Your search found 3 records
1 van Koppen, Barbara; Molose, V.; Phasha, K.; Bophela, T.; Modiba, I.; White, M.; Magombeyi, Manuel S.; Jacobs-Mata, Inga. 2020. Guidelines for community-led multiple use water services: evidence from rural South Africa. Colombo, Sri Lanka: International Water Management Institute (IWMI). 36p. (IWMI Working Paper 194) [doi: https://doi.org/10.5337/2020.213]
Multiple use water services ; Water supply ; Co-management ; Guidelines ; Rural communities ; Communal irrigation systems ; Small scale systems ; Planning ; Participatory approaches ; Integrated management ; Water resources ; Water management ; Water storage ; Water quality ; Infrastructure ; Boreholes ; Construction ; Innovation ; Technical aid ; Collaboration ; Costs ; Financing ; Institutions ; Capacity building ; State intervention ; Nongovernmental organizations ; Decision making ; Climate change adaptation ; Women's participation ; Inclusion ; Labour ; Wages ; Villages ; Households / South Africa / Sekhukhune / Vhembe / Ga Mokgotho / Ga Moela / Phiring / Ha Gumbu / Khalavha / Tshakhuma
(Location: IWMI HQ Call no: IWMI Record No: H050124)
(3.74 MB)
The African Water Facility, together with the Water Research Commission, South Africa, as its implementing agent, supported the demonstration project Operationalizing community-led Multiple Use water Services (MUS) in South Africa. As knowledge broker and research partner in this project, the International Water Management Institute (IWMI) analyzed processes and impacts at the local level, where the nongovernmental organization Tsogang Water and Sanitation demonstrated community-led MUS in six diverse rural communities in two of the poorest districts of South Africa, Sekhukhune and Vhembe districts - Ga Mokgotho, Ga Moela and Phiring in the Sekhukhune District Municipality, and Tshakhuma, Khalavha and Ha Gumbu in Vhembe District Municipality. In conventional water infrastructure projects, external state or non-state agencies plan, diagnose, design and prioritize solutions, mobilize funding, and implement the procurement of materials, recruitment of workers and construction. However, this MUS project facilitated decision-making by communities, and provided technical and institutional advice and capacity development. Based on IWMI’s evidence, tools and manuals, the project team organized learning alliances and policy dialogues from municipal to national level on the replication of community-led MUS by water services authorities; government departments of water, agriculture, and others; employment generation programs; climate and disaster management; and corporate social responsibility initiatives.
This working paper synthesizes the lessons learned about the six steps of the community-led MUS process in all six communities. The step-wise process appeared to be welcome and effective across the board. The duration of the process and the costs of facilitation, technical and institutional capacity development, and engineering advice and quality control were comparable to conventional approaches. However, the respective responsibilities of the government and communities, also in longer-term co-management arrangements, depended on the type of infrastructure. Some communities were supported to improve their communal self supply systems. In other communities, the process enabled an extension of the reticulation of borehole systems owned, operated and maintained by municipalities. Almost all households used water supplies at homesteads for multiple purposes, underscoring synergies in cross-sectoral collaboration between the water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) and irrigation sectors.
This working paper synthesizes the lessons learned about the six steps of the community-led MUS process in all six communities. The step-wise process appeared to be welcome and effective across the board. The duration of the process and the costs of facilitation, technical and institutional capacity development, and engineering advice and quality control were comparable to conventional approaches. However, the respective responsibilities of the government and communities, also in longer-term co-management arrangements, depended on the type of infrastructure. Some communities were supported to improve their communal self supply systems. In other communities, the process enabled an extension of the reticulation of borehole systems owned, operated and maintained by municipalities. Almost all households used water supplies at homesteads for multiple purposes, underscoring synergies in cross-sectoral collaboration between the water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) and irrigation sectors.
