1.

The Challenges in Attaining Sustainable Development for

Improved Livelihood

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

AFRICA

29th to 31st OCTOBER 2008.

By:
Prof. D.A. Mashauri
mashauri@udsm.ac.tz
ABSTRACT

The theme of this year touches on improved livelihood emanating

from how we manage water resources and services in a sustainable
manner. This is a mouthful objective to be met in a two or three days
meeting like this one. The definition of the sustainable development
is well known among all of us. But the connection of this concept or
principle to the concrete steps that need to be taken in order to
achieve improved livelihood is blurred. It is not the aim of this paper
to bridge this gap between the theoretical principles and what has
to be done in practice in order to have sustainable development.
That will be the outcome of our collective wisdom in this symposium.

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

our people of the region. This presentation is essentially an attempt
to point out the challenges or hurdles that must be thought through
and the pragmatic solutions found that are appropriate to the
region. The challenges include (i) training of the appropriate
operatives and water professionals (technicians and engineers etc.),
(ii) cost recovery (CR), (iii) water integrity and accountability, (iv)
Appropriate Private Sector Participation (PSP), (v) increasing water
productivity for improved crop yields and hence family incomes of
resource-constrained subsistence farmers, (vi) information and data
archiving and dissemination.

2
Key words: Capacity building, Cost Recovery (CR), improved
livelihood, IWRM, MDGs, PSP, WDM, Water integrity and
accountability.

1. INTRODUCTION

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

annual series of symposia in Southern Africa. Perhaps it is time
to look back at the series and their perceived or otherwise
achievements in grappling with attaining sustainable
development for improved livelihood. It is not naïve to look
into history in order to learn one or two things that has shaped
the current landscape.
Looking back here is in the form of the challenges or hurdles
that we had to overcome or will have to overcome in order to
achieve our expectations. In this regards we look specifically
at the issues of water and how they are imparting on
sustainable development. And in turn how this impacts on
improved livelihood. To start we dwell on the following
questions:-

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

solutions to our people’s aspirations in these series of
symposia since 2000?

3
(ii) Those we seek to help are not here! They predominantly
live in rural areas or peri-urban settlements largely
depend on unprocessed natural resources which we
exploit with our advantaged position of access to
modern technology. How are we grappling with the
practical realities of ensuring that we have a good idea
of their needs and are able to design our research to
appropriately address their needs?

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

boundary by nature. How prepared are we in conflict
prevention and conflict resolution?

(iv) The rich and the powerful can access information (and
sometimes manipulate it!) and influence decision making
in their favour. How is the region ensuring the same
information (un manipulated) reaches the poor and the
powerless?

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

water and sanitation services has caught up with a lot of
the countries (sometimes unawares!) in the region. The
challenge is how has privatization or rather private sector
involvement in most feasible ways taken on board the

4
 expectations of the poor especially the resource-
constrained urban dweller?

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

provision of water supply and sanitation especially in
urban centres has become very touching in the World.
How is the region prepared to cope with its own protocols
on the issue?

(vii) The issue of appropriate technologies and standards play

a key role in the provision of water and sanitation
services. How far have we gone in our day to day
endeavours to ensure that the technology is the one
reachable by our customers and how does it meets the
standards?

2. LOOKING BACK THROUGH THE UN-TIME TUNNEL

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

played a role on global water policy – making:

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

del Plata in Argentina. It came out with the International
Water Supply and Sanitation Decade (IWSSD)
Declaration from 1981 to 1990. This was a milestone we

5
 can’t easily forget as it was a decision by our leaders on
behalf of all of us! In 1990 and ten years down the time
lane in New Delhi we found out that water was still
undervalued as such, and much of it was misused. A
hard and blatant fact which still hangs on our necks
today.

(ii) Thereafter in 1992 the Dublin Principles were conceived

and agreed upon in the Irish Republic by many water
and political leaders. Until now we still grapple with the
comprehension of the four Dublin principles, let alone the
implementation hurdles thereof.

