitted to the funding organisation or to the government.
Input
- the project identification document defining key components of the proposed project;
- Terms of reference for detailed project design studies,
- Other assessments documents produced during Identification
Activities
The following shall be carried out:
- confirm consistency with the policy and national programming framework;
- stakeholder analysis, including institutional capacity assessment;
- problem analysis, including crosscutting issues (e.g. gender, governance, environment);
- complementarities with other ongoing and planned initiatives, incorporating lessons learned;
- strategy assessment;
- objective hierarchy assessment (objective, purpose, results and indicative activities);
- assessment of resource needs and cost requirements;
- assessment of management, coordination and financing procedures and arrangements (including financial management and internal control/reporting);
- assessment of monitoring, evaluation and audit arrangements;
- sustainability and risk assessment, including economic/financial, environmental, technical and social.
Proposed tools are
- Quality assessment criteria
- The Logical Framework Approach, including the preparation of the Logframe;
- Institutional capacity assessment, building on previous analysis undertaken in the identification stage;
- Risk management matrix;
- Guidance on promoting participation and the use of facilitation skills;
- Guidance on preparation of TORs;
- Guidance on financial management, control framework and reporting requirements;
Outcomes
- A Final project proposal; and/or
- Terms of Reference/Technical and Administrative Provisions for implementation.
- The main information elements that should be available by the end of Formulation (in order to effectively guide and support implementation) are:
- Situation Analysis/Key Assessment;
- project Description;
- management Arrangement;
- feasibility and Sustainability
Decision options can be:
- What further design / formulation work is required before the start of implementation?
- What are the final implementation / contracting modalities to be used?
Focus Areas related:
- Water Resources (WR) Formulation
- Basic Services (BS) Formulation
- Municipal Services (MS) Formulation
- Agricultural (A) Formulation
- Energy Hydropower (EH) Formulation
- Sector Performance (SP) Formulation
Implementation including monitoring and reporting
Purpose
The purpose of the implementation stage is to:
- Deliver the results and contribute effectively to the overall objective of the project;
- Manage the available resources efficiently; and
- Monitor and report on progress of activities.
The implementation stage of the project cycle is in many ways the most critical; as it is during this stage that planned benefits are delivered. All other stages in the cycle are therefore essentially supportive of this implementation stage.
Monitoring, as well as evaluation, are both concerned with the collection, analysis and use of information to support informed decision-making. For the sake of clarity it is useful to understand the differences between the monitoring and evaluation in terms of who is responsible, when they should occur, why they are carried out.
Monitoring is usually the systematic and continuous collection, analysis and use of management information to support effective decision-making. Monitoring is an internal management responsibility, although it may be complemented by ‘external’ monitoring inputs. Monitoring can be seen as a picture of the project shot at any given time. It does not give a complete overview but it is useful to identify issues while they can still be addressed in a timely fashion.
Evaluation is usually a more complete analysis of the relevance and fulfilment of objectives, developmental efficiency, effectiveness, impact and sustainability. It is carried out with external inputs at fixed timings such as the project “mid-term” or at the end of the project in order to feed the new programming phase of the PCM with lessons learnt.
Regular reviews of project progress should involve key stakeholders with ddirect responsibilities for implementation on the ground (i.e. the project management team and even the beneficiaries) as they provide a structured opportunity to discuss and agree on the content of progress reports, build a common understanding of key issues/concerns and of actions that need to be taken.
Input
The information required depends on the scope of the project: purpose, results, activities and resource requirements, budget and by the management arrangements. Information required and reporting schedule will vary according to the level of management.
The following documents might be required:
- Key indicators and source of verification as per LFA;
- Quality criteria and standards;
- Logframe matrix;
- activity/work programme schedules and resource/budget schedules;
- risk management matrix;
- checklists for planning short-visits;
- terms of reference;
- contractual documents;
- project implementation plan with calendar;
- detailed designs and tender documents.
Activities
- Monitoring and regular review
- Planning and re-planning
- Reporting aiming to:
- Inform stakeholders of prooject progress;
- provide a formal documented record of what was achieved during the reporting period;
- document any changes in forward plans;
- promote transparency and accountability.
- Ongoing assessment of the following:
- Continued relevance and feasibility of the project;
- progress in achieving objectives and resources used;
- quality of management including risk management;
- prospect of sustainability of benefits;
Outcomes
Projects are executed as far as possible according to plan; with adjustments to ensure that project assets can be operated successfully to maintain a sustainable flow of benefits.
The key documents required/produced during the implementation stage usually include:
- Operational work plans (usually annual);
- periodic but regular progress reports;
- specific reviews/study reports (e.g. mid-term evaluation); and
- completion reports (at end of project).
Focus Areas Related:
- Water Resources (WR) Implementation
- Basic Services (BS) Implementation
- Municipal Services (MS) Implementation
- Agricultural (A) Implementation
- Energy Hydropower (EH) Implementation
- Sector Performance (SP) Implementation
Evaluation and Audit: Analysis of outcomes and activities
Evaluation
Purpose
The approach to Evaluation in this section is based on the OECD-DAC Quality Standards for Development Evaluation (OECD,, 2010).
The purpose of evaluation is to make an “assessment, as systematic and objective as possible, of an ongoing or completed project, programme, strategy or policy, its design, implementation and results. The evaluation purpose will be in line with the learning and accountability function of evaluations such as:
- Contribute to improving sector policies, strategies, procedures or techniques;
- consider a continuation or discontinuation of a project/programme;
- accountability for expenditures to stakeholders and tax payers;
Amongst the most important objectives of an evaluation the OECD-DAC cites:
- To ascertain results (output, outcome, impact) and assess the effectiveness, efficiency and relevance of a specific development intervention;
- to provide findings, conclusions and recommendations with respect to a specific policy, programme etc.
The evaluation scope can include the time period, funds spent, geographical area, target groups, organisational set-up, implementation arrangements, policy and institutional context and other dimensions to be covered by the evaluation. Identifying discrepancies between the planned and actual implementation of the interventions are among the main results of an evaluation.
In the planning of the Evaluation a certain number of issues can be considered such as stakeholder involvement, consideration for joint evaluations with other sector actors, evaluation questions, selection and application of evaluation criteria, selection of approach and methodology, resources, governance and management structures, document defining purpose and expectations.
Input
- Terms of reference for the evaluation mission;
- the project’s Logframe matrix;
- project documents clearly defining activities, objectives, results, indicators, etc.;
- monitoring reports (internal and external), produced during implementation;
- annual plans;
- the Evaluation Report format (if relevant).
Activities
- Identifying the specific needs for the evaluation and selecting the topics/themes to be evaluated;
- Designing the evaluation, including preparing the Terms of Reference for the evaluation study and selecting the evaluator according to the relevant procedures;
- Briefing the evaluation team and the parties involved, supporting the evaluation mission; and
- Ensuring the production of a high quality evaluation report and of the dissemination of evaluation findings and recommendations.
Outcomes
The key documents produced during this stage of the cycle are the:
- Terms of Reference designing the evaluation work to be carried out, and
- Inception report usually following a preliminary desk study
- Draft Evaluation Report for inputs from the implementing organisation and other relevant stakeholders such as beneficiaries and authorities.
- Final Evaluation Report. The evaluation report should mirror the structure of the main evaluation criteria, taking into account the nature of the project, the stage at which the evaluation is carried out, and the users for whom the report is prepared.
Audit
Purpose
Audit is a very important activity when addressing public expenditures management. It provides assurance and accountability to stakeholders and recommendations for improvement of current and future projects.
The purpose of an audit is to:
- Assess an activity/subject that is the responsibility of another party against identified suitable criteria, and
- Express a conclusion (i.e. qualified opinion) that provides the intended user with a level of assurance about the activity/subject being audited.
The objectives of audits are to enable the auditor to express a conclusion on:
- The legality and regularity of project expenditure and income i.e. compliance with laws and regulations and with applicable contractual rules and criteria; and/or
- Whether project funds have been used efficiently and economically i.e. in accordance with sound financial management; and /or
- Whether project funds have been used effectively i.e. for purposes intended.
Inputs
- Terms of reference for the audit mission;
- the Logframe matrix - to help assess what has been achieved against plan;
- monitoring reports (internal and external), produced during implementation;
- evaluation reports, mid-terms or final;
- methodological guidance provided; and
Activities
- Planning
- Identifying the need for an audit and establishing audit objectives and scope.
- Designing the audit, including drafting the TOR, usually on the basis of standard formats.
- Selecting the audit firm according to the relevant procedures (national law, donors’ procedures, international cooperation agencies rules, etc.).
- Conduct
- Monitoring of the conduct of the audit by external audit firms
- Reporting
- Obtaining and reviewing copies of ‘Aide Memoires’ (memorandum with findings and conclusions), draft and final audit reports and ensuring their dissemination.
- Arranging procedures (meetings or written procedures) between donor agency, the audit firm and the audited.
- Follow-up
- Monitoring the follow-up of audit findings and recommendations including reporting on the follow-up.
- Outcomes
- Terms of Reference for the audit engagement; and
- The final Audit Report.
The audit report should mirror the structure of the main audit criteria, taking into acccount the nature of the project, the stage at which the audit is carried out, and the users for whom the report is prepared.
Focus Areas Related:
- Water Resources (WR) Evaluation and Audit
- Basic Services (BS) Evaluation and Audit
- Municipal Services (MS) Evaluation and Audit
- Agricultural (A) Evaluation and Audit
- Energy Hydropower (EH) Evaluation and Audit
- Sector Performance (SP) Evaluation and Audit
Focus Areas
This guide lists 6 focus areas covering the different kind of projects you may have to implement:
- Water Resources ( WR)
- Basic Services (BS)
- Municipal Services (MS)
- Agricultural (A)
- Energy Hydropower (EH)
- Sector Performance (SP)
For a detalied description of each focus areas please refer to Chapter 3: Managing water resources equitably, efficienty and sustainably: Focus Areas<
Water Resources (WR)
Check Focus Area 1 Water Resources definition, project example and possible project activities in Part 1 - Chapter 3.<
Programming
The purpose of the programming phase is to assess the main objectives and priorities for the development of the water sector, and thus to provide a relevant and feasible programming framework within which programmes and projects can be identified and prepared. Programming analyses the situation at national and sector level, and identifies problems, constraints and opportunities to be addressed. As water is fundamental to social and economic development, this chapter defines a series of Focus Areas aiming at supporting an integrated approach to water resources management. The programming phase provides an opportunity to review socio-economic indicators, national and local priorities, and all national, regional and local factors relating to water.
During this phase, the main objectives and sector priorities will be identified and thus a feasible programming framework will be provided within which potential water-related programmes and projects can be identified, indicating which Focus Area(s) are most in need of support.
The programming phase aims at applying a truly integrated approach balancing needs, solutions and possibilities within an overall water resources management sector framework. However, an integrated approach requires a wide range of information collection and analysis.
The essential question for the programming phase is: Keeping in line with national policies, strategies and priorities, which Focus Area(s) and which kinds of support would provide an intervention that would be most beneficial?
Checklists have been developed corresponding to the following four steps in the programming process.
Step 1: Alignment to national sector framework;
Step 2: Assessing the capacity of recipients to adopt and manage programmes;
Step 3: Assessing the needs of the water sector;
Step 4: Identifying the priority Focus Areas for support
Checklist for Step 1: Alignment to national sector framework
Water resources development and management must be assessed with regard to alignment with the national sector framework of the country.
- Are specific objectives and expected results, including any conditionalities and main performance and outcome indicators aligned to the national sector framework?
- Do national sector framework plans include measures to ensure the sustainable use of water resources? (e.g. monitoring strategies)
- Are national sector framework plans implying an effective level of participation by sector stakeholders and beneficiaries?
- Are national sector framework plans based on sound scientific and technical analyses?
- Is there a Sector programme (for instance as part of a sector wide approach) in place for the equitable development of the water sector?
- Are environmental aspects (including in-stream use) of water treated prominently in programming and addressed in policies related to other sector activities?
- Are effects of climate change and climate change resilience duly considered?
- Are crosscutting issues, especially gender equality and HIV/AIDS, taken into consideration?
- Is water as a key element of economic activities becoming a constraining resource?
- Are key stakeholders identified and their needs, interests and capacities assessed?
- What options are available for meeting current and future water needs, and have alternatives to supply augmentation or improved efficiency been considered?
- Are complementary measures needed in other sectors to achieve a more integrated approach to water resources management?
- Are the policies in other sectors compatible with a sustainable water resources sector development and management, as set out in the Guiding Principles?
- Is or can the national sector framework be aligned and harmonized with other potential sector activities (including donors’ and other development partners) and vice-versa?
Ensure that programmes do not conflict with other national / sector activity.
- Have the main objectives and sector priorities for sector development been identified?
- Have the capacity constraints and lessons learned from previous experience been taken into account?
- Is there a clear link between budget and policy? Are budget and policy priorities complementary and realistic?
- Are coordination mechanisms of key government actors and relevant national and local stakeholders in place? Are they active? Are they consistent with the structure and responsibilities of the national government?
- Is there an established mechanism ensuring stakeholders and beneficiaries participation?
- What degree of support and/or strategies are stakeholders and development partners providing in water resources management or water-related activities? Is water considered to be a high priority or taken for granted??
- What assistance is presently being provided by development partners in water resources development? Does it include guidance for future programming?
- Do support/planned activities by development partners in other sectors complement or conflict with existing or planned water resources management activities?
Based on the above assessment of compatibility to sector alignment decide whether:
- Activities in other sectors or by other development partners can be effective and complementary as support to the water resources sector e.g. geographical scope, project duration, most suitable partners;
- There is overlap or incompatibility with activities in other sectors or development partners; this should be resolved prior to planning or implementing any further support to water resources sector;
- If faced with multiple sector donors promoting harmonization of cooperation with development partners (e.g. to reduce transactions costs); the sector, led by the government, needs to ensure effective coordination and dialogue mechanisms
- Activities already underway in other sectors or by other actors suggest that some specific support activities to the sector / water resources management may be not required under current circumstances.
- Other potential sources of funding can be considered in the framework of a sector programme;
- Types of external assistance can be considered mainly (and optimally) as e.g. macroeconomic support, technical assistance, training, investments, and supply of equipment
Checklist for Step 4: Identifying priority Focus Areas
It is important to identify which Focus Area(s) is/are most in need of support. This priority setting should fit within an overall sector programme based on responses to the earlier key issues.
- Is there a particular area of water use or management critical to social and economic well-being?
- How are the different Focus Areas treated within existing national and regional plans?
- Do policy conflicts make holistic planning difficult or reduce the possibility of support to any of the specific identified Focus Areas?
- Are there specific common priorities (which could result either in competition or in a more effective policy) between domestic, agricultural, and industrial water use applied by the government?
- Is there a Focus Area particularly underfunded or less regarded compared to the others?
An adequate knowledge base is crucial to reasoned planning and decision making on water resources development and management.
- Is technical information readily and sufficiently available on the quality and quantity of water sources, including surface water, soil moisture, hydrological data, meteorology, land cover and land use and aquifers? If not, will the degree of the lack of information constrain effective planning?
- Are predictions of future supply and demand being made on the basis of realistic and sound scientific and technically informed assumptions, and do they take into account all uses (consumptive and non-consumptive) of water?
- Isthe data concerning access to water and sanitation in rural and urban areas known to decision-makers?
- Is there adequate information on water quality and health issues, particularly concerning pollution, risks and vulnerability of water resources?
- Is information available on the agricultural use of water and the consumers?
- What is the potential for improving food productivity or security through improved irrigation, land drainage or flood control practices?
- Is the strategic impact of ‘virtual water’ (see Part 3) understood and taken into account in assessing the need for irrigated agricultural production or the selection of types of crops for either food or economic activity?
Checklist for Step 2: Capacity to adopt and manage a programme
A water resources sector programme can only be effectively implemented if the sector governance is adequate and if there is the required capacity existing within the sector, especially for the government, in order to handle the institutional, technical and financial aspects.
- Are the required policies, laws and regulations in place in order to support an effective sector development?
- Does the national government have the capacity to formulate and implement a sector policy and sector budget with a medium term perspective (and eventually a long term perspective)?
- Does the national leadership have the capacities to realistically implement the proposed sector programme?
- Is there a need to strengthen the key sector organisations (e.g. the government, implementing agencies, main service providers, etc.)?
