Tag Archives water

From transferring expertise to co-creating change — the Dutch water sector needs a transformation

By Posted on 2996 views

The Netherlands Enterprise Agency (Rijksdienst voor Ondernemend Nederland) has spearheaded several stakeholder consultations within the Dutch water sector to discuss social inclusivity in the Netherlands-funded international water management projects. In this blog article, ISS researchers Farhad Mukhtarov and Karen Vargas, together with colleagues from Deltares, TU Delft, and IHE-Delft, discuss a recent participatory session they organized that sought to better understand ‘social inclusivity’ in the water sector. A key takeaway was that self-reflection about power dynamics among senior decision-makers and other water professionals in international water projects is crucial for making the water sector more inclusive, given the many challenges facing contemporary development cooperation.

Partners for Water, a programme managed by the Netherlands State Enterprise Agency (Rijsksdienst voor Ondernemend Nederland or RVO) to support governments around the world with subsidies and expertise on water management, organized an event titled ‘Social Inclusion in Water Climate Adaptation – Making a Transformation‘ (12 September 2023, Utrecht, the Netherlands). The departure point for this event was a broadly shared realisation that Dutch water sector parties have too often handled in a top-down fashion in international projects, displaying a condition that became known as on the pages of this blog as “polder arrogance” – a term coined by the project’s “Professor Poldergeist” (IHE-Delft, 2022). The workshop aimed to foster dialogue between academics and practitioners to promote social inclusivity in the designs and implementation of international water projects funded or delivered by the Dutch actors as an antidote to the abovementioned ‘arrogance’. As a group of long-term collaborators from Deltares, IHE Delft, and ISS/Erasmus University, we organised a session within the RVO event to discuss the transformative potential of the idea of ‘social inclusivity’ and what stands in the way of its materialisation. We aimed to create a safe space for open exchanges among diverse participants from government, advocacy groups, academia, and the private sector.

With this blog post, we aim to summarise the major topics of discussion from the workshop and offer our take-aways. We first revisit the session to invite a broader audience into the discussions about the transformative journey of the Dutch Water Sector (DWS), and then offer our reflections.

Reflexivity and humility require skills

During the RVO event, there were several plenaries, reflective exercises, and parallel sessions with panels on different subjects related to the activities of the Dutch water sector internationally. Some examples include a session on Dutch Water Authorities-operated “Blue Deal” programme on the “Valuing Water Initiative” spearheaded by RVO. In our session, we initiated a fishbowl discussion with Laura Caicedo, a recent MA graduate from the International Institute of Social Studies, Erasmus University Rotterdam (ISS/EUR), who discussed her research of an ongoing Water as Leverage project in Cartagena, Colombia, and Kim van Nieuwaal, a Dutch expert on water and climate adaptation involved in Climate Adaptation Services (CAS). Water as Leverage (WaL), as represented on the RVO website, is a Dutch-founded public-private partnership mandated with tackling urban water-related challenges such as floods and declining water quality.

We chose them to start a conversation that gave clues of what inclusivity means in Water Projects. We began by exploring the meaning of transformation in the DWS and the current state of ongoing effort, then explored the key actors in the effort to transform the projects towards more socially inclusive and finished with a discussion of key challenges and ways of transcending them.

We were positively surprised to discover a reflective stance of all participants regarding the necessity to be aware of power relations, including one’s relative power, in achieving a genuine transformation in how projects run. This is especially pertinent in relationships with the recipients of the Dutch aid, technology, or governance expertise. This self-awareness marks the initial step in recognizing actors’ positionality – how parties are situated in projects often define what can be shared and what not, how discussions take shape, and who is included or excluded from decision-making venues. For example, Caicedo’s example of a less-than-fortunate choice of a venue for a meeting with stakeholders in Cartagena – a fancy water-front expo centre, demonstrated how thoughtless choices may have great adverse consequences. Caicedo’s research showed that informal settlers and members of fishing communities did not feel welcome in such a venue and did not show up.

Willingness to be conscious of power relationships, including awareness of own power, also implies the challenge to be aware of power dynamics within one’s own team, to utilise and communicate knowledge differently, with more empathy, and to acknowledge local wisdoms and knowledges in ways that foster trust. Many of these actions require more than an attitude – they require new skills to critically listen, be mindful of own responses, and to cultivate reflexivity and curiosity in working with others.