(iii) The Rio Summit was held in the same year of 1992 and
came out with the Rio Declaration and Agenda 21
programme. A formidable and plausible Agenda
indeed. It is still anyone’s guess how much of these
different aspects of the deliberations have been
integrated into our nations’ as well as regional plans and
implemented.

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

on Sustainable Development in 2002 set global goals.

6
 The above mentioned are among the major and crucial
milestones that touch on the livelihood of our people. We can
reflect back at these Declarations and ponder on the impacts
they have made on the quest of our peoples attain better
livelihood. In reflecting on these well thought out Declarations
and proposals and the huge disparity that currently exists
between what they were intended to achieve and the present
realities, we are confronted with the challenge of proffering
solutions to bridge this gap as a matter of urgency.

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

ENDEVOURS.

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

symposium and just like the last eight meetings each has a
main Theme. The Theme of this year is “Water and Sustainable
Development for Improved Livelihoods”. This is a very fitting
Theme given the conditions of the present day challenges in
the provision of water supply and sanitation services in the
region.

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

hydrology, water for people, water and land, water and
environment, water and society as well as water resources
management. Our experience is that these identified themes

7
are still relevant and appropriate in the region. From the
survey carried by Zaag (2007) on the publications in PCE
Journal arising from previous symposia and the sobering
observation that “there is no evidence on the ground, in terms
of improving the livelihoods of people”, there is the need to
step up in terms of impacts of our research efforts. It is hoped
that subsequent symposia, including this one, will bring about
the desired outcomes of a steady and sustained improvement
in livelihoods of our people.

This paper is an attempt to highlight the hurdles which are

facing the region and not an attempt to appease a people or
a group of people. It is indeed a reflection and only so!

As expected, articles presented and eventually succeeding in

getting published in the PCE Journal are overwhelming on
Water and Environment. Hard core hydrology scores the
lowest as can be expected due to its technical nature and the
expected nature of the readership in the region. The other
four themes fall in between these two extremes.
In any case if one looks back at the symposium series one
discovers that a wide range of issues and problems have been
addressed. The following is an attempt to scan through the
Themes of each of the past 8 symposia.

8
In 2000 the symposium was sponsored by WARFSA/WATERNET
with the collaboration of Eduardo Mondlane University (UEM).
The Theme was Sustainable Use of Water Resources:
Advances in Education and Research: The emphasis was on
education and research which was fair enough as we were on
the verge of starting the Modular Masters degree programme
in IWRM in the Region. The sub themes were:-

(i) People, Institutions and Policy,

(ii) Management of Water Systems
(iii) Water Demand Management
(iv) A New Curriculum

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

Theme was “Integrated Water Resources Management.
Theory, Practice, Cases. This was the first time IWRM concepts
vividly came on board in the oral presentations as well as in
case studies. An attempt was made towards solving some
water resources issues at basin levels. The Case Studies
indicated attempts at proffering solutions to water resources
problems/challenges on the basis of IWRM principles.

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

October 2002. The main theme was “Water Demand
Management: Sustainable Uses of Water Resources”. The

9
meeting had papers striving to give practical expression to
achieving Water Demand Management and its potential
benefits of having larger segment of society benefit from water
supply services.

The 4th symposium was held in Gaborone, Botswana between

15th and 17th October 2003. The Theme was “Water, Science,
Technology and Policy – convergence and action by all”. This
was indeed a meeting point for action leading to sustainable
development. This was a meeting that intended to achieve
convergence of concepts and practice in the water sector. In
any case it left some challenges for the next symposium.

Between 2nd and 4th November 2004 the 5th

WATERNET/WARFSA Symposium was held in Windhoek,
Namibia. The symposium was held in association with GWP-SA,
DRFN as well as Polytechnic of Namibia. The Theme was
“IWRM and MDGs, Managing Water for Peace and Prosperity”.
The challenges were many but there were a lot of papers that
made an attempt to solve them head on. There was a good
combination of IWRM and MDGs in order to achieve peace
and prosperity. The symposium theme was most fitting, taking
cognisance of the fact that MDGs were at the centre stage of
most UN-sponsored international fora. Going back to the

10
introduction again the issue of transboundary waters and their
inherent potential conflicts was addressed in the forum.