- Is there a need to strengthen capacity of sector stakeholders (e.g. private sector, NGOs, local authorities)?
- What is the past record concerning sector programmes in water resources? Lessons learnt? Sector evolutions and trends?
- Have recent evaluations/capacity assessments of sector programmes and projects been initiated by the national government (in accordance with Paris Declaration principles) but with the participation of the key sector stakeholders and beneficiaries? Are results of these evaluations of recent programmes and projects being considered for future programming?
- Are customary rights, land ownership and transboundary disputes or other legal issues a constraint to effective implementation of water-related activities?
- Are the national institutional structures and capacities adequate for effective management and coordination of the proposed national sector framework and do the key organisations have clear, legally defined mandates?
- Who are the key agencies at the higher tiers of authority and are they capable of managing water resources in a holistic and coordinated way?
- Is institutional reform required, and if so, is the government aware, supportive and capable of reform?
Concerning sector funding in particular, there are a number of mechanisms for the provision of development partner support (including grants and loans). If and when this external assistance is envisaged, it is important to identify the most suitable funding mechanism during the sector programming phase and to ensure adequate local funding is available.
- How different types of water-related activities are presently financed, and to what extend is cost recovery considered?
- Would the country be able and willing to support local recurring costs and make the necessary budgetary allocations for proposed water resources activities?
- Does the country have the capacity to handle large conventional infrastructure projects or would smaller-scale intervention be more appropriate?
- Which mix of development partners’ funding mechanisms is most appropriate for interventions in water resources?
- Is the type of intervention proposed within the administrative, financial, and managerial capacity of the country?
- Is the funding mechanism (s) chosen financially and economically sustainable at macro-economic level?
Based on the above assessment of capacity decide whether:
- National policies and capacities are adequate to support the proposed water resources development and management, or
- National policies are adequate in general but there are specific weaknesses that would have to be addressed as part of any sector programme, in other words improving national or sector governance
- Country (sector) capacity is weak and specific actions are needed to determine ways to reform policies and strengthen capacity, is a priority
- Current sector funding mechanisms and strategies are adequate or whether specific actions are needed to improve them and their impact on the sector programme.
- Large-scale or smaller scale infrastructure interventions (or an appropriate mix) are most appropriate.
Checklist for Step 3: Assessing the needs of the water sector
Some countries may be fully aware of water resources issues and make appropriate plans whilst others are unaware or take a shorter-term view of needs and responses
- Is the country, or specific region, presently facing water scarcity or stress or likely to do so in the near future?
- Does the country require support in order to manage its water resources adequately?
- If no water policy exists, or is inadequate, can assistance be provided to develop one?
- If the water policy exists and it is not implemented, can the reasons be identified with internal capacities and/or external evaluation and analysis? Reasons can be varied including, ownership, planning, institutional set-up, funding, capacities, security etc.
- Do current government policies demonstrate an awareness of water resources issues and the possibility of competition, conflicts or overlaps between in-sector and other sector users?
- To what extent are people’s actual and perceived needs known and understood? Is existing water resources management clearly taking into account the social well-being of the population at the national level or in specific regions within it?
- Does the government recognise the need for an integrated/over-arching water resources policy that ensures that the water resource needs of different sectors are addressed?
- Is present legislation adequate to manage water resources effectively and, if not, can development partners provide cooperation to rectify this?
Support to programmes/ projects should be demand-driven, fully lead by the country and developed with stakeholders and the target groups.
- What is the priority given to water resources in national development policy, including issues in which water resources are critical such as survival, health, food production, well-being, natural resources conservation and ecosystem services provision?
- Is there adequate political support for policy implementation to be feasible and sustainable?
- Is there adequate conformity between the local-level problems and needs being tackled by local and community-based organisations and Government policy at national level?
- Are the local level actors (local authorities, communities, etc.) fully aware of government policies and capable to implement them?
- What choices has the government made in the past to address important issues (local, national or transboundary) related to water resources or where water has played a significant role?
- Are there indications that water issues are of concern to the general population (through NGOs, media reports, pressure groups etc.)?Is the national government responding to the people’s concern and, if so, how?
- Are associated issues, such as land use and environmental pollution prominent within general awareness and is this reflected in national policies and strategies?
- Is the government committed to resolving constraints between water and other associated issues, such as energy, navigation, transport and tourism?
In formulating any programme or action plan for water resources, care is needed to avoid contradictions between water-related sector policies and limit unnecessary competition for water resources such as those for agriculture, energy, health, education, transport, and environmental policies
- What is the national current level of commitment, both in policy and practice, to maintaining biodiversity, protecting the aquatic ecology, preserving ecosystem services and in general addressing human well-being?
- Is the national government already committed to water resources development and management that incorporates an integrated approach with other sector users?
- To what extent are the non-consumptive aspects of water resources, such as in-stream use, hydropower, flood control, recreation, and transport/navigation taken into account in water policies and proposed development plans?
- Have proposed project sector programmes or plans been developed in consultation with the various sector and sub-sector ministries and their related agencies?
- Is the proposed sector development program taking into account the other relevant sectors’ development programmes; including primarily agriculture, energy, health, education, transport, and environmental policies?
Policies established by the government should be developed in consultation with the various stakeholders to ensure that competing or conflicting interests are reconciled as far as possible and that the policy is acceptable to all interests
- Have proposed project sector programmes or plans been developed in consultation with the various sector stakeholders and with the end users in particular?
- Are there indications that the government policy and actions on water benefit the poor and disadvantaged rural or urban-poor populations, and that they are included as actors in the development process?
- To what extent is there conflict or competition between users (both consumptive and non-consumptive) and between the use and conservation of the water resource? Is this acknowledged within policy, strategy and general public awareness?
- Are transboundary issues significantly present in the water resources management? Is the government party to treaties or agreements with neighbouring countries or within their region overall?
- Are there conflicts over managing water resources between neighbouring administrative regions within the same country?
Based on the above assessment of needs, decide whether:
- Water resources are a critical issue, or whether the country is confident that it can adequately manage its water resources,
- There is a need for support to water resources in the country or region, or
- There is inadequate information available to make a decision; in this case consider whether policy support and water resource assessment and planning should be given a high priority in the country or regional programme for development assistance
Possible reponses to Assessement of Steps 1 to 4
As each country is unique, any categorisation cannot be prescriptive. However, as a guide, the responses to steps 1 to 4 can help identifying the priorities for national and/or external development support. The following category examples set out a general basis for selecting different sector programme responses based on the impression gained from the issues raised in steps 1 to 4. Three categories can be determined:
Category A:
In this category, typical of “fragile states”, a country or region is likely to have weak institutions, with minimal or no evidence of good governance in general; specifically, it will be either unaware of, or have limited commitment to, sustainable management of water resources. The country probably has little capacity to manage large programmes even though the need is evidently great. In such cases, the focus could be on:
- Improving or setting up a sector policy and legislation, strategy formulation, and assistance to identify priority programmes;
- The provision of basic services (urban and rural), capacity building and improvement of the institutional set-up.
However, as it is evident, addressing problems in fragile countries, needs considerable care and attention. It is likely that such countries are more in need of external funding and infrastructure support rather than immediate policy development.
Support for infrastructure will need to be designed to help the poorest in such a way that minimum external assistance is needed once work is completed, fostering as much as possible economically sustainable environment of investments. In this context community ownership may be critical and key partners need to be identified to help reduce the risk of unsustainable services. Adapted local technology or the careful selection of appropriate technology will be needed as one of the main issues for the sustainability of the interventions.
The role of the civil society, NGOs or community-based organisations and innovative funding instruments such as sector budget support, pool financing and otherscan have an important role in deciding responses. Support should be available for awareness-raising and knowledge generation, such as hydrological assessments, that will be useful for more extensive interventions and permit better planning and management of water resources.
Focus Area 1 (WR) and 6 (SP) will be important but appropriate support within Focus Area 2 (BS), Focus Area 3 (MS), Focus Area 4 (AM) and Focus Area 5 (E) should also be considered.
Category B:
In this category there is likely to be clear evidence of a commitment to good governance in general and an awareness of, and desire for, equitable and sustainable water resources sector development and management (including perhaps some sector policy strategies in preparation). This should include an acceptance of the importance of stakeholder involvement and evidence of programmes to improve human resources capacity that should make the development partners interventions possible. Sector development could focus on:
- improving policy, strategy, legal and regulatory frameworks to improve water resources sector management and build on any existing work;
- support the country government for the definition of a sector programme through the principles of the sector wide approach (as defined in chapter 11).
- identifying reasons why, if policy and strategy are already defined and have some political support, but are not correctly implemented and a disconnection is apparent between the national and the local level;
- assistance to increase the participation of stakeholders and, in particular, facilitating the increased involvement of the private sector, civil society and the education sector including University and research;
- encouraging capacity building and institutional improvements at all levels;
- giving increased importance to equitable and sustainable cost recovery via service charges – with progressive steps towards equitable tariffs – to allow reductions in state subsidies;
- support for knowledge generation – strengthening data and information systems.
All focus areas should be considered for support.
Category C:
In category C the country is likely to be politically stable with clear evidence of progress towards instituting a systematic approach to water resources development and management, including legal and regulatory frameworks, capacity building and private sector development. In such countries there is likely to be an awareness of, and commitment to, the modern concepts of water resources management. Support could be required for:
- devolution of responsibility to lower administrative tiers or to the private sector, including capacity building for local government, the private sector, and community organisations in water resources development and management; assumption by central government of a planning, legal, regulatory, and facilitating role including re-allocation of water resources between sectors; and the establishment of a framework for increased public private partnerships;
- measures to introduce pollution control, wastewater treatment and reuse, and charges to industry for pollution of water courses or aquifers;
- the adoption of demand management measurres to ensure reliable supplies, including rehabilitation of existing structures or other measures which minimise the need for new infrastructure;
- the improvement of integrated management through increasing knowledge about cross–sector linkages leading to a multi-sector approach to water resources development and management, including positive participation in managing transboundary waters;
In summary, all Focus Areas should be considered for support to varying degrees.
Identification
For all phases of the project cycle other than programming, checklists have been prepared in the same format, to allow the user of the Water Project Toolkit to examine key issues likely to arise in the preparation and implementation of projects, alongside possible responses. Issues and responses are grouped according to a set of problem statements within the framework of principles established in the strategic approach, starting with Institutional and Management principles, and proceeding through all categories of principles.
In the Identification and Formulation phases, each programming context is handled separately since issues and responses differ between Focus Areas. In other phases, issues and responses are generic, and the same set of checklists applies in every Focus Area.
Institutional and Management Principles
The lack of an integrated policy environment at the national level can lead to inefficient allocation of water resources and poor investment decisions. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Fragmented planning functions and agency responsibilities lead to sector-based project-by- project development and inter-sector conflict. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Transboundary water resource issues are critical to water resource availability in many countries. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Neglect of legal aspects during strategy formulation can lead to an untenable legal framework for sound resource management. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Disregard for stakeholder participation and too much emphasis on top-down planning tend to produce poor results. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Social Principles
National and regional social development goals should be integrated with water resources policies if key objectives are to be achieved. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Disregard for the social context of water use and a lack of consultation with stakeholders< can result in inappropriate interventions. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Economic and financial principles
A sense of the economic value of water is necessary to balance scarce resources with increasing demand, reduce wastage and encourage conservation. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Policies for allocation of water resources within and among sectors should promote economic efficiency and encourage higher-value uses. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Water is a scarce resource and demand management< measures offer a means to augment existing supplies and conserve resources. Hence examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Environmental principles
Environmentally sound water resource development and management relies on an integrated policy framework. Therefore examine
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Water is an essential natural resource and should be planned and managed within the context of an overall natural resource management strategy. Therefore examine
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
A lack of baseline data can make it difficult to assess the potential environmental impact of interventions and may lead to unplanned degradation. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Information, Education and Communication Principles
Water resource assessment and planning is an inter-disciplinary process that relies on a broad knowledge base as a pre-condition for effective planning. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Communication between government agencies and other stakeholders< is necessary if water-related development interventions are to be relevant. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Without an understanding of water resource management issues, important stakeholders are unable to contribute effectively to planning. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Technological principles
Assessment of surface and groundwater resources, their allocation and use is a precondition for planning water resource management. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Effective planning relies on a wide range of tools to enhance the knowledge base and understand linkages between physical and non-physical processes. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Hydrological and hydro-geological information form the basis of water resource assessments. High quality data is needed for reliable assessments. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Formulation
Institutional and Management Principles
Water Resources Management is a continuous process which needs to adapt to external factors, such as changes in policy, economic climate and development objectives. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Effective inter-sector and inter-agency planning is essential for an integrated approach. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Changes in transboundary water management can have a major impact on proposed projects. Therefore consider:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Water-related planning can become ineffective if the outputs and recommendations are not ratified and acted upon by the appropriate bodies. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Incorporating stakeholders’ needs and views into WATER RESOURCES helps to foster a sense of ownership. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Requirements for capacity-building and training must be addressed during project formulation. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Management information systems providing indicators of performance are essential for efficient project implementation and monitoring. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Social Principles
Water resource planning should be integrated with social development goals. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Developing a community-based approach is likely to increase ownership and commitment to sustainability. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Economical and Financial principles
Economic analysis of the project should reflect the economic value of water in all its competing uses. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Environmental Principles
Environmentally sound solutions rely on managing and mitigating adverse impacts within an overall resource management strategy. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Interventions to bring benefits to one user group or sector can have adverse impacts on water availability for user groups downstream. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Environmental monitoring is necessary to ensure mitigation measures are effective and to identify unforeseen impacts. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Information, Education and Communication Principles
Effective WATER RESOURCES relies on good data collection and analysis on all aspects of water-related information including socio-cultural, economic, and environmental. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Education and awareness-raising are key methods of enabling stakeholders< to contribute effectively to the planning process. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Technological Principles
Hydrological and hydro-geological data should be selected to contribute to efficiency, ease of O & M, and capital and operating costs. Therefore examine
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Implementation
Implementation Monitoring
Effective control of costs, contracts, and budget disbursement are essential to ensure project compliance with implementation targets. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Changes in policy objectives and economic factors external to the project may necessitate revision to reflect their influence on project results/outcomes. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
It is important that conditions built into the financial agreement for the project are fulfilled. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Monitoring and supervision of all aspects of the project must be effective, and allow planned revision of targets and other remedial actions to be made in good time. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Institutional and Management Principles
Management information systems may need revision if the nature or scopes of the project are revised during implementation. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Changes in the structure of implementing agencies may weaken (or improve) their capability to implement the project or programme. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Measures to improve inter-sector and sector coordination planning may meet with resistance, thereby hindering implementation. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Sustainability of services requires that users and operators understand and fulfil their responsibilities for O&M. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
There is a danger that training and capacity-building measures, defined at formulation, are cut back during implementation or are ineffectual. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Social Principles
The financing proposal may identify effective women’s participation and other social issues as central to the project’s success. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Intervention may disrupt traditional user rights to land and water resources and lead to increased inequalities between stakeholders. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Where a community-based approach is used the community may want to modify the scope of the project during implementation. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Economic and Financial Principles
Changes in economic factors occurring between financing and implementation may require revision of the project. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Identify the factors that may reduce economic benefit. Discuss these with relevant parties and modify project activities as required.
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Coordination of fund contributions is essential to avoid wastage of resource and project delay. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Environmental Principles
Environmental damage may result because adverse impacts were previously unrecognised or inadequate resources provided for mitigating measures. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Information, Education and Communication Principles
Information obtained from project monitoring should be used to shape and direct the implementation process. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Provision of information and clarity of procedure are necessary for conflict resolution between different stakeholder interests. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Technological Principles
Where construction quality is poor or equipment is badly specified, systems may fail prematurely and maintenance costs will be high. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Technology that was judged appropriate at the design stage may prove in-appropriate as implementation proceeds. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Technological and construction aspects usually represent the major capital cost items. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Hydro-meteorological information forms the basis of water / hydropower assessments. High quality data is needed for reliable implementation. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Evaluation
For all phases of the project cycle other than programming, checklists have been prepared in the same format, to allow the user of the Water Project Toolkit examine key issues likely to arise in the preparation and implementation of projects, alongside possible responses. Issues and responses are grouped according to the set of problems statements within the framework of principles established in the strategic approach, starting with Institutional and Management principles and proceeding through all categories and principles.
In the identification and formulation phases, each programming context is handled separately since issues and responses differ between Focus Areas. In other phases, issues and responses are generic, and the same set of checklists applies in every Focus Area.