The discussion on how to build and train these skills will continue in two forthcoming events, which some of us will organise in June: a workshop at the International Institute of Social Studies devoted to the roles, skills, and attitudes of foreign policy-makers in water diplomacy to be held on 18 June, 2024, and a conference panel titled “Third-Party Engagement in Water Diplomacy and Governance: the Case of South Caucasus” at the Third International Conference on Environmental Peacebuilding in The Hague on 21 June 2024.

Photo credit: Farhad Mukhtarov. The fishbowl session was led by Jaap Evers and Leon Hermans and was chaired by Shahnoor Hasan and Farhad Mukhtarov.

On the transformation journey

This session builds on earlier dialogues and seminars on rethinking the modus operandi of the Dutch Water Sector internationally. Such discussions have been motivated by evidence and growing consensus among academics and practitioners alike that the DWS parties often work through a one-sided transfer of knowledge and technology from the Netherlands to “recipient countries” and suffers from the lack of a meaningful dialogue in such projects despite continuous claims of proper participation, demand-driven project designs, and efforts for the sustainability of projects across time.

In 2018, the Center for Sustainable Development Studies from the University of Amsterdam UvA), Both ENDS, a Dutch NGO and civic advocacy group, and the Water Governance Group of IHE Delft organized the conference “Critical Perspectives on Governance by Sustainable Development Goals: Water, Food and Climate”, where discussions on Delta Dynamics and Global Challenges took place. This event was the first to engage with the sensitive subject of unequal and non-inclusive features explicitly and directly in water projects funded through the Netherlands Development Cooperation Funds. In 2019, the Netherlands Enterprise Agency (RVO) organized a follow-up event with insightful discussions and a very good end report circulated to participants. In 2021, the Partners for Water program hosted the fourth edition of the WATERPROOF event, focusing on transforming development cooperation and making social impact with it. These events, well attended and taken notice of by decision-makers, marked an important shift in the discussions on the Dutch Water Sector and its record of transformation and social inclusivity.

Unfortunately, despite these widespread discussions and initiatives by and on the DWS, a tangible structural shift has not yet occurred. Our session highlighted that while there are certainly more efforts on the part of the DWS to identify diverse groups to work with and to be inclusive, practical changes on the ground are too slow. It seemed to us that scepticism persists regarding the actual impact of transformative practices, with a real concern that sociocultural and governance complexities in project contexts often get overlooked or underplayed to sustain a certain modus operandi of the DWS parties.

Translating instead of transferring

“Sometimes the Dutch water sector looks at itself in the wrong way, or maybe too late… it is important to make changes in the way … how others are involved…. How to break the barriers and break yourself to be aware of your own position? How to transfer power to others?”                  

Anonymous participant

Examining the Dutch intervention internationally, the discussion touched on the need for senior decision-makers in concerned projects to be self-conscious about the power dynamics and difficulties in correcting, or at least couching, asymmetric power relationships in projects. We agreed that the DWS parties would benefit from reflecting on their role, breaking the barriers to open and clear communication with their partners, and transferring some of their powers to others to the extent that is politically possible. This is easier said than done, but luckily there are some examples that offer a possible way forward, such as Reversing the Flow (RtF) initiative, a project that supports communities in vulnerable situations by strengthening their water security and contributing to more resilient communities. Especially remarkable is the funding mechanism within RtF allowing some of the RVO funding to be given to NGOs in recipient countries in a way that surpasses Dutch private sector actors. Whether this works needs to be studied carefully.

The self-reflective approach of RtF underscores the importance of understanding power dynamics before and during negotiations, fostering reflexive discussions on resource constraints, and acknowledging the limitations of asymmetrical negotiations and working relationships. Self-reflection first needs to take place internally, among various parties involved in projects, and only then should be extended to cover partners in other countries. Earlier projects and some of the events we mentioned earlier in this post (by Both ENDS, IHE Delft, and RVO) indicate at the possibility of such a shift in the paradigm of inclusiveness provided continued effort and faith.

As an example, Wageningen University through the Centre for Development Innovation (CDI) had created manuals packing the conversation on social inclusivity in a kind of serial editions for transformation on paper. The consultancy-driven organizations tend to focus on restructuring policies to act on becoming diverse and expanding their work profiles into thematic areas such as nature-based solutions and social inclusion. The audience in our room considered that there is a gap between the scholarly work on transformations toward social inclusion and such work in practice.