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

Ezulwini, Swaziland during 2nd - 4th November 2005. The Theme
was “Water for sustainable social-economic development,
good health for all and gender equity”. This was the first time
issues of social-economic nature and gender equity were
dealt were addressed. It was a meeting that strived to breach
the gap that had had been left out for more technical and
“visible” subthemes.

The 7th WATERNET/WARFSA/GWP-SA Symposium was held in

Lilongwe, Malawi 1st to 3rd November 2006. The Theme was
“Mainstreaming Integrated Water Resources Management in
the Development Process.” The major sub-themes being
Hydrology, Water and Environment, Water and Land, Water
and society, Water for people as well as Water Resources
Management. A lot of papers were presented which
generated new ideas and to some extent built on the
knowledge already acquired in past symposia.

The 8th WATERNET/WARFSA/GWP-SA Symposium was held in

Lusaka, Zambia during 31st October and 2nd November 2007.
The Theme was “IWRM from Concept to Practice”. Here again

11
 the emphasis was on the less romantic and more mundane
practice and down-to-earth solutions to water resources
problems that people in the region face.

This is the 9th Symposium in the Series. And rightly so the Theme
is “Water and Sustainable Development for Improved
Livelihoods”. Again here we see the issue of water and
sustainable development but with emphasis on improved
livelihoods. It is expected that papers presented in this forum
will address the issues related to improving the livelihoods of
people of the region through better management of the water
resources – IWRM principles! It is therefore another challenge
to all of us here on how we relate our research findings to
offering better service to the people.

4. LESSONS LEARNED AND CHALLENGES AHEAD

Lessons learnt so far can be summarised as follows:-
4.1 Millennium Development Goals (MDGs).
The 7th MDG is very relevant here – the goal has three
targets i.e. sustainable development and environmental
conservation; increase in population with access to safe
drinking water and sanitation as well as improvement of
lives. In pursuance of this goal, this forum will play a very
significant role of elevating the need for achieving
“improved livelihoods”.

12
■Some hard facts about access to various forms of sanitation in Sub-Saharan
Africa are very scary (Strauss, 2006).
■Just about 53% do have access to pit latrine option.
■Those who do not have (they do not own or have access to a neighbour’s
facility!) any access are sizeable at 35%.
■A mere 8% have access to flush toilet.
■The rest use any other system including the infamous flying toilet.

In any case investment into this subsector is considered

private as such most governments do little on this if
anything. But we all know that sanitation holds the key to
achieving MDGs especially those evolving around water.
Recently (October 7th to 9th) our African leaders
recognised these challenges as such they have
committed themselves to follow up on the following 8
challenges see box below (AU, 2008)
- water and sanitation infrastructure financing
- water conservation and equitable distribution
- closing the sanitation gap
- breaking the silence on sanitation and hygiene
- adapting to climate change
- integrated management of national and transboundary surface and ground water
- investing in information, knowledge and monitoring
- institutional development as well capacity building

This shows a recommendable commitment by our leaders

that need to be followed by a matching commitment by
our experts seating in this forum.

13
However, the challenges remain that the resources
required to achieving them are not available in time and
in quantities that will bring about significant changes. In
Tanzania as an example, the amount required is close to
US$ 2billion – a colossal amount by any standards. I
believe this state of affairs is replicated in many other
countries in the region. Then how can our esteemed
experts in these symposia contribute towards the
attainment of the MDGs through their research and
publications? Perhaps the speech by the former
president of Tanzania (Mkapa, 2005) would shade some
ideas and challenges for the seemingly enormous task
(see box below).
■ Perhaps we might be tempted to ask if in 2000 world leaders were over-
ambitious in setting these goals. But let me ask you, learned people and
scientists:
• What is so ambitious about halving, over a period of 25 years, between 1990
and 2015, the proportion of people earning less than US$ 1.0 per day and
those who suffer from hunger? The goal was not to eliminate poverty, only to
halve it; not to eliminate hunger, only to halve it. Is it really too ambitious
taking into account the wealth and the knowledge that our world has?
• What is so ambitious about ensuring that by 2015, all children, boys and girls,
would be able to complete a full course of primary school education? Is that
really too much to ask?