Monitoring refers to the systematic review of the physical progress and quality of the process, the financial progress including budget and expenditures, the preliminary responses by the target groups to the project activity and the reasons for unexpected/adverse response of target groups and possible remedial actions to be taken. In summary monitoring focuses on an “ongoing analysis of project progress towards achieving planned results with the purpose of improving management decision making” (EC, 2004:46).
Evaluation relates to the “assessment of the efficiency, effectiveness, impact, relevance and sustainability of aid policies and actions” (EC, 2004:46). Normally it is carried out periodically and at project completion / ex-post, the users are rather planners and policy makers than project managers. Evaluation allows learning broader lessons applicable to other projects; it provides accountability and is useful for giving inputs to policy review.
Audit refers to the opportunity to uncover the issues, concerns and challenges encountered in the execution of a project/programme. The purpose of an audit of external aid projects is to assess the legality and regularity of project expenditure and income, to check if projects funds have been used efficiently and economically and also if they have been used effectively.
The following principles shall be followed to the greatest possible extent:
- Design of monitoring and/or review system must always keep in mind who needs what kind of information based on: hierarchy in the management system and project’s objective, institutional and management structure needs and decision making responsibilities.
- Data collection should be sufficient to have a tangible impact on the quality of decision making.
- Triangulation principles shall be applied whenever possible i.e. data shall originate from more than one source and collected through more than one method.
- A benchmark shall be provided against which progress can be assessed.
Operational monitoring
Operational monitoring permits effective post-project evaluation, provides lessons to improve future project quality and helps identify new projects. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Institutional and Management Principles
Sustainable hand-over of infrastructure and equipment depends on the training of users and organisations who are allocated responsibility for O&M and management of services. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Projects must have sufficient flexibility in their design, implementation schedule and subsequent operation to permit adjustments to be made. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Provision should be made for effective inter-agency and inter-sector planning. If this was weak, lessons should be learnt for the future. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
Did the implementing agencies fulfil their responsibilities? |
|
The project should have been formulated and implemented in a way that ensured effective stakeholders involvement and participation. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Social Principles
Ownership by stakeholders and user groups of services provided by the project is essential in ensuring sustainability. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Evaluation must determine to what extent intended social development has been achieved and what unexpected impacts may have occurred. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Economic and Financial Principles
The economic and financial sustainability of the project depends on the avoidance of inappropriate subsidies and effective cost recovery. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Projects must demonstrate economic benefit and financial accountability if they are to be sustained over the long term. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Environmental Principles
Environmental damage may result because insufficient time and money is invested in collection and analysis of data during and after. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Information, Education and Communication Principles
Evaluation should determine whether the knowledge base was adequate and whether recommendations for improved data collection have been implemented. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Public education, awareness raising and free availability of information to all stakeholders facilitate the sustainability of water projects. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Technological Principles
In evaluating the appropriateness of technology and its influence on the wider results of the project, the accuracy of underlying data is critical. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Technological solutions must be acceptable to the target users and compatible with the environment. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Sustainability of infrastructure and equipment can only be achieved if the technical and financial requirements for maintenance are met. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Basic Services (BS)
which covers service provision in rural areas and marginal or poor urban areas, usually consisting of low-technology, community-managed systems
Programming
The purpose of the programming phase is to identify the main objectives and sector priorities for co-operation, and thus to provide a relevant and feasible programming framework within which programmes and projects can be identified and prepared. Programming analyses the situation at national and sector level, and identifies problems, constraints and opportunities which cooperation could address. As water is fundamental to social and economic development, this chapter sets out to decide on priority Focus Areas for support in order to achieve an integrated approach to water resources management. The programming phase provides an opportunity to review socio-economic indicators, national and donor priorities, and all national, regional and local factors relating to water..
During this phase, the main objectives and sector priorities will be identified and thus a feasible programming framework will be provided within which potential water-related programmes and projects can be identified, indicating which Focus Area(s) are most in need of support.
At the programming phase, a truly integrated approach which balances needs and possibilities within an overall water resources management sector framework is practicable and easy to apply. However, an integrated approach requires a wide range of information collection and analysis. A standard format for a country study is given in Part III, Chapter 15, which can be used together with the checklists given below.
The essential questions for the programming phase are:
-
Is development co-operation needed for water resources?
-
In which Focus Area(s) and by what kinds of support would development co-operation be most beneficial?
Checklists have been developed to correspond to the following four steps in the programming process.
Step 1: Alignment to national plans;
Step 2: Determining the capacity of recipients to take on and manage programmes;
Step 3: Assessing the need for water resources support;
Step 4: Identifying the priority Focus Areas for support.
Checklist for Step 1: Assessing needs
Water resources development and management must be assessed with regard to alignment with the national sector framework of the country.
- Are specific objectives and expected results, including any conditionalities and main performance and outcome indicators aligned to the national sector framework?
- Do national sector framework plans include measures to ensure the sustainable use of water resources? (e.g. monitoring strategies)
- Are national sector framework plans implying an effective level of participation by sector stakeholders and beneficiaries?
- Are national sector framework plans based on sound scientific and technical analyses?
- Is there a Sector programme (for instance as part of a sector wide approach) in place for the equitable development of the water sector?
- Are environmental aspects (including in-stream use) of water treated prominently in programming and addressed in policies related to other sector activities?
- Are effects of climate change and climate change resilience duly considered?
- Are crosscutting issues, especially gender equality and HIV/AIDS, taken into consideration?
- Is water as a key element of economic activities becoming a constraining resource?
- Are key stakeholders identified and their needs, interests and capacities assessed?
- What options are available for meeting current and future water needs, and have alternatives to supply augmentation or improved efficiency been considered?
- Are complementary measures needed in other sectors to achieve a more integrated approach to water resources management?
- Are the policies in other sectors compatible with a sustainable water resources sector development and management, as set out in the Guiding Principles?
- Is or can the national sector framework be aligned and harmonized with other potential sector activities (including donors’ and other development partners) and vice-versa?
Ensure that programmes do not conflict with other national / sector activity.
- Have the main objectives and sector priorities for sector development been identified?
- Have the capacity constraints and lessons learned from previous experience been taken into account?
- Is there a clear link between budget and policy? Are budget and policy priorities complementary and realistic?
- Are coordination mechanisms of key government actors and relevant national and local stakeholders in place? Are they active? Are they consistent with the structure and responsibilities of the national government?
- Is there an established mechanism ensuring stakeholders and beneficiaries participation?
- What degree of support and/or strategies are stakeholders and development partners providing in water resources management or water-related activities? Is water considered to be a high priority or taken for granted??
- What assistance is presently being provided by development partners in water resources development? Does it include guidance for future programming?
- Do support/planned activities by development partners in other sectors complement or conflict with existing or planned water resources management activities?
Based on the above assessment of compatibility to sector alignment decide whether:
- Activities in other sectors or by other development partners can be effective and complementary as support to the water resources sector e.g. geographical scope, project duration, most suitable partners;
- There is overlap or incompatibility with activities in other sectors or development partners; this should be resolved prior to planning or implementing any further support to water resources sector;
- If faced with multiple sector donors promoting harmonization of cooperation with development partners (e.g. to reduce transactions costs); the sector, led by the government, needs to ensure effective coordination and dialogue mechanisms
- Activities already underway in other sectors or by other actors suggest that some specific support activities to the sector / water resources management may be not required under current circumstances.
- Other potential sources of funding can be considered in the framework of a sector programme;
- Types of external assistance can be considered mainly (and optimally) as e.g. macroeconomic support, technical assistance, training, investments, and supply of equipment
Checklist for Step 2: Capacity to take on and manage programme
A water resources sector programme can only be effectively implemented if the sector governance is adequate and if there is the required capacity existing within the sector, especially for the government, in order to handle the institutional, technical and financial aspects.
- Are the required policies, laws and regulations in place in order to support an effective sector development?
- Does the national government have the capacity to formulate and implement a sector policy and sector budget with a medium term perspective (and eventually a long term perspective)?
- Does the national leadership have the capacities to realistically implement the proposed sector programme?
- Is there a need to strengthen the key sector organisations (e.g. the government, implementing agencies, main service providers, etc.)?
- Is there a need to strengthen capacity of sector stakeholders (e.g. private sector, NGOs, local authorities)?
- What is the past record concerning sector programmes in water resources? Lessons learnt? Sector evolutions and trends?
- Have recent evaluations/capacity assessments of sector programmes and projects been initiated by the national government (in accordance with Paris Declaration principles) but with the participation of the key sector stakeholders and beneficiaries? Are results of these evaluations of recent programmes and projects being considered for future programming?
- Are customary rights, land ownership and transboundary disputes or other legal issues a constraint to effective implementation of water-related activities?
- Are the national institutional structures and capacities adequate for effective management and coordination of the proposed national sector framework and do the key organisations have clear, legally defined mandates?
- Who are the key agencies at the higher tiers of authority and are they capable of managing water resources in a holistic and coordinated way?
- Is institutional reform required, and if so, is the government aware, supportive and capable of reform?
Concerning sector funding in particular, there are a number of mechanisms for the provision of development partner support (including grants and loans). If and when this external assistance is envisaged, it is important to identify the most suitable funding mechanism during the sector programming phase and to ensure adequate local funding is available.
- How different types of water-related activities are presently financed, and to what extend is cost recovery considered?
- Would the country be able and willing to support local recurring costs and make the necessary budgetary allocations for proposed water resources activities?
- Does the country have the capacity to handle large conventional infrastructure projects or would smaller-scale intervention be more appropriate?
- Which mix of development partners’ funding mechanisms is most appropriate for interventions in water resources?
- Is the type of intervention proposed within the administrative, financial, and managerial capacity of the country?
- Is the funding mechanism (s) chosen financially and economically sustainable at macro-economic level?
Based on the above assessment of capacity decide whether:
- National policies and capacities are adequate to support the proposed water resources development and management, or
- National policies are adequate in general but there are specific weaknesses that would have to be addressed as part of any sector programme, in other words improving national or sector governance
- Country (sector) capacity is weak and specific actions are needed to determine ways to reform policies and strengthen capacity, is a priority
- Current sector funding mechanisms and strategies are adequate or whether specific actions are needed to improve them and their impact on the sector programme.
- Large-scale or smaller scale infrastructure interventions (or an appropriate mix) are most appropriate.
Checklist for Step 3: Compatibility and complementarity
Some countries may be fully aware of water resources issues and make appropriate plans whilst others are unaware or take a shorter-term view of needs and responses
- Is the country, or specific region, presently facing water scarcity or stress or likely to do so in the near future?
- Does the country require support in order to manage its water resources adequately?
- If no water policy exists, or is inadequate, can assistance be provided to develop one?
- If the water policy exists and it is not implemented, can the reasons be identified with internal capacities and/or external evaluation and analysis? Reasons can be varied including, ownership, planning, institutional set-up, funding, capacities, security etc.
- Do current government policies demonstrate an awareness of water resources issues and the possibility of competition, conflicts or overlaps between in-sector and other sector users?
- To what extent are people’s actual and perceived needs known and understood? Is existing water resources management clearly taking into account the social well-being of the population at the national level or in specific regions within it?
- Does the government recognise the need for an integrated/over-arching water resources policy that ensures that the water resource needs of different sectors are addressed?
- Is present legislation adequate to manage water resources effectively and, if not, can development partners provide cooperation to rectify this?
Support to programmes/ projects should be demand-driven, fully lead by the country and developed with stakeholders and the target groups.
- What is the priority given to water resources in national development policy, including issues in which water resources are critical such as survival, health, food production, well-being, natural resources conservation and ecosystem services provision?
- Is there adequate political support for policy implementation to be feasible and sustainable?
- Is there adequate conformity between the local-level problems and needs being tackled by local and community-based organisations and Government policy at national level?
- Are the local level actors (local authorities, communities, etc.) fully aware of government policies and capable to implement them?
- What choices has the government made in the past to address important issues (local, national or transboundary) related to water resources or where water has played a significant role?
- Are there indications that water issues are of concern to the general population (through NGOs, media reports, pressure groups etc.)?Is the national government responding to the people’s concern and, if so, how?
- Are associated issues, such as land use and environmental pollution prominent within general awareness and is this reflected in national policies and strategies?
- Is the government committed to resolving constraints between water and other associated issues, such as energy, navigation, transport and tourism?
In formulating any programme or action plan for water resources, care is needed to avoid contradictions between water-related sector policies and limit unnecessary competition for water resources such as those for agriculture, energy, health, education, transport, and environmental policies
- What is the national current level of commitment, both in policy and practice, to maintaining biodiversity, protecting the aquatic ecology, preserving ecosystem services and in general addressing human well-being?
- Is the national government already committed to water resources development and management that incorporates an integrated approach with other sector users?
- To what extent are the non-consumptive aspects of water resources, such as in-stream use, hydropower, flood control, recreation, and transport/navigation taken into account in water policies and proposed development plans?
- Have proposed project sector programmes or plans been developed in consultation with the various sector and sub-sector ministries and their related agencies?
- Is the proposed sector development program taking into account the other relevant sectors’ development programmes; including primarily agriculture, energy, health, education, transport, and environmental policies?
Policies established by the government should be developed in consultation with the various stakeholders to ensure that competing or conflicting interests are reconciled as far as possible and that the policy is acceptable to all interests
- Have proposed project sector programmes or plans been developed in consultation with the various sector stakeholders and with the end users in particular?
- Are there indications that the government policy and actions on water benefit the poor and disadvantaged rural or urban-poor populations, and that they are included as actors in the development process?
- To what extent is there conflict or competition between users (both consumptive and non-consumptive) and between the use and conservation of the water resource? Is this acknowledged within policy, strategy and general public awareness?
- Are transboundary issues significantly present in the water resources management? Is the government party to treaties or agreements with neighbouring countries or within their region overall?
- Are there conflicts over managing water resources between neighbouring administrative regions within the same country?
Based on the above assessment of needs, decide whether:
- Water resources are a critical issue, or whether the country is confident that it can adequately manage its water resources,
- There is a need for support to water resources in the country or region, or
- There is inadequate information available to make a decision; in this case consider whether policy support and water resource assessment and planning should be given a high priority in the country or regional programme for development assistance
Checklist for the Step 4: Identifying priority Focus Areas
It is important to identify which Focus Area(s) is/are most in need of support. This priority setting should fit within an overall sector programme based on responses to the earlier key issues.
- Is there a particular area of water use or management critical to social and economic well-being?
- How are the different Focus Areas treated within existing national and regional plans?
- Do policy conflicts make holistic planning difficult or reduce the possibility of support to any of the specific identified Focus Areas?
- Are there specific common priorities (which could result either in competition or in a more effective policy) between domestic, agricultural, and industrial water use applied by the government?
- Is there a Focus Area particularly underfunded or less regarded compared to the others?
An adequate knowledge base is crucial to reasoned planning and decision making on water resources development and management.
- Is technical information readily and sufficiently available on the quality and quantity of water sources, including surface water, soil moisture, hydrological data, meteorology, land cover and land use and aquifers? If not, will the degree of the lack of information constrain effective planning?
- Are predictions of future supply and demand being made on the basis of realistic and sound scientific and technically informed assumptions, and do they take into account all uses (consumptive and non-consumptive) of water?
- Isthe data concerning access to water and sanitation in rural and urban areas known to decision-makers?
- Is there adequate information on water quality and health issues, particularly concerning pollution, risks and vulnerability of water resources?
- Is information available on the agricultural use of water and the consumers?
- What is the potential for improving food productivity or security through improved irrigation, land drainage or flood control practices?
- Is the strategic impact of ‘virtual water’ (see Part 3) understood and taken into account in assessing the need for irrigated agricultural production or the selection of types of crops for either food or economic activity?
Possible reponses to Assessement of Steps 1 to 4
As each country is unique, any categorisation cannot be prescriptive. However, as a guide, the responses to steps 1 to 4 can help identifying the priorities for national and/or external development support. The following category examples set out a general basis for selecting different sector programme responses based on the impression gained from the issues raised in steps 1 to 4. Three categories can be determined:
Category A:
In this category, typical of “fragile states”, a country or region is likely to have weak institutions, with minimal or no evidence of good governance in general; specifically, it will be either unaware of, or have limited commitment to, sustainable management of water resources. The country probably has little capacity to manage large programmes even though the need is evidently great. In such cases, the focus could be on:
- Improving or setting up a sector policy and legislation, strategy formulation, and assistance to identify priority programmes;
- The provision of basic services (urban and rural), capacity building< and improvement of the institutional set-up.