Addressing unresolved challenges, our discussion uncovered the following barriers to social inclusivity of the DWS’s operations. First, our focus shifted to project assessment terms that prioritise tangible outcomes over long-term and trust-based relationships with the partners, for instance a piece of embankment that is strengthened, a flood risk management report, or a technology transferred. More intangible but crucial elements such as capacity, trust, and joint development of problem diagnoses often deserve less attention. If project outcomes and outputs are pre-determined and the managerial logic of projects push participants to focus on these deliverables regardless the context on the ground, it is not surprising that one faces little participation and dialogue and achieves little social impact.

Second, we discussed gaps in socioeconomic class, especially among those who represent project beneficiaries on the ground in Indonesia, Bangladesh, or Colombia and the beneficiaries of the projects. Involving the beneficiaries, such as the slum dwellers, the urban poor, and the fishermen communities in the discussions requires special project design, suitable designs for deliberation, and settings suitable for such groups, as the case with the meeting venue in Cartagena illustrated.

Finally, and related to the previous two points, we discussed the time constraints of the projects that have to be delivered within a particular timeframe and to reflect a particular pre-determined “theory of change”. As an overarching theme, the critical discussion centred on the top-down approaches of the ongoing projects, urging a shift towards more bottom-up solutions and away from the mode of “transferring” knowledge, expertise, or technology. Instead, we need to foster open-ended dialogues based on respect, curiosity, and critical listening. Then transferring will become translating, and both the Netherlands and recipient countries could be seen as “co-authors” of such works – a true shift from transferring expertise to co-creating change.

Photo credit: Farhad Mukhtarov. The participants joined a fishbowl, which is a facilitative technique to encourage a discussion. We have begun by asking about what transformation means for the DWS. What is the current point of the discussion and in what direction are the efforts taking effect?

Despite intentions for inclusivity, practitioners keep facing challenges in translating discussions into practical strategies. The Dutch Water Sector’s role abroad demands adaptation to diverse contexts, acknowledging that one-size-fits-all solutions are inadequate. While the Dutch Water Sector is making strides in prioritizing social inclusion in international projects, not all organizations are homogenously transforming. Applauding these efforts, we remain curious about the implications and requirements of this transformation, and we hope to see this conversation moving forward.

About the authors: Farhad Mukhtarov, Karen Vargas, Shahnoor Hasan, Jaap Evers and Leon Hermans.

Farhad Mukhtarov is Assistant Professor of Governance and Public Policy at the International Institute of Social Sciences (ISS), Erasmus University Rotterdam and an Adjunct Senior Research Fellow at Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy at National University Singapore. Mukhtarov’s research can be summarised in three broad themes: water governance, politics of knowledge, and theories of policy-making. Geographically, Farhad’s work has covered Western Europe, the larger Mediterranean, and Central and South-Eastern Asia. He currently develops research in the South Caucasus.

Karen Vargas is a researcher with working experience in Colombia and Mexico. She is a political scientist holding a Master’s degree in Development Studies from Erasmus University Rotterdam, with a professional focus on public policies and governance. She has experience collaborating with research institutes, communicating results to international cooperation agencies, and fostering conversations with grassroots communities.


Shahnoor Hasan is a senior researcher and advisor at the department of resilience and planning at Deltares. Her work deals with issues of production of policies and dynamics of development cooperation from a perspective of water governance. One of Shahnoor’s research works on the Dutch Delta Approach in Vietnam and Bangladesh have generated heated and constructive debate in the Dutch water sector. It has pushed practitioners to reflect critically on their methods of exchanging delta knowledge and expertise with international partners, contributing to further discussions about social inclusion in international cooperation. With her work, Shahnoor opens-up discussions on what ‘good’ policies and practices are and stimulates rethinking about how different knowledges and ‘knowers’ can relate to each other and come together for sustainable and just development.


Jaap Evers works at IHE Delft since 2011. Starting of as lecturer in River Basin Governance, he currently has the position of Senior lecturer in Water and Environmental Policy as a member of the Water Governance department. His main research interests revolve around the departments research line Policy and Organizations. Jaap’s research interests revolve around policy implementation, and more specifically policy mobility, policy learning, policy -implementation- practices, and implementation feasibility in planning in the water sector.