14
• What is so ambitious about eliminating gender disparity in primary and
secondary schools; or in reducing by two-thirds the under-five mortality rate
and maternal mortality rate?

4.2 Privatisation and Divesture

This is an issue which is a challenge to all of us here. How
can we embrace privatization or rather private sector
involvement as a policy but avoid the inherent
monopolistic machinations? And at the same time keep
water supply and sanitation services affordable to the
poor especially the urban poor. The other issue is how the
State remains in control and accountable over water
management if the water sector is transformed from the
public law domain into the private law domain?
We can at least borrow a leaf from the PRINWASS (2004)
research findings on the issue. The main findings of this
three year research (the author was a member of the
team) is “the Policy of Promoting Private Sector
Involvement in Urban Water and Sanitation Projects was
pitched on the premise that the public sector is inefficient
and under resourced and that private sector
participation would bring higher efficiency through
competition and fresh resources, and help to extend
coverage of these services to the poor. The case
material does not support this claim”. There are 14 other

15
findings from this study which are worth noting and taking
on board before joining the band wagon of privatization.
These findings confirm what Briscoe (2003) had allayed
and to quote him “….The role of Governments and the
World Bank – which are basically public institutions – is
facilitation, getting regulatory frameworks right, and then
automatically all this would be done by the private
sector. But we and others vastly overestimated what the
private sector could and would do in difficult markets”.

Hukka and Katko (2003) buttress this by stating that

“…Water Supply and Sewerage Systems are, and will
remain, natural monopolies since it is not viable to build
several networks and facilities in the same physical
environment”. This finding ties with those of the PRINWASS
(2004) study. The poor pay more for water of suspicious
quality was another stack finding by Kjellen (2000). Annez
(2006) points out that PPI must be revisited so that the
perceived services e.g. water supply and sanitation are
rendered in a manner and spirit of the served.

PPI = Private Participation in Infrastructure

16
Now some fifteen years further even the World Bank representatives admit among others that
“however, PPI has disappointed—playing a far less significant role in financing infrastructure in
cities than was hoped for, and which might be expected given the attention it has received and
continues to receive in strategies to mobilize financing for infrastructure” (Anew, 2006).
Thus, the challenge is rather how to develop private sector companies that
would sell their services and goods in ways that will guarantee competition. And
how to develop the capacity of local governments. And how to promote and
develop public enterprise reforms. And how to develop the overall “games of
the rules” like regulation.
Policy Research Working Paper 4391Alternatives to Infrastructure Privatization Revisited: Public
Enterprise Reform from the 1960s to the 1980s José A. Gómez-Ibáñez The World Bank
Sustainable Development Network. November 2007. WPS4391

4.3 COST RECOVERY ISSUES

When considering privatization we usually refer to urban
settings. This is partly because very little or no privatization
can take place in a rural setting. This is a wrong notion as
yet, in rural conditions in many countries we have the
tradition of water cooperatives of small systems owned
and managed by people themselves. These are also
private, but they are not profit-making. Thus, there is a
difference between private and private depending what
we are speaking about Mashauri and Katko (1992). There
are exceptions but this is neither the place nor the time
for an argument on the issue.

17
 On the other hand cost recovery will and can take place
in rural setting. Both Hukka and Katko (2003) and Yacoob
(1990) agree that cost recovery must be imbedded in the
policies of provision of water supply and sanitation
services. They also concur that CR must be articulated so
that it does not overburden the poor. Even the poorest of
the poor must be afforded the bare minimum amount of
water to make him survive. This is the third challenge that
must be looked into when we ponder about the theme of
this meeting.