However, as it is evident, addressing problems in fragile countries, needs considerable care and attention. It is likely that such countries are more in need of external funding and infrastructure support rather than immediate policy development.
Support for infrastructure will need to be designed to help the poorest in such a way that minimum external assistance is needed once work is completed, fostering as much as possible economically sustainable environment of investments. In this context community ownership may be critical and key partners need to be identified to help reduce the risk of unsustainable services. Adapted local technology or the careful selection of appropriate technology< will be needed as one of the main issues for the sustainability of the interventions.
The role of the civil society, NGOs or community-based organisations and innovative funding instruments such as sector budget support, pool financing and otherscan have an important role in deciding responses. Support should be available for awareness-raising and knowledge generation, such as hydrological assessments, that will be useful for more extensive interventions and permit better planning and management of water resources.
Focus Area 1 (WR) and 6 (SP) will be important but appropriate support within Focus Area 2 (BS), Focus Area 3 (MS), Focus Area 4 (AM) and Focus Area 5 (E) should also be considered.
Category B:
In this category there is likely to be clear evidence of a commitment to good governance in general and an awareness of, and desire for, equitable and sustainable water resources sector development and management (including perhaps some sector policy strategies in preparation). This should include an acceptance of the importance of stakeholder involvement and evidence of programmes to improve human resources capacity that should make the development partners interventions possible. Sector development could focus on:
- improving policy, strategy, legal and regulatory frameworks to improve water resources sector management and build on any existing work;
- support the country government for the definition of a sector programme through the principles of the sector wide approach (as defined in chapter 11).
- identifying reasons why, if policy and strategy are already defined and have some political support, but are not correctly implemented and a disconnection is apparent between the national and the local level;
- assistance to increase the participation< of stakeholders< and, in particular, facilitating the increased involvement of the private sector, civil society and the education sector including University and research;
- encouraging capacity building and institutional improvements at all levels;
- giving increased importance to equitable and sustainable cost recovery via service charges – with progressive steps towards equitable tariffs< – to allow reductions in state subsidies;
- support for knowledge generation – strengthening data and information systems.
All focus areas should be considered for support.
Category C:
In category C the country is likely to be politically stable with clear evidence of progress towards instituting a systematic approach to water resources development and management, including legal and regulatory frameworks, capacity building and private sector development. In such countries there is likely to be an awareness of, and commitment to, the modern concepts of water resources management. Support could be required for:
- devolution of responsibility to lower administrative tiers or to the private sector, including capacity building for local government, the private sector, and community organisations in water resources development and management; assumption by central government of a planning, legal, regulatory, and facilitating role including re-allocation of water resources between sectors; and the establishment of a framework for increased public private partnerships;
- measures to introduce pollution control, wastewater treatment and reuse, and charges to industry for pollution of water courses or aquifers;
- the adoption of demand management< measures to ensure reliable supplies, including rehabilitation of existing structures or other measures which minimise the need for new infrastructure;
- the improvement of integrated management through increasing knowledge about cross–sector linkages leading to a multi-sector approach to water resources development and management, including positive participation in managing transboundary waters<;
- the provision of increasingly sophisticated knowledge and data generation and computerised management information systems, with a sustainable strategy on scientific and technical knowledge management.
In summary, all Focus Areas should be considered for support to varying degrees.
Identification
Institutional and Management Principles
Basic service activities should be consistent with an integrated national water policy, and WHO< standards. Therefore examine
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Effective inter-agency and inter-sector planning is essential. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Maximum stakeholder participation is essential for an effective project, from the earliest possible stage. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
A sound legal basis is required for effective delivery of Basic Services (BS), therefore:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
BS projects have traditionally focused on design and construction and tended to neglect O&M (operation and maintenance)and management. New policies may seek to transfer responsibility for O&M to the private sector or user groups. If so:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Capacity building for government institutions and user groups is required to support new initiatives. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Management information systems in which both users and service providers have confidence are essential for improved operational efficiency. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Social Principles
BS initiatives should be integrated with social development goals and policies. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
BS projects can bring great health and quality of life benefits to communities, but without taking into account existing user norms, they can be underused or even abandoned. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
A community-based approach helps to ensure a sense of ownership of the project by the stakeholders< and user groups. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Women have a central role in BS projects, not only as primary users, but to manage water resources. Their participation at all levels of planning is needed. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Economic and Financial Principles
The economic value of water is an integral part of BS. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Charging for services is needed to generate funds for future investment and to ensure maintenance. However, the concept of water as a free resource can be difficult to overcome. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Where possible, demand management< through both market and non-market measures should be incorporated into projects. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Projects must demonstrate financial viability and accountability. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Environmental Principles
Environmental damage may result because insufficient time and money is invested in collection and analysis of baseline data. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
BS projects often bring changes in water use. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Information, Education and Communication Principles
The development of a BS knowledge base is a pre-condition for development of services. This requires effective data collection and monitoring procedures. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Without an understanding of the principles of BS schemes, stakeholder participation is weakened. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Technological Principles
Appropriate technological solutions should be selected according to criteria that include efficiency, ease of operation, capital and operating costs, and the management capacity of the users. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Formulation
Institutional and Management Principles
Changes in policy objectives and economic factors since the identification phase, and recent lessons from previous projects, should be taken into account. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Effective inter-sector and inter-agency planning should be facilitated by the project. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Effective stakeholder participation< requires that their views and needs help to shape the design of the project. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Sustainability of BASIC SERVICES requires that responsibility for a significant share of management and O&M be devolved to users, within a suitable organisational structure. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Requirements for training and capacity-building, identified in the feasibility study, must be addressed in project formulation. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Management information systems in which both users and service providers have confidence are essential for operational efficiency. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Social Principles
Development of BASIC SERVICES projects may disrupt traditional user rights to water and land. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Development of BASIC SERVICES can require significant changes in social and cultural norms and habits, especially with regard to sanitation. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Improved BASIC SERVICES schemes can also lead to increased inequalities between different social groups. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
A community-based approach is more likely to ensure ownership and sustainability of services by the users. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Given the centrality of water to women’s daily lives, measures are required to ensure the effective participation< of women in project planning and design. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Economic and Financial Principles
The economic value of water must be reflected in BASIC SERVICES schemes. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Charging for services is needed to generate funds for future investment and promote the idea of water as a valuable commodity. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
A balanced approach between supply augmentation and demand management< is required. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Projects must demonstrate financial viability. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Environmental Principles
Projects in BASIC SERVICES often bring changes in land and water use. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Accurate baseline data collection and informed analysis are the keys to minimising environmental damage. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
New sanitation schemes may cause disposal problems. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Information, Education and Communication Principles
An adequate knowledge base is a pre-condition for development of BASIC SERVICES programmes. This requires effective data collection and monitoring procedures. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Education and awareness raising< targeted at BASIC SERVICES agency staff and users is needed to ensure an understanding of principles and participatory approaches. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Technological Principles
Appropriate specification and design of hardware for BASIC SERVICES depends on complete and reliable information.
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
The design of hardware and specification of operating rules must minimise detrimental impacts on the environment. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Engineering solutions should take account of the material and technical resource base available to operating agencies and users. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Implementation
Implementation Monitoring
Effective control of costs, contracts, and budget disbursement are essential to ensure project compliance with implementation targets. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Changes in policy objectives and economic factors external to the project may necessitate revision to reflect their influence on project results/outcomes. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
It is important that conditions built into the financial agreement for the project are fulfilled. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Monitoring and supervision of all aspects of the project must be effective, and allow planned revision of targets and other remedial actions to be made in good time. Therefore examine:
:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Institutional and Management Principles
Management information systems may need revision if the nature or scopes of the project are revised during implementation. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Changes in the structure of implementing agencies may weaken (or improve) their capability to implement the project or programme. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Measures to improve inter-sector and sector coordination planning may meet with resistance, thereby hindering implementation. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Sustainability of services requires that users and operators understand and fulfil their responsibilities for O&M. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
There is a danger that training and capacity-building measures, defined at formulation, are cut back during implementation or are ineffectual. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Social Principles
The financing proposal may identify effective women’s participation and other social issues as central to the project’s success. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Intervention may disrupt traditional user rights to land and water resources and lead to increased inequalities between stakeholders. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Where a community-based approach is used the community may want to modify the scope of the project during implementation. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Economic and Financial Principles
Changes in economic factors occurring between financing and implementation may require revision of the project. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Identify the factors that may reduce economic benefit. Discuss these with relevant parties and modify project activities as required.
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Coordination of fund contributions is essential to avoid wastage of resource and project delay. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Environmental Principles
Environmental damage may result because adverse impacts were previously unrecognised or inadequate resources provided for mitigating measures. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Information, Education and Communication Principles
Information obtained from project monitoring should be used to shape and direct the implementation process. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
. |
Provision of information and clarity of procedure are necessary for conflict resolution between different stakeholder interests. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Technological Principles
Where construction quality is poor or equipment is badly specified, systems may fail prematurely and maintenance costs will be high. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Technology that was judged appropriate at the design stage may prove in-appropriate as implementation proceeds. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Technological and construction aspects usually represent the major capital cost items. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Hydro-meteorological information forms the basis of water / hydropower assessments. High quality data is needed for reliable implementation. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Evaluation
For all phases of the project cycle other than programming, checklists have been prepared in the same format, to allow the user of the Water Project Toolkit examine key issues likely to arise in the preparation and implementation of projects, alongside possible responses. Issues and responses are grouped according to the set of problems statements within the framework of principles established in the strategic approach, starting with Institutional and Management principles and proceeding through all categories and principles.
In the identification and formulation phases, each programming context is handled separately since issues and responses differ between Focus Areas. In other phases, issues and responses are generic, and the same set of checklists applies in every Focus Area.
Monitoring refers to the systematic review of the physical progress and quality of the process, the financial progress including budget and expenditures, the preliminary responses by the target groups to the project activity and the reasons for unexpected/adverse response of target groups and possible remedial actions to be taken. In summary monitoring focuses on an “ongoing analysis of project progress towards achieving planned results with the purpose of improving management decision making” (EC, 2004:46).
Evaluation relates to the “assessment of the efficiency, effectiveness, impact, relevance and sustainability of aid policies and actions” (EC, 2004:46). Normally it is carried out periodically and at project completion / ex-post, the users are rather planners and policy makers than project managers. Evaluation allows learning broader lessons applicable to other projects; it provides accountability and is useful for giving inputs to policy review.
Audit refers to the opportunity to uncover the issues, concerns and challenges encountered in the execution of a project/programme. The purpose of an audit of external aid projects is to assess the legality and regularity of project expenditure and income, to check if projects funds have been used efficiently and economically and also if they have been used effectively.
The following principles shall be followed to the greatest possible extent:
- Design of monitoring and/or review system must always keep in mind who needs what kind of information based on: hierarchy in the management system and project’s objective, institutional and management structure needs and decision making responsibilities.
- Data collection should be sufficient to have a tangible impact on the quality of decision making.
- Triangulation principles shall be applied whenever possible i.e. data shall originate from more than one source and collected through more than one method.
- A benchmark shall be provided against which progress can be assessed.
Operational monitoring
Operational monitoring permits effective post-project evaluation, provides lessons to improve future project quality and helps identify new projects. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Institutional and Management Principles
Sustainable hand-over of infrastructure and equipment depends on the training of users and organisations who are allocated responsibility for O&M and management of services. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Projects must have sufficient flexibility in their design, implementation schedule and subsequent operation to permit adjustments to be made. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Provision should be made for effective inter-agency and inter-sector planning. If this was weak, lessons should be learnt for the future. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
Did the implementing agencies fulfil their responsibilities? |
|
The project should have been formulated and implemented in a way that ensured effective stakeholders involvement and participation. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Social Principles
Ownership by stakeholders and user groups of services provided by the project is essential in ensuring sustainability. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Evaluation must determine to what extent intended social development has been achieved and what unexpected impacts may have occurred. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Economic and Financial Principles
The economic and financial sustainability of the project depends on the avoidance of inappropriate subsidies and effective cost recovery. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Projects must demonstrate economic benefit and financial accountability if they are to be sustained over the long term. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Environmental Principles
Environmental damage may result because insufficient time and money is invested in collection and analysis of data during and after. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Information, Education and Communication Principles
Evaluation should determine whether the knowledge base was adequate and whether recommendations for improved data collection have been implemented. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Public education, awareness raising and free availability of information to all stakeholders facilitate the sustainability of water projects. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Technological Principles
In evaluating the appropriateness of technology and its influence on the wider results of the project, the accuracy of underlying data is critical. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Technological solutions must be acceptable to the target users and compatible with the environment. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Sustainability of infrastructure and equipment can only be achieved if the technical and financial requirements for maintenance are met. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Municipal Services (MS)
which covers major urban and industrial installations and systems, including wastewater treatment and sewerage systems
Programming
The purpose of the programming phase is to identify the main objectives and sector priorities for co-operation, and thus to provide a relevant and feasible programming framework within which programmes and projects can be identified and prepared. Programming analyses the situation at national and sector level, and identifies problems, constraints and opportunities which cooperation could address. As water is fundamental to social and economic development, this chapter sets out to decide on priority Focus Areas for support in order to achieve an integrated approach to water resources management. The programming phase provides an opportunity to review socio-economic indicators, national and donor priorities, and all national, regional and local factors relating to water..
During this phase, the main objectives and sector priorities will be identified and thus a feasible programming framework will be provided within which potential water-related programmes and projects can be identified, indicating which Focus Area(s) are most in need of support.
At the programming phase, a truly integrated approach which balances needs and possibilities within an overall water resources management sector framework is practicable and easy to apply. However, an integrated approach requires a wide range of information collection and analysis. A standard format for a country study is given in Part III, Chapter 15, which can be used together with the checklists given below.
The essential questions for the programming phase are:
-
Is development co-operation needed for water resources?
-
In which Focus Area(s) and by what kinds of support would development co-operation be most beneficial?
Checklists have been developed to correspond to the following four steps in the programming process.
Step 1: Alignment to national plans;
Step 2: Determining the capacity of recipients to take on and manage programmes;
Step 3: Assessing the need for water resources support;
Step 4: Identifying the priority Focus Areas for support.
Checklist for Step 1: Assessing needs
Water resources development and management must be assessed with regard to alignment with the national sector framework of the country.
- Are specific objectives and expected results, including any conditionalities and main performance and outcome indicators aligned to the national sector framework?
- Do national sector framework plans include measures to ensure the sustainable use of water resources? (e.g. monitoring strategies)
- Are national sector framework plans implying an effective level of participation by sector stakeholders and beneficiaries?
- Are national sector framework plans based on sound scientific and technical analyses?
- Is there a Sector programme (for instance as part of a sector wide approach) in place for the equitable development of the water sector?
- Are environmental aspects (including in-stream use) of water treated prominently in programming and addressed in policies related to other sector activities?
- Are effects of climate change and climate change resilience duly considered?
- Are crosscutting issues, especially gender equality and HIV/AIDS, taken into consideration?
- Is water as a key element of economic activities becoming a constraining resource?
- Are key stakeholders identified and their needs, interests and capacities assessed?
- What options are available for meeting current and future water needs, and have alternatives to supply augmentation or improved efficiency been considered?
- Are complementary measures needed in other sectors to achieve a more integrated approach to water resources management?
- Are the policies in other sectors compatible with a sustainable water resources sector development and management, as set out in the Guiding Principles?
- Is or can the national sector framework be aligned and harmonized with other potential sector activities (including donors’ and other development partners) and vice-versa?
Ensure that programmes do not conflict with other national / sector activity.
- Have the main objectives and sector priorities for sector development been identified?
- Have the capacity constraints and lessons learned from previous experience been taken into account?
- Is there a clear link between budget and policy? Are budget and policy priorities complementary and realistic?
- Are coordination mechanisms of key government actors and relevant national and local stakeholders in place? Are they active? Are they consistent with the structure and responsibilities of the national government?
- Is there an established mechanism ensuring stakeholders and beneficiaries participation?
- What degree of support and/or strategies are stakeholders and development partners providing in water resources management or water-related activities? Is water considered to be a high priority or taken for granted??
- What assistance is presently being provided by development partners in water resources development? Does it include guidance for future programming?