Leon Hermans is Head of the Land and Water Management Department at IHE Delft, with responsibility for the department’s integral management and academic leadership. As Associate Professor of Environmental Planning and Management, Leon is also responsible for the Specialization of Environmental Planning and Management within the IHE MSc programme on Environmental Science. Leon Hermans combines work at IHE Delft with a part-time appointment as Associate Professor at TU Delft’s Faculty of Technology, Policy & Management. Prior to joining IHE Delft, Leon worked fulltime at TU Delft, where he also obtained his PhD degree in policy analysis, and at FAO at its headquarters in Rome, Italy.

Are you looking for more content about Global Development and Social Justice? Subscribe to Bliss, the official blog of the International Institute of Social Studies, and stay updated about interesting topics our researchers are working on.

 

EADI ISS Conference 2021 | For the redistribution of water, framing matters!

By Posted on 2747 views

In the face of increasing pressure on global water resources, a degree of inventiveness in finding just and sustainable ways to ensure access to water is required. The redistribution of water is one possible way in which this could be done. But ongoing research on elite responses to a recent water scarcity crisis in South Africa shows that the redistribution of water resources will not go uncontested by water elites and that existing narratives on the sharing of water are not creating the extent of solidarity needed. We need to frame this action differently, writes Lize Swartz.

Water is intricately linked to development, both to ensure or improve people’s quality of life, as well as to help secure livelihoods such as subsistence farming. But increasing pressure on water resources due to a changing climate, as well as an increased demand for water, amongst others, is making it difficult to even sustain current access to water, let alone provide new access to populations that are not yet connected to formal water networks.

Millions of people around the world are still waiting for the moment they can turn on a tap and watch water gushing from it, to be able to flush a toilet, or to bathe under running water. In light of the need to keep an expanding access to water and sanitation facilities, but also with the realisation that less and less water is available per capita, new ways of thinking about ensuring access to water are needed.

‘Sharing is scaring’

During a recent panel session on inclusive development and water governance linked to the 2021 EADI ISS Conference, the likelihood of having to share water came up toward the end of the discussion. Emanuele Fantini[1] suggested that it’s not as straightforward as ‘sharing is caring’ when it comes to water, pointing to the many complexities that would affect the governance of water redistribution by using the term ‘sharing is scaring’. Joyeeta Gupta[2], one of the panel convenors, observed that it is likely that “there will be no win-win situation; it will be a win-lose situation” when it comes to sharing water. As one of the main challenges, she recognised the need to convince water elites of the necessity of sharing water.

My ongoing research on elite responses to water scarcity shows exactly how difficult it will be to get ‘buy-in’ from those who are able to share water: I  investigate the way in which elite water users navigated the collapse of three urban water supply systems in South Africa in 2016. With ‘buy-in’ I mean that those who have sufficient water agree to share it, provided that they still have enough water to meet their own basic water needs. ‘Elite water users’ in the context of South Africa can be considered those who either have water and sanitation connections within their own homes, or who have access to non-municipal water resources such as groundwater (through boreholes) that can replace or supplement municipal water.

Some of the preliminary conclusions of my research are that:

  • Basic water needs are different for different socio-economic groups in South Africa. For example, irrigating private gardens to ensure that lawns remain green and plants continue to grow may be considered a basic need by those owning gardens, but not by those without gardens. This may be linked to the pride that is taken in being able to maintain ‘life’ by tending to an urban nature.
  • The way in which water is used is closely linked to the socio-economic and cultural identity and status of water users; water is much more than a product linked to hygiene, for example – having abundant water is a reminder of a high standard of living and prosperity. Swimming pools, fountains, and running water in general is considered part and parcel of a ‘good life’.
  • Water is closely linked to emotional and mental health; having sufficient water creates a sense of peace and safety among water users, which turns into anxiety when the threat of water scarcity or shortages looms. My research found that retaining a sense of water security seems to trump other considerations that may inform how water is used and whether and how it is shared.

Allegations of mismanagement stand in the way of viewing water scarcity as collective problem  

In addition to the symbolic importance of water that moves beyond the idea of water needs as largely material, political factors may also affect the willingness of water elites to share water. My research found, for example, that specific interpretations of the collapse of urban water supply systems as being caused by municipal mismanagement and water losses through leakages in general may prevent water users from seeing water scarcity as a collective problem and responding to it in a similar way. Those who hold such views are unlikely to cooperate with local governments to ensure that those without water are helped out of own accord. My research also shows that water is hoarded by households out of fear of not being able to access it in the future and is mostly shared with those elites’ own social networks.