4.4. Water integrity and accountability

The issue of water integrity and accountability is as old as
the water resources trade itself. At regional level issues of
transparency and accountability are well articulated in
the SADC Protocol Against Corruption (Earle et al 2008).
The Protocol covers the water sector, too. The corrupt
practices in the water sector have been attributed as
taking the form of:
- Abuse of resources,
- Corruption in procurements,
- Administrative corruption in payment systems, and
- Corruption at the point of service delivery.

18
 You and I in this forum constitute a good section of
expertise in the region. We are therefore better off (than
the people we pretend to represent!) to explain how we
are grappling with water integrity and accountability in
our own countries or in our work domains. It is yet another
challenge which can mean success or failure in the
provision of water and sanitation for improved livelihood.
Are we really accountable to our peoples in the
deliverance of services such as those of water supply and
sanitation? Did we have to dance to tunes of
Globalisation and the good governance stuff? See box
below (Shivji, 2003).

■“Political conditionalities were added to economic conditionalities, while

economic conditionalities were upgraded to include privatisation of not only
parastatals but also services-water, electricity, communication, education, etc.
■Multiparty democracy, human rights, “good governance”, poverty reduction
became the buzz words of the discourse, now renamed “policy dialogues”

4.5. Capacity Building and Sustainable Development

This is yet another issue which needs proper evaluation
and support if we are to achieve the MDGs. This is a
region “proud” of less than 20 engineers per 100,000
people. A number much less than the one required to
form a critical mass for development. Rotival (1990)
stated that in order to progress (post IWSSD) Capacity

19
 Building in terms of strengthening of sector institutions and
sector plans and strategies, human resources
development and improved information systems is
crucial. Ellis (1990) concurs with Rotival and alludes that
training of engineers and technicians is of paramount
importance in the water sector. This line of thought is
equally supported by Mkanga (1990). It is gratifying that
WaterNet is a capacity building network that has a
mission to enhance human knowledge base so as to
achieve improved livelihood. Indeed WaterNet is playing
its role in mounting short specialised courses, Master’s
degree programmes as well as running
workshops/meetings like this one which is part of its
mission. We are all proud to be part of the WATERNET
family. It is hoped that our governments and their
development partners will endure the new paradigms in
terms of vision, mission and implementation so as to attain
the MDGs.

4.6 APPROPRIATE TECHNOLOGIES AND STANDARDS

The issue of appropriate technologies and standards is usually taken

for granted in the provision of water and sanitation services. If the
technology chosen is in-appropriate it will not meet the aspirations
of the intended users of a given system. On the other hand when

20
the standards are not adhered to, resources will be lost, too. Thus
there must be both carrot and stick system that will ensure resources
are not wasted and services are delivered at the prescribed quality
(pressure, water quality and for the number hours per day etc). Of
course the criteria is that all this done but should not overburden the
user in anyway. The paper by Van Vuuren (2008) says it so well see
box below.

▀When you go into a hardware store, chances are you will find it much easier and cheaper to
purchase a non-compliant plumbing component than a compliant equivalent
■Nearly 60% of plumbing products are not SABS or JASWIC complaint
■Plumbers and product manufacturers considered a lack of enforcement of legislation due to a
lack of trained inspectors as the biggest problems in the sector at present.

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

can be causative to problems of service delivery to the
communities we have committed ourselves to serve.

5.0 CONCLUDING REMARKS

• It can be concluded that the series of

WATERNET/WARFSA/GWP-SA symposia is still relevant and
provide a viable avenue for dissemination of research
findings.