- Do support/planned activities by development partners in other sectors complement or conflict with existing or planned water resources management activities?
Based on the above assessment of compatibility to sector alignment decide whether:
- Activities in other sectors or by other development partners can be effective and complementary as support to the water resources sector e.g. geographical scope, project duration, most suitable partners;
- There is overlap or incompatibility with activities in other sectors or development partners; this should be resolved prior to planning or implementing any further support to water resources sector;
- If faced with multiple sector donors promoting harmonization of cooperation with development partners (e.g. to reduce transactions costs); the sector, led by the government, needs to ensure effective coordination and dialogue mechanisms
- Activities already underway in other sectors or by other actors suggest that some specific support activities to the sector / water resources management may be not required under current circumstances.
- Other potential sources of funding can be considered in the framework of a sector programme;
- Types of external assistance can be considered mainly (and optimally) as e.g. macroeconomic support, technical assistance, training, investments, and supply of equipment
Checklist for Step 2: Capacity to take on and manage programme
A water resources sector programme can only be effectively implemented if the sector governance is adequate and if there is the required capacity existing within the sector, especially for the government, in order to handle the institutional, technical and financial aspects.
- Are the required policies, laws and regulations in place in order to support an effective sector development?
- Does the national government have the capacity to formulate and implement a sector policy and sector budget with a medium term perspective (and eventually a long term perspective)?
- Does the national leadership have the capacities to realistically implement the proposed sector programme?
- Is there a need to strengthen the key sector organisations (e.g. the government, implementing agencies, main service providers, etc.)?
- Is there a need to strengthen capacity of sector stakeholders (e.g. private sector, NGOs, local authorities)?
- What is the past record concerning sector programmes in water resources? Lessons learnt? Sector evolutions and trends?
- Have recent evaluations/capacity assessments of sector programmes and projects been initiated by the national government (in accordance with Paris Declaration principles) but with the participation of the key sector stakeholders and beneficiaries? Are results of these evaluations of recent programmes and projects being considered for future programming?
- Are customary rights, land ownership and transboundary disputes or other legal issues a constraint to effective implementation of water-related activities?
- Are the national institutional structures and capacities adequate for effective management and coordination of the proposed national sector framework and do the key organisations have clear, legally defined mandates?
- Who are the key agencies at the higher tiers of authority and are they capable of managing water resources in a holistic and coordinated way?
- Is institutional reform required, and if so, is the government aware, supportive and capable of reform?
Concerning sector funding in particular, there are a number of mechanisms for the provision of development partner support (including grants and loans). If and when this external assistance is envisaged, it is important to identify the most suitable funding mechanism during the sector programming phase and to ensure adequate local funding is available.
- How different types of water-related activities are presently financed, and to what extend is cost recovery considered?
- Would the country be able and willing to support local recurring costs and make the necessary budgetary allocations for proposed water resources activities?
- Does the country have the capacity to handle large conventional infrastructure projects or would smaller-scale intervention be more appropriate?
- Which mix of development partners’ funding mechanisms is most appropriate for interventions in water resources?
- Is the type of intervention proposed within the administrative, financial, and managerial capacity of the country?
- Is the funding mechanism (s) chosen financially and economically sustainable at macro-economic level?
Based on the above assessment of capacity decide whether:
- National policies and capacities are adequate to support the proposed water resources development and management, or
- National policies are adequate in general but there are specific weaknesses that would have to be addressed as part of any sector programme, in other words improving national or sector governance
- Country (sector) capacity is weak and specific actions are needed to determine ways to reform policies and strengthen capacity, is a priority
- Current sector funding mechanisms and strategies are adequate or whether specific actions are needed to improve them and their impact on the sector programme.
- Large-scale or smaller scale infrastructure interventions (or an appropriate mix) are most appropriate.
Checklist for Step 3: Compatibility and complementarity
Some countries may be fully aware of water resources issues and make appropriate plans whilst others are unaware or take a shorter-term view of needs and responses
- Is the country, or specific region, presently facing water scarcity or stress or likely to do so in the near future?
- Does the country require support in order to manage its water resources adequately?
- If no water policy exists, or is inadequate, can assistance be provided to develop one?
- If the water policy exists and it is not implemented, can the reasons be identified with internal capacities and/or external evaluation and analysis? Reasons can be varied including, ownership, planning, institutional set-up, funding, capacities, security etc.
- Do current government policies demonstrate an awareness of water resources issues and the possibility of competition, conflicts or overlaps between in-sector and other sector users?
- To what extent are people’s actual and perceived needs known and understood? Is existing water resources management clearly taking into account the social well-being of the population at the national level or in specific regions within it?
- Does the government recognise the need for an integrated/over-arching water resources policy that ensures that the water resource needs of different sectors are addressed?
- Is present legislation adequate to manage water resources effectively and, if not, can development partners provide cooperation to rectify this?
Support to programmes/ projects should be demand-driven, fully lead by the country and developed with stakeholders and the target groups.
- What is the priority given to water resources in national development policy, including issues in which water resources are critical such as survival, health, food production, well-being, natural resources conservation and ecosystem services provision?
- Is there adequate political support for policy implementation to be feasible and sustainable?
- Is there adequate conformity between the local-level problems and needs being tackled by local and community-based organisations and Government policy at national level?
- Are the local level actors (local authorities, communities, etc.) fully aware of government policies and capable to implement them?
- What choices has the government made in the past to address important issues (local, national or transboundary) related to water resources or where water has played a significant role?
- Are there indications that water issues are of concern to the general population (through NGOs, media reports, pressure groups etc.)?Is the national government responding to the people’s concern and, if so, how?
- Are associated issues, such as land use and environmental pollution prominent within general awareness and is this reflected in national policies and strategies?
- Is the government committed to resolving constraints between water and other associated issues, such as energy, navigation, transport and tourism?
In formulating any programme or action plan for water resources, care is needed to avoid contradictions between water-related sector policies and limit unnecessary competition for water resources such as those for agriculture, energy, health, education, transport, and environmental policies
- What is the national current level of commitment, both in policy and practice, to maintaining biodiversity, protecting the aquatic ecology, preserving ecosystem services and in general addressing human well-being?
- Is the national government already committed to water resources development and management that incorporates an integrated approach with other sector users?
- To what extent are the non-consumptive aspects of water resources, such as in-stream use, hydropower, flood control, recreation, and transport/navigation taken into account in water policies and proposed development plans?
- Have proposed project sector programmes or plans been developed in consultation with the various sector and sub-sector ministries and their related agencies?
- Is the proposed sector development program taking into account the other relevant sectors’ development programmes; including primarily agriculture, energy, health, education, transport, and environmental policies?
Policies established by the government should be developed in consultation with the various stakeholders to ensure that competing or conflicting interests are reconciled as far as possible and that the policy is acceptable to all interests
- Have proposed project sector programmes or plans been developed in consultation with the various sector stakeholders and with the end users in particular?
- Are there indications that the government policy and actions on water benefit the poor and disadvantaged rural or urban-poor populations, and that they are included as actors in the development process?
- To what extent is there conflict or competition between users (both consumptive and non-consumptive) and between the use and conservation of the water resource? Is this acknowledged within policy, strategy and general public awareness?
- Are transboundary issues significantly present in the water resources management? Is the government party to treaties or agreements with neighbouring countries or within their region overall?
- Are there conflicts over managing water resources between neighbouring administrative regions within the same country?
Based on the above assessment of needs, decide whether:
- Water resources are a critical issue, or whether the country is confident that it can adequately manage its water resources,
- There is a need for support to water resources in the country or region, or
- There is inadequate information available to make a decision; in this case consider whether policy support and water resource assessment and planning should be given a high priority in the country or regional programme for development assistance
Checklist for the Step 4: Identifying priority Focus Areas
It is important to identify which Focus Area(s) is/are most in need of support. This priority setting should fit within an overall sector programme based on responses to the earlier key issues.
- Is there a particular area of water use or management critical to social and economic well-being?
- How are the different Focus Areas treated within existing national and regional plans?
- Do policy conflicts make holistic planning difficult or reduce the possibility of support to any of the specific identified Focus Areas?
- Are there specific common priorities (which could result either in competition or in a more effective policy) between domestic, agricultural, and industrial water use applied by the government?
- Is there a Focus Area particularly underfunded or less regarded compared to the others?
An adequate knowledge base is crucial to reasoned planning and decision making on water resources development and management.
- Is technical information readily and sufficiently available on the quality and quantity of water sources, including surface water, soil moisture, hydrological data, meteorology, land cover and land use and aquifers? If not, will the degree of the lack of information constrain effective planning?
- Are predictions of future supply and demand being made on the basis of realistic and sound scientific and technically informed assumptions, and do they take into account all uses (consumptive and non-consumptive) of water?
- Isthe data concerning access to water and sanitation in rural and urban areas known to decision-makers?
- Is there adequate information on water quality and health issues, particularly concerning pollution, risks and vulnerability of water resources?
- Is information available on the agricultural use of water and the consumers?
- What is the potential for improving food productivity or security through improved irrigation, land drainage or flood control practices?
- Is the strategic impact of ‘virtual water’ (see Part 3) understood and taken into account in assessing the need for irrigated agricultural production or the selection of types of crops for either food or economic activity?
Possible reponses to Assessement of Steps 1 to 4
As each country is unique, any categorisation cannot be prescriptive. However, as a guide, the responses to steps 1 to 4 can help identifying the priorities for national and/or external development support. The following category examples set out a general basis for selecting different sector programme responses based on the impression gained from the issues raised in steps 1 to 4. Three categories can be determined:
Category A:
In this category, typical of “fragile states”, a country or region is likely to have weak institutions, with minimal or no evidence of good governance in general; specifically, it will be either unaware of, or have limited commitment to, sustainable management of water resources. The country probably has little capacity to manage large programmes even though the need is evidently great. In such cases, the focus could be on:
- Improving or setting up a sector policy and legislation, strategy formulation, and assistance to identify priority programmes;
- The provision of basic services (urban and rural), capacity building< and improvement of the institutional set-up.
However, as it is evident, addressing problems in fragile countries, needs considerable care and attention. It is likely that such countries are more in need of external funding and infrastructure support rather than immediate policy development.
Support for infrastructure will need to be designed to help the poorest in such a way that minimum external assistance is needed once work is completed, fostering as much as possible economically sustainable environment of investments. In this context community ownership may be critical and key partners need to be identified to help reduce the risk of unsustainable services. Adapted local technology or the careful selection of appropriate technology< will be needed as one of the main issues for the sustainability of the interventions.
The role of the civil society, NGOs or community-based organisations and innovative funding instruments such as sector budget support, pool financing and otherscan have an important role in deciding responses. Support should be available for awareness-raising and knowledge generation, such as hydrological assessments, that will be useful for more extensive interventions and permit better planning and management of water resources.
Focus Area 1 (WR) and 6 (SP) will be important but appropriate support within Focus Area 2 (BS), Focus Area 3 (MS), Focus Area 4 (AM) and Focus Area 5 (E) should also be considered.
Category B:
In this category there is likely to be clear evidence of a commitment to good governance in general and an awareness of, and desire for, equitable and sustainable water resources sector development and management (including perhaps some sector policy strategies in preparation). This should include an acceptance of the importance of stakeholder involvement and evidence of programmes to improve human resources capacity that should make the development partners interventions possible. Sector development could focus on:
- improving policy, strategy, legal and regulatory frameworks to improve water resources sector management and build on any existing work;
- support the country government for the definition of a sector programme through the principles of the sector wide approach (as defined in chapter 11).
- identifying reasons why, if policy and strategy are already defined and have some political support, but are not correctly implemented and a disconnection is apparent between the national and the local level;
- assistance to increase the participation< of stakeholders< and, in particular, facilitating the increased involvement of the private sector, civil society and the education sector including University and research;
- encouraging capacity building and institutional improvements at all levels;
- giving increased importance to equitable and sustainable cost recovery via service charges – with progressive steps towards equitable tariffs< – to allow reductions in state subsidies;
- support for knowledge generation – strengthening data and information systems.
All focus areas should be considered for support.
Category C:
In category C the country is likely to be politically stable with clear evidence of progress towards instituting a systematic approach to water resources development and management, including legal and regulatory frameworks, capacity building and private sector development. In such countries there is likely to be an awareness of, and commitment to, the modern concepts of water resources management. Support could be required for:
- devolution of responsibility to lower administrative tiers or to the private sector, including capacity building for local government, the private sector, and community organisations in water resources development and management; assumption by central government of a planning, legal, regulatory, and facilitating role including re-allocation of water resources between sectors; and the establishment of a framework for increased public private partnerships;
- measures to introduce pollution control, wastewater treatment and reuse, and charges to industry for pollution of water courses or aquifers;
- the adoption of demand management< measures to ensure reliable supplies, including rehabilitation of existing structures or other measures which minimise the need for new infrastructure;
- the improvement of integrated management through increasing knowledge about cross–sector linkages leading to a multi-sector approach to water resources development and management, including positive participation in managing transboundary waters<;
- the provision of increasingly sophisticated knowledge and data generation and computerised management information systems, with a sustainable strategy on scientific and technical knowledge management.
In summary, all Focus Areas should be considered for support to varying degrees.
Identification
Institutional and Management Principles
MS activities should be consistent with a national integrated water policy, and institutions’ functions and responsibilities clearly identified. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Effective inter-agency and inter-sector planning is essential. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Maximum stakeholder participation is essential for an effective project and should be involved at the earliest possible stage. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
MS projects have traditionally focused on design and construction aspects and neglected operation, maintenance and management. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Participation of the private sector can be important in the efficient delivery of municipal water and wastewater services. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Management information systems in which both users and service providers have confidence are essential for improved operational efficiency. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Social Principles
Municipal services initiatives must be integrated with the social development goals of the municipality. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
MS projects can bring great health and social benefits to urban areas. But without taking into account users’ norms and needs, projects can be underused. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Community involvement by stakeholders and users is more likely to ensure project success. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Economic and Financial Principles
The economic value of water is an integral part of MS. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Charging for services is necessary to generate funds for future investment and to ensure maintenance and long-term financial viability. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Demand management< through both market and non-market measures should be used in conjunction with supply provision; in water-scarce areas, demand management should take priority over supply-led solutions. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Projects must demonstrate financial viability and accountability. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Environmental Principles
Environmental damage may result because insufficient time and money is invested in collection and analysis of baseline data. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Municipal services often have adverse effects on water use, particularly groundwater. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Information, Education and Communication Principles
The development of a water and wastewater knowledge base is necessary and requires effective data collection and monitoring procedures. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Education and awareness-raising targeted at municipal staff, stakeholders< and users should be used to strengthen stakeholder participation<. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Technological Principles
MS should be technically efficient, using appropriate modern technology that is adapted to suit local, physical, economic and social conditions. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Technical knowledge forms the basis of all good design. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
. |
Formulation
Institutional and Management Principles
Changes in policy objectives and economic factors may influence predicted project benefits. Lessons from previous projects in MS should be taken into account. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Effective inter-agency and inter-sector planning should be facilitated by the project. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Effective stakeholder participation< needs to be implemented with the views and needs of stakeholders< shaping the form of the project. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Projects should aim for effective public-private sector partnership in service delivery. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Requirements for training and capacity-building must be addressed in the project formulation phase. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Management information systems in which both users and service providers have confidence are essential for operational efficiency. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Social Principles
MS projects must conform with social development goals. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
- Full involvement by stakeholders< and users is more likely to ensure project success. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Effective provision of MUNICIPAL SERVICES should take account of the needs and roles of women. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Economic and Financial Principles
The economic value of water must be recognised as an integral part of any municipal water and wastewater project. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Charging for services is needed to generate funds for maintenance, management, future investment and service spread. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Demand management<, through both market and non-market measures, should be incorporated into projects.