Also, in the communities studied, distrust stretches beyond the local level and is rooted in perceptions regarding the legitimacy and accountability of the national government. A certain level of mistrust is based on its perceived disability to govern in the interests of water elites, who in South Africa for the most part are also socio-economic elites. This also affects the extent to which water scarcity is considered a collective problem requiring collective action, similar to the above observation.

Capping the water use of elites?

Thus, ensuring elite buy-in of the need to redistribute water will not be a simple task. The sharing of water may involve the limiting of water use for elites by imposing a maximum daily or monthly limit (‘holding back’ water) and making greater amounts of water available for other water users who have used less water. Another example is the redistribution of groundwater by pumping it into municipal water tanks that are accessible to all. But limiting the water use of some households and not others is likely to cause dissatisfaction and perhaps even resistance.

What complicates matters further is that the amount of water used in informal urban areas is generally far lower than that of the amount used in formal urban areas – while the redistribution of water is likely to reduce the amount of water used by water elites, water use may not increase in areas where there are different water needs and priorities and where the majority of residents still share taps and toilets. This may thus not create the impression that water has been distributed more equitably so that everyone gets ‘more or less the same’.

The overall reduction of water on the other hand may be beneficial in countries like South Africa where the water supply is under severe stress. But convincing water users that it is possible – and desirable – to use less water will be a challenge.

In light of this difficulty, the redistribution narrative – and indeed a narrative of ‘sharing is caring’ – will need to be reconsidered. A reduction in the amount of water used by water elites that frees up water for a municipal ‘reserve’ may be achieved more easily if it is framed in light of the need for a water reserve to prevent the water scarcity and corresponding water use restrictions – the idea of ‘using less water now so that there will be water in the future’. This de facto would free up water that is needed elsewhere in urban areas. Elite water users may have to be convinced that limiting their water use will benefit them in the future, and that this sacrifice is worth making.

[1] Senior Lecturer in Water Politics and Communication at IHE Delft

[2] Professor of Environment and Development in the Global South at the Amsterdam Institute for Social Science Research of the University of Amsterdam and IHE Delft Institute for Water Education in Delft

Opinions expressed in Bliss posts reflect solely the views of the author of the post in question.[

About the author:

Lize Swartz

Lize Swartz is the editor-in-chief of ISS Blog Bliss and a PhD researcher at the International Institute of Social Studies of Erasmus University Rotterdam, where she researches political dynamics of socio-hydrological systems. She is part of the newly formed Transformative Methodologies Working Group situated in the Civic Innovation Research

Are you looking for more content about Global Development and Social Justice? Subscribe to Bliss, the official blog of the International Institute of Social Studies, and stay updated about interesting topics our researchers are working on.

 

The role of the media in promoting water integrity: the case of Ghana by Abdul-Kudus Husein

By Posted on 2909 views

Ghana’s water utilities are undermined by corruption, impeding the ability of millions of Ghanaians to access safe water resources. The media can play an important role in pushing back corruption in several ways. But often, the media’s potential as watchdog is not fulfilled. This article highlights the key challenges that the Ghana’s media sector faces and argues that it is not likely to ensure greater water integrity without support from the government, the private sector, and civil society.

It is 6am on a Saturday morning and Charity Abiamo, a street vendor of oranges, is on a daily mission with her three children to find water. Charity and her children live in Abofu, an informal settlement situated between Achimota and Abelemkpe in Accra, Ghana’s capital.

Charity leads the way in the alleys of Abofu carrying a black plastic container, with her one–year-old child strapped to her back whilst her two other children follow her carrying two yellow jerrycans known as ‘Kuffour gallons’. These yellow one-gallon containers, which have become a symbol of the water shortage in Ghana, were named after the country’s former president, John Agyekum Kuffour (2000–8), under whose rule Ghana experienced a severe water crisis.

The journey from Charity’s home to the source of drinking water, a large drainage channel connecting to the Odaw River in Accra, takes between 10 and 15 minutes. As Charity arrives, other families are already at the Odaw drainage channel, stretching over the edge with their containers to collect water from an overflowing algae-infested pipeline. Charity claims she uses the water for cooking, drinking and washing, despite the water not being treated considering the lack of suitable and safe alternative water sources.

