KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa: Management of water services

Actors

Vivendi Water originally became interested in setting up a tri-sector pilot project in response to the global launch of the BPD - its contacts with Umgeni water (a bulk water supplier in South Africa) led it into discussion with Pietermaritzburg local council.

Mvula Trust agreed to form the NGO pillar of the arrangement, principally to gain experience of working in urban environments. Durban Council joined a few months later as did the Water Research Commission. A Memorandum of Understanding (for the project in Pietermaritzburg) was followed by a formal Co-operation Agreement, detailing the roles, responsibilities and governance structures of the pilot partnership.

Project Description

Several pilot schemes are now up and running in five selected communities in the two cities (ranging from 700 to 4000 households each). Various solutions include a three service-level scheme, individual flow limiters, community service centres. Most recently a new project on customer management has been started in a pilot area whose methodology builds on lessons learned to date

Context

After 1994 Durban and Pietermaritzburg municipalities were expanded to include the former townships. Their boundaries have recently been further extended to include surrounding rural areas (part of a national decentralisation policy). New local authorities were defined and elected in 2000. During these elections a statement by the ANC promising free basic services for all reawakened the 'free water' debate - the ramifications and responses to this are now being hotly debated. There is also a backdrop of general ambivalence towards PSP in South Africa with the unions generally wary of private sector involvement in any form.

Project Beneficiaries

Post-apartheid expectations in South Africa are high, requiring careful negotiation from the partners. Within the townships there is a strong culture of non-payment & entitlement, stemming from the apartheid-era resistance movement. This low willingness-to-pay is proving difficult for the pilot to overcome and impairs cost recovery. Security is an issue in the townships, but good community relations have somewhat tempered this. A recent outbreak of cholera in KwaZulu Natal (though not in Durban or Pietermaritzburg) made headline news, increasing political attention. Other significant issues include HIV/Aids, illiteracy and unemployment.

Objectives and Structures of Partnership

The focus project is an experimental pilot project exploring innovative W&S solutions. The overall objectives are well documented and split via 7 Task components: i) community liaison; ii) project environment; iii) education and awareness; iv) technical activities; v) customer management; vi) monitoring of awareness, knowledge and behaviour & vii) reporting and communication of project activities and outcomes. The project established two Steering Committees (senior partner representatives) and two Task Teams - one for Durban and one for Pietermaritzburg. The Task Teams focus on implementation and delegate work to both Component Managers and Task Managers.

Roles and Responsibilities

Co-operative Agreements lay out roles, responsibilities, and financial commitments. Vivendi Water serves as the project manager, whilst time & other resources roughly follow a three-way split. On the ground there is some cross-over, but in general Mvula are involved in community liaison work, Vivendi Water undertake project management and the Municipalities integrate the pilot project within their role as a service provider. The WRC helps to determine and disseminate lessons learned. External consultants have undertaken some community liaison, education and technical activities.

Community Liaison

Community liaison is cited as the first of the projects seven components, reflecting its importance. There is a commitment to undertake community consultation / participation on an ongoing basis, using existing community structures. Transfer workshops educate people about the project, build up capacity within the municipalities to undertake liaison work, promote community organisation and self-development, and share knowledge, skills and resources. Actors from all sectors are involved. Turnover of role-players within communities does pose a challenge - recent local elections mean that new actors will have to be educated.

Communications and Feedback

The partnership structure lends itself to clear consultation and communication between partners (whether in the Steering Committees or via Task Teams). Monthly Task Team meetings are an effective mechanism - decisions rely on consensus with working groups discussing unsettled issues. Strong personal relationships have been built up over time - staff contact is informal, frequent and generally project oriented. A specific monitoring and evaluation (M&E) aspect has been included (and a local consultant engaged). The WRC will play a key role in these M&E exercises (which it is funding). A workshop was also held in January 2001 to analyse the functioning of the partnership.

Evolution and Institutionalisation

As mentioned, some cross-over of roles has emerged - this reflects an informal flexibility to the partnership. Community liaison itself has evolved over time. In general, the partnership is characterised as responsive and evolving, exhibiting a wide sense of fluidity and candour. Institutionalisation questions turn on the future of the partnership beyond the pilot stages, something which is still unclear. Some effort needs to be expended on institutionalising the approach within partner organisations.

Results

It is too soon to properly judge the partnership impacts. Indicators and an M&E methodology are being established to substantiate anecdotal testimony of cheaper and faster projects. Satisfaction and optimism amongst both partners and communities is strong.

Strengths

Strong relationships between partners; solid time invested at the beginning; a well-defined structure; clear roles and responsibilities; willingness & trust amongst partners.

Next Steps and Replicability

The next steps for the partners will be to capitalise on the strengths and address the weaknesses, opportunities and threats identified in the Jan 2001 Workshop. These steps include:

• increasing councillor buy-in
• deepening community involvement
• seeking clarity over the NGO role
• constructing a two-way dialogue with the poor and bringing community structures closer
• producing and communicating tangible results
• undertaking more marketing and outreach work
• strengthening the Steering Committee (whose role has been relatively weak and membership smaller and more remote from the project)
• pursuing further institutionalisation
• exploring future partnership options whilst maintaining current focus.

Replicating the project seems a definite possibility, although the future of partnership beyond the pilot remains unclear. If not within the current partnership framework, most partners would like to replicate a similar approach within their organisations.

Wider Lessons

Wider lessons relate to:

• governance: clear roles and responsibilities are crucial; flexibility is important; consensus decision making helps; partner contact should be institutionalised
• time: consensus and trust require time; relationship-building is important and needs champions
• other lessons: external events can pose a threat to a solid partnership; attention over the NGO role is needed; an NGOs financial independence can be a delicate issue; and community liaison is vital but challenging.

Synopsis content update: 20 July 2001