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Projects must assess financial risks and demonstrate accountability. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Environmental Principles
Environmental damage may result because insufficient time and money is invested in collection and analysis of baseline data. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
MS projects often bring changes in water use. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Municipal wastewater schemes present disposal problems. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Information, Education, and Communication Principles
The development of a water and wastewater knowledge base is a pre-condition for successful project implementation and service delivery. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Education and awareness raising< among municipal staff and other stakeholders< on MS principles is needed to facilitate participation< and exchange. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Technological Principles
Appropriate modern technology< must be utilised to suit local physical, economic, social, and environmental conditions. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Implementation
Implementation Monitoring
Effective control of costs, contracts, and budget disbursement are essential to ensure project compliance with implementation targets. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Changes in policy objectives and economic factors external to the project may necessitate revision to reflect their influence on project results/outcomes. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
It is important that conditions built into the financial agreement for the project are fulfilled. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Monitoring and supervision of all aspects of the project must be effective, and allow planned revision of targets and other remedial actions to be made in good time. Therefore examine:
:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Institutional and Management Principles
Management information systems may need revision if the nature or scopes of the project are revised during implementation. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Changes in the structure of implementing agencies may weaken (or improve) their capability to implement the project or programme. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Measures to improve inter-sector and sector coordination planning may meet with resistance, thereby hindering implementation. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Sustainability of services requires that users and operators understand and fulfil their responsibilities for O&M. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
There is a danger that training and capacity-building measures, defined at formulation, are cut back during implementation or are ineffectual. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Social Principles
The financing proposal may identify effective women’s participation and other social issues as central to the project’s success. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Intervention may disrupt traditional user rights to land and water resources and lead to increased inequalities between stakeholders. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Where a community-based approach is used the community may want to modify the scope of the project during implementation. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Economic and Financial Principles
Changes in economic factors occurring between financing and implementation may require revision of the project. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Identify the factors that may reduce economic benefit. Discuss these with relevant parties and modify project activities as required.
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Coordination of fund contributions is essential to avoid wastage of resource and project delay. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Environmental Principles
Environmental damage may result because adverse impacts were previously unrecognised or inadequate resources provided for mitigating measures. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Information, Education and Communication Principles
Information obtained from project monitoring should be used to shape and direct the implementation process. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
. |
Provision of information and clarity of procedure are necessary for conflict resolution between different stakeholder interests. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Technological Principles
Where construction quality is poor or equipment is badly specified, systems may fail prematurely and maintenance costs will be high. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Technology that was judged appropriate at the design stage may prove in-appropriate as implementation proceeds. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Technological and construction aspects usually represent the major capital cost items. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Hydro-meteorological information forms the basis of water / hydropower assessments. High quality data is needed for reliable implementation. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Evaluation
For all phases of the project cycle other than programming, checklists have been prepared in the same format, to allow the user of the Water Project Toolkit examine key issues likely to arise in the preparation and implementation of projects, alongside possible responses. Issues and responses are grouped according to the set of problems statements within the framework of principles established in the strategic approach, starting with Institutional and Management principles and proceeding through all categories and principles.
In the identification and formulation phases, each programming context is handled separately since issues and responses differ between Focus Areas. In other phases, issues and responses are generic, and the same set of checklists applies in every Focus Area.
Monitoring refers to the systematic review of the physical progress and quality of the process, the financial progress including budget and expenditures, the preliminary responses by the target groups to the project activity and the reasons for unexpected/adverse response of target groups and possible remedial actions to be taken. In summary monitoring focuses on an “ongoing analysis of project progress towards achieving planned results with the purpose of improving management decision making” (EC, 2004:46).
Evaluation relates to the “assessment of the efficiency, effectiveness, impact, relevance and sustainability of aid policies and actions” (EC, 2004:46). Normally it is carried out periodically and at project completion / ex-post, the users are rather planners and policy makers than project managers. Evaluation allows learning broader lessons applicable to other projects; it provides accountability and is useful for giving inputs to policy review.
Audit refers to the opportunity to uncover the issues, concerns and challenges encountered in the execution of a project/programme. The purpose of an audit of external aid projects is to assess the legality and regularity of project expenditure and income, to check if projects funds have been used efficiently and economically and also if they have been used effectively.
The following principles shall be followed to the greatest possible extent:
- Design of monitoring and/or review system must always keep in mind who needs what kind of information based on: hierarchy in the management system and project’s objective, institutional and management structure needs and decision making responsibilities.
- Data collection should be sufficient to have a tangible impact on the quality of decision making.
- Triangulation principles shall be applied whenever possible i.e. data shall originate from more than one source and collected through more than one method.
- A benchmark shall be provided against which progress can be assessed.
Operational monitoring
Operational monitoring permits effective post-project evaluation, provides lessons to improve future project quality and helps identify new projects. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Institutional and Management Principles
Sustainable hand-over of infrastructure and equipment depends on the training of users and organisations who are allocated responsibility for O&M and management of services. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Projects must have sufficient flexibility in their design, implementation schedule and subsequent operation to permit adjustments to be made. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Provision should be made for effective inter-agency and inter-sector planning. If this was weak, lessons should be learnt for the future. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
Did the implementing agencies fulfil their responsibilities? |
|
The project should have been formulated and implemented in a way that ensured effective stakeholders involvement and participation. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Social Principles
Ownership by stakeholders and user groups of services provided by the project is essential in ensuring sustainability. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Evaluation must determine to what extent intended social development has been achieved and what unexpected impacts may have occurred. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Economic and Financial Principles
The economic and financial sustainability of the project depends on the avoidance of inappropriate subsidies and effective cost recovery. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Projects must demonstrate economic benefit and financial accountability if they are to be sustained over the long term. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Environmental Principles
Environmental damage may result because insufficient time and money is invested in collection and analysis of data during and after. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Information, Education and Communication Principles
Evaluation should determine whether the knowledge base was adequate and whether recommendations for improved data collection have been implemented. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Public education, awareness raising and free availability of information to all stakeholders facilitate the sustainability of water projects. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Technological Principles
In evaluating the appropriateness of technology and its influence on the wider results of the project, the accuracy of underlying data is critical. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Technological solutions must be acceptable to the target users and compatible with the environment. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Sustainability of infrastructure and equipment can only be achieved if the technical and financial requirements for maintenance are met. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Agriculture (A)
which covers installations and activities related to agricultural use of water, especially for irrigation. No pre-determined priority is given to any one Focus Area as compared to any other. The programmatic activities covered by the Focus Areas are explored more fully in this chapter
Programming
The purpose of the programming phase is to identify the main objectives and sector priorities for co-operation, and thus to provide a relevant and feasible programming framework within which programmes and projects can be identified and prepared. Programming analyses the situation at national and sector level, and identifies problems, constraints and opportunities which cooperation could address. As water is fundamental to social and economic development, this chapter sets out to decide on priority Focus Areas for support in order to achieve an integrated approach to water resources management. The programming phase provides an opportunity to review socio-economic indicators, national and donor priorities, and all national, regional and local factors relating to water..
During this phase, the main objectives and sector priorities will be identified and thus a feasible programming framework will be provided within which potential water-related programmes and projects can be identified, indicating which Focus Area(s) are most in need of support.
At the programming phase, a truly integrated approach which balances needs and possibilities within an overall water resources management sector framework is practicable and easy to apply. However, an integrated approach requires a wide range of information collection and analysis. A standard format for a country study is given in Part III, Chapter 15, which can be used together with the checklists given below.
The essential questions for the programming phase are:
-
Is development co-operation needed for water resources?
-
In which Focus Area(s) and by what kinds of support would development co-operation be most beneficial?
Checklists have been developed to correspond to the following four steps in the programming process.
Step 1: Alignment to national plans;
Step 2: Determining the capacity of recipients to take on and manage programmes;
Step 3: Assessing the need for water resources support;
Step 4: Identifying the priority Focus Areas for support.
Checklist for Step 1: Assessing needs
Water resources development and management must be assessed with regard to alignment with the national sector framework of the country.
- Are specific objectives and expected results, including any conditionalities and main performance and outcome indicators aligned to the national sector framework?
- Do national sector framework plans include measures to ensure the sustainable use of water resources? (e.g. monitoring strategies)
- Are national sector framework plans implying an effective level of participation by sector stakeholders and beneficiaries?
- Are national sector framework plans based on sound scientific and technical analyses?
- Is there a Sector programme (for instance as part of a sector wide approach) in place for the equitable development of the water sector?
- Are environmental aspects (including in-stream use) of water treated prominently in programming and addressed in policies related to other sector activities?
- Are effects of climate change and climate change resilience duly considered?
- Are crosscutting issues, especially gender equality and HIV/AIDS, taken into consideration?
- Is water as a key element of economic activities becoming a constraining resource?
- Are key stakeholders identified and their needs, interests and capacities assessed?
- What options are available for meeting current and future water needs, and have alternatives to supply augmentation or improved efficiency been considered?
- Are complementary measures needed in other sectors to achieve a more integrated approach to water resources management?
- Are the policies in other sectors compatible with a sustainable water resources sector development and management, as set out in the Guiding Principles?
- Is or can the national sector framework be aligned and harmonized with other potential sector activities (including donors’ and other development partners) and vice-versa?
Ensure that programmes do not conflict with other national / sector activity.
- Have the main objectives and sector priorities for sector development been identified?
- Have the capacity constraints and lessons learned from previous experience been taken into account?
- Is there a clear link between budget and policy? Are budget and policy priorities complementary and realistic?
- Are coordination mechanisms of key government actors and relevant national and local stakeholders in place? Are they active? Are they consistent with the structure and responsibilities of the national government?
- Is there an established mechanism ensuring stakeholders and beneficiaries participation?
- What degree of support and/or strategies are stakeholders and development partners providing in water resources management or water-related activities? Is water considered to be a high priority or taken for granted??
- What assistance is presently being provided by development partners in water resources development? Does it include guidance for future programming?
- Do support/planned activities by development partners in other sectors complement or conflict with existing or planned water resources management activities?
Based on the above assessment of compatibility to sector alignment decide whether:
- Activities in other sectors or by other development partners can be effective and complementary as support to the water resources sector e.g. geographical scope, project duration, most suitable partners;
- There is overlap or incompatibility with activities in other sectors or development partners; this should be resolved prior to planning or implementing any further support to water resources sector;
- If faced with multiple sector donors promoting harmonization of cooperation with development partners (e.g. to reduce transactions costs); the sector, led by the government, needs to ensure effective coordination and dialogue mechanisms
- Activities already underway in other sectors or by other actors suggest that some specific support activities to the sector / water resources management may be not required under current circumstances.
- Other potential sources of funding can be considered in the framework of a sector programme;
- Types of external assistance can be considered mainly (and optimally) as e.g. macroeconomic support, technical assistance, training, investments, and supply of equipment
Checklist for Step 2: Capacity to take on and manage programme
A water resources sector programme can only be effectively implemented if the sector governance is adequate and if there is the required capacity existing within the sector, especially for the government, in order to handle the institutional, technical and financial aspects.
- Are the required policies, laws and regulations in place in order to support an effective sector development?
- Does the national government have the capacity to formulate and implement a sector policy and sector budget with a medium term perspective (and eventually a long term perspective)?
- Does the national leadership have the capacities to realistically implement the proposed sector programme?
- Is there a need to strengthen the key sector organisations (e.g. the government, implementing agencies, main service providers, etc.)?
- Is there a need to strengthen capacity of sector stakeholders (e.g. private sector, NGOs, local authorities)?
- What is the past record concerning sector programmes in water resources? Lessons learnt? Sector evolutions and trends?
- Have recent evaluations/capacity assessments of sector programmes and projects been initiated by the national government (in accordance with Paris Declaration principles) but with the participation of the key sector stakeholders and beneficiaries? Are results of these evaluations of recent programmes and projects being considered for future programming?
- Are customary rights, land ownership and transboundary disputes or other legal issues a constraint to effective implementation of water-related activities?
- Are the national institutional structures and capacities adequate for effective management and coordination of the proposed national sector framework and do the key organisations have clear, legally defined mandates?
- Who are the key agencies at the higher tiers of authority and are they capable of managing water resources in a holistic and coordinated way?
- Is institutional reform required, and if so, is the government aware, supportive and capable of reform?
Concerning sector funding in particular, there are a number of mechanisms for the provision of development partner support (including grants and loans). If and when this external assistance is envisaged, it is important to identify the most suitable funding mechanism during the sector programming phase and to ensure adequate local funding is available.
- How different types of water-related activities are presently financed, and to what extend is cost recovery considered?
- Would the country be able and willing to support local recurring costs and make the necessary budgetary allocations for proposed water resources activities?
- Does the country have the capacity to handle large conventional infrastructure projects or would smaller-scale intervention be more appropriate?
- Which mix of development partners’ funding mechanisms is most appropriate for interventions in water resources?
- Is the type of intervention proposed within the administrative, financial, and managerial capacity of the country?
- Is the funding mechanism (s) chosen financially and economically sustainable at macro-economic level?
Based on the above assessment of capacity decide whether:
- National policies and capacities are adequate to support the proposed water resources development and management, or
- National policies are adequate in general but there are specific weaknesses that would have to be addressed as part of any sector programme, in other words improving national or sector governance
- Country (sector) capacity is weak and specific actions are needed to determine ways to reform policies and strengthen capacity, is a priority
- Current sector funding mechanisms and strategies are adequate or whether specific actions are needed to improve them and their impact on the sector programme.
- Large-scale or smaller scale infrastructure interventions (or an appropriate mix) are most appropriate.
Checklist for Step 3: Compatibility and complementarity
Some countries may be fully aware of water resources issues and make appropriate plans whilst others are unaware or take a shorter-term view of needs and responses
- Is the country, or specific region, presently facing water scarcity or stress or likely to do so in the near future?
- Does the country require support in order to manage its water resources adequately?
- If no water policy exists, or is inadequate, can assistance be provided to develop one?
- If the water policy exists and it is not implemented, can the reasons be identified with internal capacities and/or external evaluation and analysis? Reasons can be varied including, ownership, planning, institutional set-up, funding, capacities, security etc.
- Do current government policies demonstrate an awareness of water resources issues and the possibility of competition, conflicts or overlaps between in-sector and other sector users?
- To what extent are people’s actual and perceived needs known and understood? Is existing water resources management clearly taking into account the social well-being of the population at the national level or in specific regions within it?
- Does the government recognise the need for an integrated/over-arching water resources policy that ensures that the water resource needs of different sectors are addressed?
- Is present legislation adequate to manage water resources effectively and, if not, can development partners provide cooperation to rectify this?
Support to programmes/ projects should be demand-driven, fully lead by the country and developed with stakeholders and the target groups.
- What is the priority given to water resources in national development policy, including issues in which water resources are critical such as survival, health, food production, well-being, natural resources conservation and ecosystem services provision?
- Is there adequate political support for policy implementation to be feasible and sustainable?
- Is there adequate conformity between the local-level problems and needs being tackled by local and community-based organisations and Government policy at national level?
- Are the local level actors (local authorities, communities, etc.) fully aware of government policies and capable to implement them?
- What choices has the government made in the past to address important issues (local, national or transboundary) related to water resources or where water has played a significant role?
- Are there indications that water issues are of concern to the general population (through NGOs, media reports, pressure groups etc.)?Is the national government responding to the people’s concern and, if so, how?
- Are associated issues, such as land use and environmental pollution prominent within general awareness and is this reflected in national policies and strategies?
- Is the government committed to resolving constraints between water and other associated issues, such as energy, navigation, transport and tourism?
In formulating any programme or action plan for water resources, care is needed to avoid contradictions between water-related sector policies and limit unnecessary competition for water resources such as those for agriculture, energy, health, education, transport, and environmental policies
- What is the national current level of commitment, both in policy and practice, to maintaining biodiversity, protecting the aquatic ecology, preserving ecosystem services and in general addressing human well-being?
- Is the national government already committed to water resources development and management that incorporates an integrated approach with other sector users?
- To what extent are the non-consumptive aspects of water resources, such as in-stream use, hydropower, flood control, recreation, and transport/navigation taken into account in water policies and proposed development plans?
- Have proposed project sector programmes or plans been developed in consultation with the various sector and sub-sector ministries and their related agencies?
- Is the proposed sector development program taking into account the other relevant sectors’ development programmes; including primarily agriculture, energy, health, education, transport, and environmental policies?
Policies established by the government should be developed in consultation with the various stakeholders to ensure that competing or conflicting interests are reconciled as far as possible and that the policy is acceptable to all interests
- Have proposed project sector programmes or plans been developed in consultation with the various sector stakeholders and with the end users in particular?
- Are there indications that the government policy and actions on water benefit the poor and disadvantaged rural or urban-poor populations, and that they are included as actors in the development process?
- To what extent is there conflict or competition between users (both consumptive and non-consumptive) and between the use and conservation of the water resource? Is this acknowledged within policy, strategy and general public awareness?
- Are transboundary issues significantly present in the water resources management? Is the government party to treaties or agreements with neighbouring countries or within their region overall?
