|
|
Eastern Cape and Northern Province, South Africa: Sustainable water and wastewater services in underprivileged areas
Actors
In 1997, South Africas Department for Water Affairs and Forestry (DWAF) signed two-year contracts with four BoTT consortia, one in each of the countrys four poorest provinces (extended by two years in 1999). Programmes in two of the four provinces with Project Implementing Agencies (PIAs) Metsico in the Northern Province and AmanzAbantu in Eastern Cape constitute one focus project of the BPD. These PIAs are led by Water and Sanitation Services of South Africa (WSSA), a subsidiary of Northumbrian Lyonnaise International (NLI - and therefore of ONDEO (ex-SLdE)). Both incorporate the Mvula Trust, a water and sanitation oriented national NGO, for the institutional and social development (ISD) elements of the programme. The intention is to transfer responsibilities for rural W&S to local authorities and / or communities. An Employers Representative (ER) oversees the PIAs on behalf of DWAF. Project Description
BoTT (Build, Operate, Train, Transfer) is a public-private partnership - whereby scheme funding is from the public sector & private partners undertake project implementation. BoTT is primarily targeted at poor communities and small, poorer towns. One of the key principles is that sustainability can only be achieved by actively involving communities and local government in all stages of the project life cycle. BoTT thus attempts to build up capacity within institutions, communities and councils in order to pursue an integrated and participatory project development approach. A one-stop shop capacity is created via a consortium of service providers with expertise in five key disciplines: design, construction, operation and maintenance (O&M), on-site sanitation, and Institutional and Social Development (ISD). Context
Upon its creation in 1994 DWAF assumed control of W&S in the former black homelands - national government now seeks to transfer its responsibilities to local government. Ongoing institutional reform has redrawn jurisdictional boundaries and new local authorities were defined and elected in 2000. An accompanying statement by the ANC promising free basic services for all also reawakened the 'free water' debate - the ramifications and responses to this statement are now being hotly debated. There is a backdrop of general ambivalence towards PSP in South Africa - the BoTT programme has itself achieved significant notoriety. Project Beneficiaries
Multiple, typically small, rural W&S systems have now been built and are being run (by communities). In general, post-apartheid expectations are extremely high - this is coupled with a general non-payment / entitlement culture and the use of technology generally inappropriate to the ability to pay of poor rural communities. Extensive radio and media campaigns are aimed at strengthening willingness-to-pay, which has met with some success in the BoTT service areas. There are some security issues in historically unsafe areas, whilst other issues of note include HIV/Aids, land tenure, illiteracy and unemployment. A recent outbreak of cholera made headline news and increased pressure on politicians. Pollution of rural water sources is another concern. Objectives and Structures of Partnership
The overall aim is to harness the comparative advantages of each sector, to provide a holistic drop-down structure that can deliver rapid, yet sustainable, W&S solutions in poor rural areas. Overall objectives are clearly enshrined in the contract, whilst the means are encapsulated in Business Plans prepared by the PIAs when bidding. In effect there are three types of partnership: i) the contractual relationships between DWAF, the ER, local governments, the PIAs & the communities; ii) the working relationship within the PIAs between private sector firms & Mvula; and iii) the project implementation partnerships of the private sector, Mvula (and various sub-contractors) with communities and / or local governments. In this latter arrangement, communities are represented directly via Project Working and Project Steering Committees. Roles and Responsibilities
DWAF (both national and regional) funds construction and approves projects. Local Governments are being transferred W&S responsibilities. The PIAs are contracted to DWAF. Individual organisations within the PIAs may win spin-off contracts and are specialists in one of the five disciplines. Water and Sanitation South Africa (WSSA) is present within both BPD BoTTs and brings operations and maintenance experience. The Mvula Trust is also doubly present and works on ISD implementation with sub contractors (Amanz'abantu) and ISD strategy and quality control (Metsico). Communities select a representative for Project Steering Committees (PSCs) and Project Working Committees - they also contribute labour, operate and maintain schemes and set user fees. The ER monitors PIAs work. Community Liaison
Community involvement is regarded as the key to ownership, cost-recovery and thus sustainability. Stakeholder involvement is typically via the PSC (facilitated by Mvula in the Eastern Cape, and by private sector partners in the Northern Province) - this evolves into a Water Committee which runs the system. An initial fund (10% of future annual O&M costs) is set up (in the Eastern Cape) & community labour used for construction. There is also training of plumbers, operators, water bailiffs and revenue collection officers. After a 12 month O&M period DWAF transfers schemes to local water authorities (a Local or District Council). Communications and Feedback
Amongst consortium partners communications are fairly good. These have a strong project focus (and thus macro issues can take a back seat). Serious disputes are fairly rare internally - if necessary these are resolved via reference to the contract. There is a national BoTT Steering Committee meeting every 2/3 months. However, various ad-hoc modifications have complicated communications and decision-making (with many intermediaries between DWAF and a water user). To compensate DWAF have developed a number of planning forums and standing committees. For the end beneficiaries, this structure also poses accountability problems - with so many actors and committees, access is complicated. The proliferation of decision-making forums also renders each less effective. Evolution and Institutionalisation
BoTT was also designed to be a flexible structure from the start, and has demonstrated this over time. The NGO sector has seen increasing professionalism (outcome-based contracts, performance measurement etc). District councils are increasingly accepting of both the PIAs and BoTT, whilst increasing trust from DWAF has seen an extension of original contracts. As for institutionalisation - a possible transfer to BoTT phase II is currently being debated. Results
Over 45 projects have now been implemented, leading to improved access for roughly 3.5 million people. BoTT has ongoing DWAF support and general endorsement from reviewers. The mainstreaming of ISD has led to an enhanced chance of sustainability. Lower costs, increased ownership and job creation have also resulted from community involvement. Strengths
Flexibility in a comprehensive format; community empowerment; local government control; increased ownership & sustainability via community/local government involvement; a leveraging of DWAFs limited capacity; a more central role for ISD; close co-ordination between NGO & private sector; a solid structure with clearly defined roles and responsibilities. Next Steps and Replicability
The major issue is now the decentralisation and transfer process. This will require ongoing capacity building within local government and new relationship building. A possible revision of the BoTT structure is being considered - this will retain the partnership but streamline and reduce duplication. Some replication is already visible and more is planned. Wider Lessons
Wider Lessons are that:
- dialogue towards consensus over time frames is critical
- dialogue towards consensus over stakeholder risks is also beneficial
- structural monopolies (thus limiting potential partners) can be a threat
- that the balance of risks and responsibilities when bringing a regulator into partnership needs careful thought
- ongoing learning mechanisms are also important
- questions over the NGO skills, resources and capacity must be separated from questions of commitment.
Synopsis content update: 03 July 2001 |
|
|