21
• There is a need to concretise whatever has been
researched and found to be workable, and thereafter
translated into country and regional plans.
• Issues of water integrity and accountability are real and
must be taken on board in all our endeavours of water
development.
• There is a need to streamline all that can be done or should
be done in order to achieve the MDGs by the set time of
2015 (which is just around the corner).
• The knowledge base (training, research, information and
data archiving and dissemination) must be enhanced in the
region if we have to improve the livelihood of our people.
• Issues of cost recovery (CR) and affordability must not
remain as slogans but rather pragmatic strategies of
provision of water and sanitation services especially to poor
should be more vigorously pursued.
• Investment in the sanitation sub-sector is far below the
actual requirements. On the other hand sanitation may hold
the key to success or failure of the MDGs. It is really a time
bomb (in terms of health and the environment) awaiting to
be detonated!
• The issue of appropriate technologies and standards is
usually taken for granted in the provision of water and
sanitation services. It is therefore just appropriate that

22
 standards are adhered to and appropriate technologies
are implemented.
• All of us should reflect back on the symposia achievements
and take something home to experiment with and perhaps
report back in the next symposium!

23
 REFERENCES:

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

what have we learnt from recent experience? World Bank Policy Research
Working Paper 4045.
2. AU-African Union, (2008), Achieving the Millennium Development
Goals on Water and Sanitation in Africa by 2015, Priorities,
Partnerships and Plans. Report for the Meeting of Joint Meetings of
the African Ministers’ Council on Water (AMCOW), African
Development Bank (AfDB), UN Water/Africa and Partners, Addis
Ababa, Ethiopia, 7th-10th October 2008, 14p. Available at ww.africa-
union.org.

2. Briscoe, J., (2003), Return to resources for the World Bank,

Water 21 – June 2003, pp. 13-14.

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

Integrity and Accountability in Water Activities and Relevant
Capacities in the SADC – Region, UNDP Water Governance
Facility at SIWI, WaterNet and Cap-Net, Paper 12, p. 45.

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

5. Hukka, J.J., and Katko, T.S., (2003), Refuting the paradigm of

water services privatization, Natural Resources Forum.
27 (2003) 142-155.

6. Katko, T.S. (1990); Cost Recovery in Water Supply in

Developing Countries, Water Resources Development,
Volume 6 No. 2, pp. 86-94.

24
7. Kjellen, M., (2000); Complementary Water Systems in Dar es
Salaam, Tanzania: The Case of Water Vending, Water
Resources Development, Vol. 16, No. 1 pp. 143-154.

8. Mashauri, D. A., and Katko, T.S., (1992), Water Development

and Tariffs in Tanzania: From Free Water Policy towards
Cost Recovery, Environmental Management Journal,
Volume 17(1), pp. 31-39.

9. Mkanga, P.J., (1990); Experiences of the Water Supply and

Sanitation Decade in Tanzania as a Developing
Country, 1981-1990, Vesitalous 6/1990, pp 12-14.

10. Mkapa, W.B., (2005); Speech by The former President of the

Republic of Tanzania, at The UniPID conference,
University of Joensuu, Finland, 9th September 2005, 7p.
Available at
http://www.joensuu.fi/ajankohtaista/unipid090905.html

11. PRINWASS, (2004); Main Trends and prospects characterizing

private sector participation in Water and Sanitation: A
discussion of project findings, Oxford University, 4p.
(Also at www.geog.ox.ac.uk/~ prinwass/).

12. Rotival, A.H., (1990), The Decade in Retrospect and Future

Work within the UN, Vesitalous 6/1990, pp. 3-5.

13. Savenije, H.H.G., (2002), Why water is not an ordinary

economic good, or Why the Girl is special, pp. 340-343.

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

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

15. Strauss, M., (2006), Urban Sanitation Challenges in Un-

sewered cities, International Conference on Faecal

25
 Sludge Management(FSM) Policy, Dakar, Senegal May
9th-12th 2006. Available at www.sandec.eawag.ch.

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

17. Van Vuuren, L., (2008); Cheap Plumbing Imports Wastes

Precious Resource, The Water Wheel, July/August 2008
Vol. 7 No. 4, pp.16-18.

18. Yacoob, M., (1990); Community Self-Financing of Water

Supply and Sanitation: What are the promises and
pitfalls? Oxford University Press, Health Policy and
Planning 5(4): pp. 1-6.

26