Accra’s water problems

Accra, Ghana is a fast-growing urban area that is facing considerable planning challenges including access to clean water owing to its rising population. With a current total of 4 million, the city’s population is expected to double by 2030, further compounding the water situation as illustrated by Charity.

Water supply to urban populations in Accra is assigned to the Ghana Water Company Limited (GWCL). Water is provided for inhabitants of these regions using a piped rationing system managed by the GWCL. Additionally, there are private tanker services to provide water to areas that are not served by the GWCL. Despite these measures, both high and low income earners in Accra still face a great challenge in accessing water. High-income earners in areas with piped water connections even purchase large water-storage vessels, such as the ‘poly-tank’, to store enough water to last them a week or more. Those in the low-income bracket rely on small, unhygienic storage systems and informal vendors such as the water-tanker services, community standpipes and boreholes for their daily use.

Poor integrity contributes to water woes

In an article published by Bloomberg, Moses Dzawu (2013) argued that many of the GWCL’s problems can be attributed to weak and outdated pipes, which fail to support the mass production and distribution of water to certain parts of the capital, as well as poor management, a lack of transparency and accountability, and corruption.

Similarly, Peter Van Rooijen (2008) maintains that corruption, together with a lack of transparency and accountability, is a key challenge hindering the GWCL’s effective operation. Corruption in the water sector in Ghana takes many forms, from misappropriations of huge sums of money to illegal connections and consumption of water. Indeed, stories of corruption have always dominated the media space in Ghana.

The link between media and integrity

The media, along with other agencies, plays an important role in corruption detection and promoting transparency and accountability in the water sector. Scholars argue that Ghana’s media has contributed largely to the country’s democratic efforts by holding the state accountable, promoting citizen education and participation, and monitoring state institutions.

In fact, in 2001, the media, together with the Integrated Social Development Centre (ISSODEC), successfully opposed a World Bank-backed project to fully privatise the GWCL. This effort was largely carried out through increased media reportage, in order to educate the public on the dangers of such privatisation (Amenga-Etego and Grusky 2005: 275).

The media is widely regarded as a defence against abuses of power; excessive politicization of national matters in the Ghanaian media is therefore very worrying. The lack of coverage and at times biased coverage on corruption or lack of integrity show that there is still a way to go before the media plays its potential role of encouraging and catalysing change within the water sector.

Challenges for the media on water integrity

The Water Integrity Network (WIN) supports and connects partners, individuals, organisations and governments promoting water integrity in order to reduce corruption and improve water-sector performance worldwide. In its Water Integrity Global Outlook 2016, it maintains that in order to fight corruption in the water sector there is a need for people to first recognise that corrupt practices exist. Local and national media both have an important role to play in bringing issues of corruption to the attention of civil society, the public and policymakers, to ensure that action is taken through policy or advocacy.

Several things come into play here: first, ownership of the media can play a role. The question of whether the media is independent or state-owned influences the extent to which it can be critical about the level of corruption in state institutions. State media tends to be less critical of government institutions, whilst the private media will most likely be more critical.

Furthermore, the amount of resources available to journalists may influence how effectively the media is able to act as a watchdog in fighting corruption. Ghanaian reporters are often poorly paid, under-resourced and lacking in training. As a result, journalists in Ghana find themselves susceptible to bribery and self-censorship.

Aside from low salaries, the Ghanaian media also suffers from weak capacity. There is a lack of adequate training and mentoring for thousands of journalists in the country in general and in specific the water sector, even though some donor organisations and non-governmental organisations (NGOs) have attempted to train reporters. Most of these attempts have, in fact, been frustrated by a lack of commitment from the journalists themselves.

The social media debate

Social media presents opportunities as well as challenges for the future of the news media in promoting integrity in the water sector. It offers many people new ways of networking, and of sharing and receiving information outside of the mainstream media such as TV, radio and newspapers.

Social media can serve as a mechanism to ‘name and shame’ corrupt officials and share information on corruption using blogs and corruption-reporting platforms such as ‘I PAID A BRIBE’ by the GII in Ghana. This online platform helps to collect anonymous reports of bribes paid, bribes requested but not paid, and bribes that were expected but not forthcoming.

Looking ahead

The watchdog role of the media does not end at producing information about misbehaviour, but also concerns how that information is used to hold people accountable for their actions. A government must know that people want responsiveness and wish to hold those in power accountable for their actions. A country’s media is likely to have a minimal effect on corruption if it tows the political line or fails to obtain the necessary support from the government, the private sector and civil society.