- Are there conflicts over managing water resources between neighbouring administrative regions within the same country?
Based on the above assessment of needs, decide whether:
- Water resources are a critical issue, or whether the country is confident that it can adequately manage its water resources,
- There is a need for support to water resources in the country or region, or
- There is inadequate information available to make a decision; in this case consider whether policy support and water resource assessment and planning should be given a high priority in the country or regional programme for development assistance
Checklist for the Step 4: Identifying priority Focus Areas
It is important to identify which Focus Area(s) is/are most in need of support. This priority setting should fit within an overall sector programme based on responses to the earlier key issues.
- Is there a particular area of water use or management critical to social and economic well-being?
- How are the different Focus Areas treated within existing national and regional plans?
- Do policy conflicts make holistic planning difficult or reduce the possibility of support to any of the specific identified Focus Areas?
- Are there specific common priorities (which could result either in competition or in a more effective policy) between domestic, agricultural, and industrial water use applied by the government?
- Is there a Focus Area particularly underfunded or less regarded compared to the others?
An adequate knowledge base is crucial to reasoned planning and decision making on water resources development and management.
- Is technical information readily and sufficiently available on the quality and quantity of water sources, including surface water, soil moisture, hydrological data, meteorology, land cover and land use and aquifers? If not, will the degree of the lack of information constrain effective planning?
- Are predictions of future supply and demand being made on the basis of realistic and sound scientific and technically informed assumptions, and do they take into account all uses (consumptive and non-consumptive) of water?
- Isthe data concerning access to water and sanitation in rural and urban areas known to decision-makers?
- Is there adequate information on water quality and health issues, particularly concerning pollution, risks and vulnerability of water resources?
- Is information available on the agricultural use of water and the consumers?
- What is the potential for improving food productivity or security through improved irrigation, land drainage or flood control practices?
- Is the strategic impact of ‘virtual water’ (see Part 3) understood and taken into account in assessing the need for irrigated agricultural production or the selection of types of crops for either food or economic activity?
Possible reponses to Assessement of Steps 1 to 4
As each country is unique, any categorisation cannot be prescriptive. However, as a guide, the responses to steps 1 to 4 can help identifying the priorities for national and/or external development support. The following category examples set out a general basis for selecting different sector programme responses based on the impression gained from the issues raised in steps 1 to 4. Three categories can be determined:
Category A:
In this category, typical of “fragile states”, a country or region is likely to have weak institutions, with minimal or no evidence of good governance in general; specifically, it will be either unaware of, or have limited commitment to, sustainable management of water resources. The country probably has little capacity to manage large programmes even though the need is evidently great. In such cases, the focus could be on:
- Improving or setting up a sector policy and legislation, strategy formulation, and assistance to identify priority programmes;
- The provision of basic services (urban and rural), capacity building< and improvement of the institutional set-up.
However, as it is evident, addressing problems in fragile countries, needs considerable care and attention. It is likely that such countries are more in need of external funding and infrastructure support rather than immediate policy development.
Support for infrastructure will need to be designed to help the poorest in such a way that minimum external assistance is needed once work is completed, fostering as much as possible economically sustainable environment of investments. In this context community ownership may be critical and key partners need to be identified to help reduce the risk of unsustainable services. Adapted local technology or the careful selection of appropriate technology< will be needed as one of the main issues for the sustainability of the interventions.
The role of the civil society, NGOs or community-based organisations and innovative funding instruments such as sector budget support, pool financing and otherscan have an important role in deciding responses. Support should be available for awareness-raising and knowledge generation, such as hydrological assessments, that will be useful for more extensive interventions and permit better planning and management of water resources.
Focus Area 1 (WR) and 6 (SP) will be important but appropriate support within Focus Area 2 (BS), Focus Area 3 (MS), Focus Area 4 (AM) and Focus Area 5 (E) should also be considered.
Category B:
In this category there is likely to be clear evidence of a commitment to good governance in general and an awareness of, and desire for, equitable and sustainable water resources sector development and management (including perhaps some sector policy strategies in preparation). This should include an acceptance of the importance of stakeholder involvement and evidence of programmes to improve human resources capacity that should make the development partners interventions possible. Sector development could focus on:
- improving policy, strategy, legal and regulatory frameworks to improve water resources sector management and build on any existing work;
- support the country government for the definition of a sector programme through the principles of the sector wide approach (as defined in chapter 11).
- identifying reasons why, if policy and strategy are already defined and have some political support, but are not correctly implemented and a disconnection is apparent between the national and the local level;
- assistance to increase the participation< of stakeholders< and, in particular, facilitating the increased involvement of the private sector, civil society and the education sector including University and research;
- encouraging capacity building and institutional improvements at all levels;
- giving increased importance to equitable and sustainable cost recovery via service charges – with progressive steps towards equitable tariffs< – to allow reductions in state subsidies;
- support for knowledge generation – strengthening data and information systems.
All focus areas should be considered for support.
Category C:
In category C the country is likely to be politically stable with clear evidence of progress towards instituting a systematic approach to water resources development and management, including legal and regulatory frameworks, capacity building and private sector development. In such countries there is likely to be an awareness of, and commitment to, the modern concepts of water resources management. Support could be required for:
- devolution of responsibility to lower administrative tiers or to the private sector, including capacity building for local government, the private sector, and community organisations in water resources development and management; assumption by central government of a planning, legal, regulatory, and facilitating role including re-allocation of water resources between sectors; and the establishment of a framework for increased public private partnerships;
- measures to introduce pollution control, wastewater treatment and reuse, and charges to industry for pollution of water courses or aquifers;
- the adoption of demand management< measures to ensure reliable supplies, including rehabilitation of existing structures or other measures which minimise the need for new infrastructure;
- the improvement of integrated management through increasing knowledge about cross–sector linkages leading to a multi-sector approach to water resources development and management, including positive participation in managing transboundary waters<;
- the provision of increasingly sophisticated knowledge and data generation and computerised management information systems, with a sustainable strategy on scientific and technical knowledge management.
In summary, all Focus Areas should be considered for support to varying degrees.
Identification
Institutional and Management Principles
“A” activities must be consistent with an integrated national water policy setting out the legal and policy framework for service provision. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Fragmented planning functions and agency responsibilities lead to sector-based, project-by project development and potential inter-sector and inter-agency conflict. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Stakeholder participation< can help resolve conflicts of interest and promote user ownership of projects. Management and institutional structures should facilitate the participation of all interested parties. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Agencies have traditionally focused on project design and construction and neglected operation and maintenance. Policy may now be to transfer responsibility for O&M to the users. If so:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Capacity building< (see Part 3) for government staff and user groups may be required to support new initiatives. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Management information systems in which both users and service providers have confidence are essential. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Social Principles
Agricultural water use and management initiatives must be integrated with the social development goals of the region. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
A community-based approach is more likely to ensure ownership of the project by the intended beneficiaries. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
In many regions women are responsible for production decisions and contribute significant field labour. Measures are required to ensure women’s effective participation< in project planning and design. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Economic and Financial Principles
The economic value of land and water must be reflected in A actions. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Charging for services is needed to generate funds for future investment and promote efficient water use. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Where possible, demand management<, through both market and non-market measures, should be incorporated into projects. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Projects must demonstrate economic benefit and financial viability. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Environmental Principles
Environmental damage may result because insufficient time and money are invested in collection and analysis of baseline data. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
A activities often bring major changes in land and water use. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Information, Education, and Communiction Principles
The development of a broad knowledge base grounded in effective data collection and monitoring procedures is essential for both local and basin-level plans. Therefore examine
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Education and awareness-raising, targeted at agency staff and farmers, are needed to develop user participation< in decisions over competing user group needs. Therefore examine
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Technological Principles
Engineering solutions must take account of environment and physical characteristics; needs, resources and skills of users; capital and operating costs and markets. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
The objective should be to use modern but appropriate technology. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Formulation
Institutional and Management Principles
Changes in policy objectives and economic factors may influence predicted project benefits; lessons from other AGRICULTURE projects should be taken into account. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Effective inter-sector and inter-agency planning should be facilitated by the project. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Ensure that commitment to stakeholder participation< is effectively implemented so that the views and needs of stakeholders< help shape the project. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
The sustainability of systems requires that users shoulder significant responsibility for O&M and management of systems, within a suitable organisational structure. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Requirements for training and capacity building<, identified in the feasibility study, must be addressed in project formulation. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Management information systems in which users and service providers have confidence are essential. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Social Principles
Development of irrigation, drainage and flood control works may disrupt traditional user rights to land and water resources. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
The provision of irrigation can lead to increased inequalities between different social groups. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
A community-based approach is more likely to ensure ownership of the intervention by the intended beneficiaries. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
In many regions, women are responsible for certain production decisions and contribute significantly to field labour. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Economic and Financial Principles
The economic value of water must be reflected in activities relating to AGRICULTURE. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Charging for services is needed to generate funds for future investment and promote water allocation to higher-value uses. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Where possible, demand management<, through both market and non-market measures, should be incorporated into projects. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Interventions must demonstrate economic benefit and financial viability. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Financial viability is critical to successful irrigated agriculture for both farmers and service providers. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Environmental Principles
Environmental damage may result because of insufficient time and money are invested on the collection and analysis of baseline data. Therefore examine
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
AGRICULTURE activities often bring major changes in land and water use. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Information, Education and Communication Principles
Knowledge, based on effective data collection and monitoring procedures, is a pre-condition for development of AGRICULTURE programmes. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Education and awareness raising< targeted at agency staff and users are needed to develop user participation< and reach decisions over competing user group needs. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Technological Principles
Appropriate specification and design of hardware for water control and management can only occur when there are reliable estimates of resources and needs. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
The design of hardware and specification of operating rules must minimise detrimental impacts on the environment. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Engineering solutions should take account of the material and technical resource base available to the operating agencies and the users. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Simplicity and operational flexibility must be incorporated in the operating environment. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Sustainability requires that maintenance needs are identified and agreements for the technical performance of installations reached with agencies and farmers. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Implementation
Implementation Monitoring
Effective control of costs, contracts, and budget disbursement are essential to ensure project compliance with implementation targets. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Changes in policy objectives and economic factors external to the project may necessitate revision to reflect their influence on project results/outcomes. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
It is important that conditions built into the financial agreement for the project are fulfilled. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Monitoring and supervision of all aspects of the project must be effective, and allow planned revision of targets and other remedial actions to be made in good time. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Institutional and Management Principles
Management information systems may need revision if the nature or scopes of the project are revised during implementation. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Changes in the structure of implementing agencies may weaken (or improve) their capability to implement the project or programme. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Measures to improve inter-sector and sector coordination planning may meet with resistance, thereby hindering implementation. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Sustainability of services requires that users and operators understand and fulfil their responsibilities for O&M. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
There is a danger that training and capacity-building measures, defined at formulation, are cut back during implementation or are ineffectual. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Social Principles
The financing proposal may identify effective women’s participation and other social issues as central to the project’s success. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Intervention may disrupt traditional user rights to land and water resources and lead to increased inequalities between stakeholders. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Where a community-based approach is used the community may want to modify the scope of the project during implementation. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Economic and Financial Principles
Changes in economic factors occurring between financing and implementation may require revision of the project. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Identify the factors that may reduce economic benefit. Discuss these with relevant parties and modify project activities as required.
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Coordination of fund contributions is essential to avoid wastage of resource and project delay. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Environmental Principles
Environmental damage may result because adverse impacts were previously unrecognised or inadequate resources provided for mitigating measures. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Information, Education and Communication Principles
Information obtained from project monitoring should be used to shape and direct the implementation process. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
. |
Provision of information and clarity of procedure are necessary for conflict resolution between different stakeholder interests. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Technological Principles
Where construction quality is poor or equipment is badly specified, systems may fail prematurely and maintenance costs will be high. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Technology that was judged appropriate at the design stage may prove in-appropriate as implementation proceeds. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Technological and construction aspects usually represent the major capital cost items. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Hydro-meteorological information forms the basis of water / hydropower assessments. High quality data is needed for reliable implementation. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Evaluation
For all phases of the project cycle other than programming, checklists have been prepared in the same format, to allow the user of the Water Project Toolkit examine key issues likely to arise in the preparation and implementation of projects, alongside possible responses. Issues and responses are grouped according to the set of problems statements within the framework of principles established in the strategic approach, starting with Institutional and Management principles and proceeding through all categories and principles.
In the identification and formulation phases, each programming context is handled separately since issues and responses differ between Focus Areas. In other phases, issues and responses are generic, and the same set of checklists applies in every Focus Area.
Monitoring refers to the systematic review of the physical progress and quality of the process, the financial progress including budget and expenditures, the preliminary responses by the target groups to the project activity and the reasons for unexpected/adverse response of target groups and possible remedial actions to be taken. In summary monitoring focuses on an “ongoing analysis of project progress towards achieving planned results with the purpose of improving management decision making” (EC, 2004:46).
Evaluation relates to the “assessment of the efficiency, effectiveness, impact, relevance and sustainability of aid policies and actions” (EC, 2004:46). Normally it is carried out periodically and at project completion / ex-post, the users are rather planners and policy makers than project managers. Evaluation allows learning broader lessons applicable to other projects; it provides accountability and is useful for giving inputs to policy review.
Audit refers to the opportunity to uncover the issues, concerns and challenges encountered in the execution of a project/programme. The purpose of an audit of external aid projects is to assess the legality and regularity of project expenditure and income, to check if projects funds have been used efficiently and economically and also if they have been used effectively.
The following principles shall be followed to the greatest possible extent:
- Design of monitoring and/or review system must always keep in mind who needs what kind of information based on: hierarchy in the management system and project’s objective, institutional and management structure needs and decision making responsibilities.
- Data collection should be sufficient to have a tangible impact on the quality of decision making.
- Triangulation principles shall be applied whenever possible i.e. data shall originate from more than one source and collected through more than one method.
- A benchmark shall be provided against which progress can be assessed.
Operational monitoring
Operational monitoring permits effective post-project evaluation, provides lessons to improve future project quality and helps identify new projects. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Institutional and Management Principles
Sustainable hand-over of infrastructure and equipment depends on the training of users and organisations who are allocated responsibility for O&M and management of services. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Projects must have sufficient flexibility in their design, implementation schedule and subsequent operation to permit adjustments to be made. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Provision should be made for effective inter-agency and inter-sector planning. If this was weak, lessons should be learnt for the future. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
Did the implementing agencies fulfil their responsibilities? |
|
The project should have been formulated and implemented in a way that ensured effective stakeholders involvement and participation. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Social Principles
Ownership by stakeholders and user groups of services provided by the project is essential in ensuring sustainability. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Evaluation must determine to what extent intended social development has been achieved and what unexpected impacts may have occurred. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Economic and Financial Principles
The economic and financial sustainability of the project depends on the avoidance of inappropriate subsidies and effective cost recovery. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Projects must demonstrate economic benefit and financial accountability if they are to be sustained over the long term. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Environmental Principles
Environmental damage may result because insufficient time and money is invested in collection and analysis of data during and after. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Information, Education and Communication Principles
Evaluation should determine whether the knowledge base was adequate and whether recommendations for improved data collection have been implemented. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Public education, awareness raising and free availability of information to all stakeholders facilitate the sustainability of water projects. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Technological Principles
In evaluating the appropriateness of technology and its influence on the wider results of the project, the accuracy of underlying data is critical. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Technological solutions must be acceptable to the target users and compatible with the environment. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Sustainability of infrastructure and equipment can only be achieved if the technical and financial requirements for maintenance are met. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Energy Hydropower (E)
Programming
The purpose of the programming phase is to identify the main objectives and sector priorities for co-operation, and thus to provide a relevant and feasible programming framework within which programmes and projects can be identified and prepared. Programming analyses the situation at national and sector level, and identifies problems, constraints and opportunities which cooperation could address. As water is fundamental to social and economic development, this chapter sets out to decide on priority Focus Areas for support in order to achieve an integrated approach to water resources management. The programming phase provides an opportunity to review socio-economic indicators, national and donor priorities, and all national, regional and local factors relating to water..
During this phase, the main objectives and sector priorities will be identified and thus a feasible programming framework will be provided within which potential water-related programmes and projects can be identified, indicating which Focus Area(s) are most in need of support.
At the programming phase, a truly integrated approach which balances needs and possibilities within an overall water resources management sector framework is practicable and easy to apply. However, an integrated approach requires a wide range of information collection and analysis. A standard format for a country study is given in Part III, Chapter 15, which can be used together with the checklists given below.