If the UN’s Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 6 on water is to be achieved, the issue of water integrity should be taken more seriously by the media because it plays a key role in various aspects of the SDGs.

It is important that new initiatives are established where the media is further encouraged to take a keen interest in reporting on water related issues. International non-profit organisations, such as WIN, as well as other civil-society organisations have a role to play in ensuring that journalist networks are supported to report on these issues. It is important that the interest of journalists in reporting on such issues is sustained, which could be done through involving them in training courses or broadening their knowledge and awareness on integrity issues in the sector. The government has a role to play in ensuring that the space for the media remains open and that their safety on reporting on sensitive issues is assured.

International non-profit organisations, such as WIN, as well as civil society organisations should intensify their efforts in supporting the media to report on water issues. Journalists who show an interest in the water sector should be given the opportunity, through training courses, to broaden their knowledge and awareness of integrity issues in that sector.

Finally, there is a need for enhanced monitoring mechanisms to be utilised by citizens, civil society and the media in order to strengthen accountability and transparency, and to ensure value for money in water-service delivery.

This post is a shortened version of the original article that can be found here

33591844_10216565409229217_4810907646955618304_n.jpgAbout the author:

Abdul-Kudus Husein graduated from the ISS last year with a MA degree in Development Studies. He is currently the Communications Officer at the Ghana Anti-Corruption Coalition (GACC). His professional portfolio includes communication and fundraising with civil society and the private sector. He has over 10 years experience in generating and implementing positive offline and online messages to engage audience and stakeholders and strong long term commitment to public policy, governance, participatory development, communications for change and local economic development.

 

 

The positive effects of systemic collapse — lessons for Cape Town by Lize Swartz

By Posted on 3147 views

16177487_1348685531818526_4418355730312549822_oAbout the author:

Lize Swartz is a PhD Researcher at the ISS and blog manager of the ISS Blog. Her research focuses on the link between civic action and change in social-ecological systems, and she has conducted fieldwork in three South African towns to closely study citizen responses to the collapse of local water supply systems.

Across the world, newsreaders recently started catching on to arguably one of the most pressing challenges in South Africa: The looming collapse of Cape Town’s water supply system. The Cape Town government and residents over the past few years have taken numerous steps to slow the gradual emptying of dams supplying this city, but ‘Day Zero’ is now a real possibility1. While news media show the uncertainty and fear surrounding Day Zero, ongoing research about similar ‘water crises’ in South Africa shows that systemic collapse can also beget positive outcomes.

The dreaded ‘Day Zero’

Long before the issue of water scarcity is now reaching its peak, water restrictions were imposed in Cape Town, South Africa in an attempt to save water in dry summer periods until the next rains would come. The Western Cape, one of South Africa’s nine provinces situated in the south west of the country, had experienced below-normal rainfall for years, to an extent that residents could witness the difference in the matter of a decade. Moreover, Cape Town’s population increased by 1 million people in just a decade, increasing the demand for water2.

It hence should not have come as a surprise that this African city that houses over 4 million people would eventually face water scarcity. Over recent years, however, the dry period started stretching into the winter and beyond, and predictions for dry future decades became a present reality. The inability to balance decreasing water supply with an ever-increasing demand has resulted therein that dams supplying the city have now reached such a low level that policy-makers have become cognisant of the very real possibility of municipal water supplies running out. The city has taken extensive measures to halt the sysem’s collapse, but current efforts seem to have been in vain3. Much uncertainty surrounds ‘Day Zero’, and what happens after this moment cannot be predicted. However, ongoing research of similar systemic collapse in three other South African towns can potentially provide some lessons – and hope.

Crises: An opportunity for change

Over the last two years, I have been studying civic action in three South African towns following the collapse of their municipal water supply systems. The processes of collapse and restoration were studied from a systems perspective. Systems theory sees the world as comprising countless social-ecological systems that are closely linked to their environments in which change occurs. Hence, I talk about Cape Town’s water in terms of a local water supply system.

From a systems perspective, static water management paradigms may lead to systemic collapse and eventual reorganization. The good news is that this collapse can force necessary change need for the system to function better in the future. The theory describes moments in the adaptive cycles of ecological systems where opportunity for novelty and innovation can emerge. This usually follows after systemic collapse. Hence, while one of the possible outcomes of systemic collapse is the failure of a system to return to ‘normal’, through this it can change to something new altogether, possibly becoming an enhanced version of its former self. A new normal may be created, and both the state and citizens can play a part in achieving this.

Systemic collapse: Not all bad news

My research shows that in each of the towns the municipal water supply had run out after dams and rivers were drained. None of the municipalities had a plan in place for after ‘Day Zero’. But each town found their own way of dealing with the crisis. One town set up functional water collection points. Others resorted to ‘water shedding’4. Throughout, citizens led the process of restoring the water system, also adapting their water use practices or securing their own water supply in whichever means available to them. All three towns somehow managed the collapse and carried on until water could be restored to the taps.

IMG_2839
Drained to the dregs: In one of the studied towns, the last available water was drained manually from a reserve dam (see pumps on left of photo) before the taps spluttered and ran dry in June 2016. The town then survived without water in taps for around six weeks. Photo: Lize Swartz

While the data analysis phase is in its early stages, my study tentatively shows that some citizens through civic action have played a crucial role in managing the collapse by adapting their own water use practices and by becoming water distributors themselves in the period following collapse. As in Cape Town, in the three towns the government’s lagging response and trial-by-error approach to dealing with the problem also characterised the periods before and after these water supply systems collapsed. The bad news is that governance practices in the three towns do not seem to have been adapted on the long run.

While this is bad news, particularly because drought and climate change discourses allow the state to absolve itself from blame, herein lies the hope: Citizens learned and could apply the lessons to their interactions with the water systems. Much novelty emerged not only in the way people made sense of their relationship with water and in their adaptive practices, but also in social relationships and in their conceptualisation of their identity as citizens and their own power. 

While, evidently, governance practices founded on certain beliefs regarding water availability need to change, this new realisation of the role of citizens as water users in contributing to change, and the value of civic action in shaping new futures, is an essential starting point. It can help to address the problematic issue of technocratic ‘fixes’ and the empty discourses on ‘participation’ that I argue led to the increased vulnerability of systems that ultimately resulted in their collapse.

While the extent and type of change brought about may not be enough to protect the water systems from future shocks, particularly due to partial instead of system-wide adaptation, small changes are an essential starting point for better aligning water demand with water supply, to change how systems work without changing their core function, in this case supplying water. Hence, the study shows the importance of citizens in leading change to a new, adaptive water governance paradigm characterised by flexibility.

IMG_7368
While some residents of one South African town had to survive from whatever the water they could carry, cooperation instead of conflict seemed to characterise interactions in the town. Photo: Lize Swartz.

Lessons for Cape Town

What exactly can the city learn from smaller towns? Some preliminary insights point to the inevitability of change following systemic collapse, and the ability to shape the type of change that would ensue. The trend in (near-)collapses of water systems across South Africa clearly indicates that something must change. And the space for civic leadership presents itself in this moment of crisis. Such moments of crisis invite reflexivity and create opportunities for novelty of thought and practice – and therefore for change, be it political or systemic. Learn from the collapse and apply the lessons to the water system to improve its resilience and sustainability. Learn to collaborate and to work together – this will be crucial in the period going forward. It is up to Capetonian policy-makers, residents and industries to collectively harness this opportunity to tailor the system to better function in the context of a changing landscape and deteriorating governance. It is also up to Captonian residents to then hold the state accountable across all levels, and to demand its adherence to its self-assigned mandate of ensuring sound water governance and sustainable water use.

1Day Zero, the day when municipal taps are turned off, is currently expected on 21 April 2018.
2http://www.statssa.gov.za/?page_id=1021&id=city-of-cape-town-municipality
3From 1 February 2018, potable water use will be limited to 50 litres per person per day. However, despite increasingly severe water restrictions, only 39% of residents are using less than the specified limit. While the city is in the process of augementing its water resources – something residents feel it should have done years ago – water demand is clearly not being managed well.
4 While this term, referring to the intermittent provision of water at certain times of the day, may be known in South Africa, it is likely less known outside of the country. The phrase has its origins in the term ‘load shedding’, referring to the intermittent provision of electricity in the country due to an ongoing energy crisis that is comparable to the national water crisis in many aspects. 
MAIN PHOTO: In one of the towns, citizens become water suppliers by providing water to the public on a daily basis.
DISCLAIMER: None of the findings in this study are final or binding.