The essential questions for the programming phase are:
-
Is development co-operation needed for water resources?
-
In which Focus Area(s) and by what kinds of support would development co-operation be most beneficial?
Checklists have been developed to correspond to the following four steps in the programming process.
Step 1: Alignment to national plans;
Step 2: Determining the capacity of recipients to take on and manage programmes;
Step 3: Assessing the need for water resources support;
Step 4: Identifying the priority Focus Areas for support.
Checklist for Step 1: Assessing needs
Water resources development and management must be assessed with regard to alignment with the national sector framework of the country.
- Are specific objectives and expected results, including any conditionalities and main performance and outcome indicators aligned to the national sector framework?
- Do national sector framework plans include measures to ensure the sustainable use of water resources? (e.g. monitoring strategies)
- Are national sector framework plans implying an effective level of participation by sector stakeholders and beneficiaries?
- Are national sector framework plans based on sound scientific and technical analyses?
- Is there a Sector programme (for instance as part of a sector wide approach) in place for the equitable development of the water sector?
- Are environmental aspects (including in-stream use) of water treated prominently in programming and addressed in policies related to other sector activities?
- Are effects of climate change and climate change resilience duly considered?
- Are crosscutting issues, especially gender equality and HIV/AIDS, taken into consideration?
- Is water as a key element of economic activities becoming a constraining resource?
- Are key stakeholders identified and their needs, interests and capacities assessed?
- What options are available for meeting current and future water needs, and have alternatives to supply augmentation or improved efficiency been considered?
- Are complementary measures needed in other sectors to achieve a more integrated approach to water resources management?
- Are the policies in other sectors compatible with a sustainable water resources sector development and management, as set out in the Guiding Principles?
- Is or can the national sector framework be aligned and harmonized with other potential sector activities (including donors’ and other development partners) and vice-versa?
Ensure that programmes do not conflict with other national / sector activity.
- Have the main objectives and sector priorities for sector development been identified?
- Have the capacity constraints and lessons learned from previous experience been taken into account?
- Is there a clear link between budget and policy? Are budget and policy priorities complementary and realistic?
- Are coordination mechanisms of key government actors and relevant national and local stakeholders in place? Are they active? Are they consistent with the structure and responsibilities of the national government?
- Is there an established mechanism ensuring stakeholders and beneficiaries participation?
- What degree of support and/or strategies are stakeholders and development partners providing in water resources management or water-related activities? Is water considered to be a high priority or taken for granted??
- What assistance is presently being provided by development partners in water resources development? Does it include guidance for future programming?
- Do support/planned activities by development partners in other sectors complement or conflict with existing or planned water resources management activities?
Based on the above assessment of compatibility to sector alignment decide whether:
- Activities in other sectors or by other development partners can be effective and complementary as support to the water resources sector e.g. geographical scope, project duration, most suitable partners;
- There is overlap or incompatibility with activities in other sectors or development partners; this should be resolved prior to planning or implementing any further support to water resources sector;
- If faced with multiple sector donors promoting harmonization of cooperation with development partners (e.g. to reduce transactions costs); the sector, led by the government, needs to ensure effective coordination and dialogue mechanisms
- Activities already underway in other sectors or by other actors suggest that some specific support activities to the sector / water resources management may be not required under current circumstances.
- Other potential sources of funding can be considered in the framework of a sector programme;
- Types of external assistance can be considered mainly (and optimally) as e.g. macroeconomic support, technical assistance, training, investments, and supply of equipment
Checklist for Step 2: Capacity to take on and manage programme
A water resources sector programme can only be effectively implemented if the sector governance is adequate and if there is the required capacity existing within the sector, especially for the government, in order to handle the institutional, technical and financial aspects.
- Are the required policies, laws and regulations in place in order to support an effective sector development?
- Does the national government have the capacity to formulate and implement a sector policy and sector budget with a medium term perspective (and eventually a long term perspective)?
- Does the national leadership have the capacities to realistically implement the proposed sector programme?
- Is there a need to strengthen the key sector organisations (e.g. the government, implementing agencies, main service providers, etc.)?
- Is there a need to strengthen capacity of sector stakeholders (e.g. private sector, NGOs, local authorities)?
- What is the past record concerning sector programmes in water resources? Lessons learnt? Sector evolutions and trends?
- Have recent evaluations/capacity assessments of sector programmes and projects been initiated by the national government (in accordance with Paris Declaration principles) but with the participation of the key sector stakeholders and beneficiaries? Are results of these evaluations of recent programmes and projects being considered for future programming?
- Are customary rights, land ownership and transboundary disputes or other legal issues a constraint to effective implementation of water-related activities?
- Are the national institutional structures and capacities adequate for effective management and coordination of the proposed national sector framework and do the key organisations have clear, legally defined mandates?
- Who are the key agencies at the higher tiers of authority and are they capable of managing water resources in a holistic and coordinated way?
- Is institutional reform required, and if so, is the government aware, supportive and capable of reform?
Concerning sector funding in particular, there are a number of mechanisms for the provision of development partner support (including grants and loans). If and when this external assistance is envisaged, it is important to identify the most suitable funding mechanism during the sector programming phase and to ensure adequate local funding is available.
- How different types of water-related activities are presently financed, and to what extend is cost recovery considered?
- Would the country be able and willing to support local recurring costs and make the necessary budgetary allocations for proposed water resources activities?
- Does the country have the capacity to handle large conventional infrastructure projects or would smaller-scale intervention be more appropriate?
- Which mix of development partners’ funding mechanisms is most appropriate for interventions in water resources?
- Is the type of intervention proposed within the administrative, financial, and managerial capacity of the country?
- Is the funding mechanism (s) chosen financially and economically sustainable at macro-economic level?
Based on the above assessment of capacity decide whether:
- National policies and capacities are adequate to support the proposed water resources development and management, or
- National policies are adequate in general but there are specific weaknesses that would have to be addressed as part of any sector programme, in other words improving national or sector governance
- Country (sector) capacity is weak and specific actions are needed to determine ways to reform policies and strengthen capacity, is a priority
- Current sector funding mechanisms and strategies are adequate or whether specific actions are needed to improve them and their impact on the sector programme.
- Large-scale or smaller scale infrastructure interventions (or an appropriate mix) are most appropriate.
Checklist for Step 3: Compatibility and complementarity
Some countries may be fully aware of water resources issues and make appropriate plans whilst others are unaware or take a shorter-term view of needs and responses
- Is the country, or specific region, presently facing water scarcity or stress or likely to do so in the near future?
- Does the country require support in order to manage its water resources adequately?
- If no water policy exists, or is inadequate, can assistance be provided to develop one?
- If the water policy exists and it is not implemented, can the reasons be identified with internal capacities and/or external evaluation and analysis? Reasons can be varied including, ownership, planning, institutional set-up, funding, capacities, security etc.
- Do current government policies demonstrate an awareness of water resources issues and the possibility of competition, conflicts or overlaps between in-sector and other sector users?
- To what extent are people’s actual and perceived needs known and understood? Is existing water resources management clearly taking into account the social well-being of the population at the national level or in specific regions within it?
- Does the government recognise the need for an integrated/over-arching water resources policy that ensures that the water resource needs of different sectors are addressed?
- Is present legislation adequate to manage water resources effectively and, if not, can development partners provide cooperation to rectify this?
Support to programmes/ projects should be demand-driven, fully lead by the country and developed with stakeholders and the target groups.
- What is the priority given to water resources in national development policy, including issues in which water resources are critical such as survival, health, food production, well-being, natural resources conservation and ecosystem services provision?
- Is there adequate political support for policy implementation to be feasible and sustainable?
- Is there adequate conformity between the local-level problems and needs being tackled by local and community-based organisations and Government policy at national level?
- Are the local level actors (local authorities, communities, etc.) fully aware of government policies and capable to implement them?
- What choices has the government made in the past to address important issues (local, national or transboundary) related to water resources or where water has played a significant role?
- Are there indications that water issues are of concern to the general population (through NGOs, media reports, pressure groups etc.)?Is the national government responding to the people’s concern and, if so, how?
- Are associated issues, such as land use and environmental pollution prominent within general awareness and is this reflected in national policies and strategies?
- Is the government committed to resolving constraints between water and other associated issues, such as energy, navigation, transport and tourism?
In formulating any programme or action plan for water resources, care is needed to avoid contradictions between water-related sector policies and limit unnecessary competition for water resources such as those for agriculture, energy, health, education, transport, and environmental policies
- What is the national current level of commitment, both in policy and practice, to maintaining biodiversity, protecting the aquatic ecology, preserving ecosystem services and in general addressing human well-being?
- Is the national government already committed to water resources development and management that incorporates an integrated approach with other sector users?
- To what extent are the non-consumptive aspects of water resources, such as in-stream use, hydropower, flood control, recreation, and transport/navigation taken into account in water policies and proposed development plans?
- Have proposed project sector programmes or plans been developed in consultation with the various sector and sub-sector ministries and their related agencies?
- Is the proposed sector development program taking into account the other relevant sectors’ development programmes; including primarily agriculture, energy, health, education, transport, and environmental policies?
Policies established by the government should be developed in consultation with the various stakeholders to ensure that competing or conflicting interests are reconciled as far as possible and that the policy is acceptable to all interests
- Have proposed project sector programmes or plans been developed in consultation with the various sector stakeholders and with the end users in particular?
- Are there indications that the government policy and actions on water benefit the poor and disadvantaged rural or urban-poor populations, and that they are included as actors in the development process?
- To what extent is there conflict or competition between users (both consumptive and non-consumptive) and between the use and conservation of the water resource? Is this acknowledged within policy, strategy and general public awareness?
- Are transboundary issues significantly present in the water resources management? Is the government party to treaties or agreements with neighbouring countries or within their region overall?
- Are there conflicts over managing water resources between neighbouring administrative regions within the same country?
Based on the above assessment of needs, decide whether:
- Water resources are a critical issue, or whether the country is confident that it can adequately manage its water resources,
- There is a need for support to water resources in the country or region, or
- There is inadequate information available to make a decision; in this case consider whether policy support and water resource assessment and planning should be given a high priority in the country or regional programme for development assistance
Checklist for the Step 4: Identifying priority Focus Areas
It is important to identify which Focus Area(s) is/are most in need of support. This priority setting should fit within an overall sector programme based on responses to the earlier key issues.
- Is there a particular area of water use or management critical to social and economic well-being?
- How are the different Focus Areas treated within existing national and regional plans?
- Do policy conflicts make holistic planning difficult or reduce the possibility of support to any of the specific identified Focus Areas?
- Are there specific common priorities (which could result either in competition or in a more effective policy) between domestic, agricultural, and industrial water use applied by the government?
- Is there a Focus Area particularly underfunded or less regarded compared to the others?
An adequate knowledge base is crucial to reasoned planning and decision making on water resources development and management.
- Is technical information readily and sufficiently available on the quality and quantity of water sources, including surface water, soil moisture, hydrological data, meteorology, land cover and land use and aquifers? If not, will the degree of the lack of information constrain effective planning?
- Are predictions of future supply and demand being made on the basis of realistic and sound scientific and technically informed assumptions, and do they take into account all uses (consumptive and non-consumptive) of water?
- Isthe data concerning access to water and sanitation in rural and urban areas known to decision-makers?
- Is there adequate information on water quality and health issues, particularly concerning pollution, risks and vulnerability of water resources?
- Is information available on the agricultural use of water and the consumers?
- What is the potential for improving food productivity or security through improved irrigation, land drainage or flood control practices?
- Is the strategic impact of ‘virtual water’ (see Part 3) understood and taken into account in assessing the need for irrigated agricultural production or the selection of types of crops for either food or economic activity?
Possible reponses to Assessement of Steps 1 to 4
As each country is unique, any categorisation cannot be prescriptive. However, as a guide, the responses to steps 1 to 4 can help identifying the priorities for national and/or external development support. The following category examples set out a general basis for selecting different sector programme responses based on the impression gained from the issues raised in steps 1 to 4. Three categories can be determined:
Category A:
In this category, typical of “fragile states”, a country or region is likely to have weak institutions, with minimal or no evidence of good governance in general; specifically, it will be either unaware of, or have limited commitment to, sustainable management of water resources. The country probably has little capacity to manage large programmes even though the need is evidently great. In such cases, the focus could be on:
- Improving or setting up a sector policy and legislation, strategy formulation, and assistance to identify priority programmes;
- The provision of basic services (urban and rural), capacity building< and improvement of the institutional set-up.
However, as it is evident, addressing problems in fragile countries, needs considerable care and attention. It is likely that such countries are more in need of external funding and infrastructure support rather than immediate policy development.
Support for infrastructure will need to be designed to help the poorest in such a way that minimum external assistance is needed once work is completed, fostering as much as possible economically sustainable environment of investments. In this context community ownership may be critical and key partners need to be identified to help reduce the risk of unsustainable services. Adapted local technology or the careful selection of appropriate technology< will be needed as one of the main issues for the sustainability of the interventions.
The role of the civil society, NGOs or community-based organisations and innovative funding instruments such as sector budget support, pool financing and otherscan have an important role in deciding responses. Support should be available for awareness-raising and knowledge generation, such as hydrological assessments, that will be useful for more extensive interventions and permit better planning and management of water resources.
Focus Area 1 (WR) and 6 (SP) will be important but appropriate support within Focus Area 2 (BS), Focus Area 3 (MS), Focus Area 4 (AM) and Focus Area 5 (E) should also be considered.
Category B:
In this category there is likely to be clear evidence of a commitment to good governance in general and an awareness of, and desire for, equitable and sustainable water resources sector development and management (including perhaps some sector policy strategies in preparation). This should include an acceptance of the importance of stakeholder involvement and evidence of programmes to improve human resources capacity that should make the development partners interventions possible. Sector development could focus on:
- improving policy, strategy, legal and regulatory frameworks to improve water resources sector management and build on any existing work;
- support the country government for the definition of a sector programme through the principles of the sector wide approach (as defined in chapter 11).
- identifying reasons why, if policy and strategy are already defined and have some political support, but are not correctly implemented and a disconnection is apparent between the national and the local level;
- assistance to increase the participation< of stakeholders< and, in particular, facilitating the increased involvement of the private sector, civil society and the education sector including University and research;
- encouraging capacity building and institutional improvements at all levels;
- giving increased importance to equitable and sustainable cost recovery via service charges – with progressive steps towards equitable tariffs< – to allow reductions in state subsidies;
- support for knowledge generation – strengthening data and information systems.
All focus areas should be considered for support.
Category C:
In category C the country is likely to be politically stable with clear evidence of progress towards instituting a systematic approach to water resources development and management, including legal and regulatory frameworks, capacity building and private sector development. In such countries there is likely to be an awareness of, and commitment to, the modern concepts of water resources management. Support could be required for:
- devolution of responsibility to lower administrative tiers or to the private sector, including capacity building for local government, the private sector, and community organisations in water resources development and management; assumption by central government of a planning, legal, regulatory, and facilitating role including re-allocation of water resources between sectors; and the establishment of a framework for increased public private partnerships;
- measures to introduce pollution control, wastewater treatment and reuse, and charges to industry for pollution of water courses or aquifers;
- the adoption of demand management< measures to ensure reliable supplies, including rehabilitation of existing structures or other measures which minimise the need for new infrastructure;
- the improvement of integrated management through increasing knowledge about cross–sector linkages leading to a multi-sector approach to water resources development and management, including positive participation in managing transboundary waters<;
- the provision of increasingly sophisticated knowledge and data generation and computerised management information systems, with a sustainable strategy on scientific and technical knowledge management.
In summary, all Focus Areas should be considered for support to varying degrees.
Identification
Institutional and Management Principles
The lack of an integrated policy environment at the national level can lead to inefficient allocation of water resources and poor investment decisions. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Fragmented planning functions and agency responsibilities lead to sector-based project-by- project development and inter-sector conflict. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Transboundary water resource issues are critical to water resource availability in many countries. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Neglect of legal aspects during strategy formulation can lead to an untenable legal framework for sound resource management. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Effective inter-agency and inter-sector planning is essential. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
A sound legal basis is required for effective delivery service, therefore:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|
Social Principles
National and regional social development goals should be integrated with water resources policies if key objectives are to be achieved. Therefore examine:
| KEY ISSUES | POSSIBLE RESPONSES |
|---|---|
|
|