2 Hofstetter, Moritz; van Koppen, Barbara; Bolding, A. 2021. The emergence of collectively owned self-supply water supply systems in rural South Africa – what can we learn from the Tshakhuma case in Limpopo? Water SA, 47(2):253-263. [doi: https://doi.org/10.17159/wsa/2021.v47.i2.10921]
Water supply ; Collective ownership ; Community involvement ; Rural areas ; Institutions ; Governance ; Investment ; Accountability ; Infrastructure ; Water users ; Water quality ; Households ; Case studies / South Africa / Limpopo / Tshakhuma
(Location: IWMI HQ Call no: e-copy only Record No: H050441)
(0.79 MB) (805 KB)
Despite the rapid extension of public service delivery since the end of Apartheid, many rural citizens in South Africa still rely on their own initiatives and infrastructure to access water. They construct, improve, operate and maintain infrastructure of different complexities, from individual wells to complex collectively owned water schemes. While most of these schemes operate without legal recognition, they provide essential services to many households. In this article we will first provide an overview of the growing international body of literature describing self-supply as an alternative pathway for public service delivery. We then take a historical perspective on the role of communities and self-supply in South Africa and describe the emergence of six collectively owned, gravity-fed, piped schemes in Tshakhuma, Limpopo Province. We describe and compare these systems using key characteristics like resource access, investment, construction, operation, maintenance and institutional governance. We further assess their performance with regard to coverage, service level, reliability, governance structure, accountability and water quality. We do so because we are convinced that lessons learned from studying such schemes as locally adapted prototypes have the potential to improve public approaches to service delivery. The described cases show the willingness of community members to engage with service delivery and their ability to provide services in cases where the state has failed. The assessment also highlights problematic aspects of self-supply related to a lack of accountability, technical expertise and the exclusion of disadvantaged community members. By describing and assessing the performance of rural self-supply schemes, we aim to recognize, study and learn from such schemes. We consequently do not conclude this article by providing answers, but by raising some pertinent, policy-relevant questions.
3 van Koppen, Barbara; Hofstetter, Moritz; Nesamvuni, A. E.; Chiluwe, Q. 2020. Integrated management of multiple water sources for multiple uses: rural communities in Limpopo Province, South Africa. Water SA, 46(1):1-11. [doi: https://doi.org/10.17159/wsa/2020.v46.i1.7870]
Multiple use water services ; Integrated management ; Water management ; Rural communities ; Communal irrigation systems ; Infrastructure ; Community involvement ; Water supply ; Water resources ; Groundwater ; Water use ; Rainwater harvesting ; Water quality ; Sanitation ; Villages ; Households ; Livelihoods / South Africa / Limpopo / Sekhukhune / Vhembe / Ga-Moela / Khalavha / Tshakhuma / Ha-Gumbu / Ga-Mokgotho / Phiring
(Location: IWMI HQ Call no: e-copy only Record No: H050552)
(0.74 MB) (755 KB)
This study fills a knowledge gap about low-income rural communities’ holistic management of multiple water resources to meet their multiple needs through multiple or single-use infrastructure. Six low-income rural villages in Limpopo Province were selected with a diversity in: service levels, surface and groundwater resources, public infrastructure (designed for either domestic uses or irrigation but multiple use in reality) and self-supply (people’s individual or communal investments in infrastructure). Focusing on water-dependent livelihoods and water provision to homesteads, distant fields and other sites of use, three policy-relevant patterns were identified. First, most households have two or more sources of water to their homesteads as a vital buffer to irregular supplies and droughts. Second, infrastructure to homesteads is normally for domestic uses, livestock and, for many households, irrigation for consumption and sale. Public infrastructure to irrigate distant fields is multiple use. Exceptionally, self-supply point sources to distant fields are single use. Water bodies to other sites of use are normally multiple use. As for large-scale infrastructure, multiple-use infrastructure is cost-effective and water-efficient. Third, in four of the six villages people’s self-supply is a more important water source to homesteads than public infrastructure. In all villages, water provided through self-supply is shared. Self-supply improves access to water faster, more cost-effectively and more sustainably than public services do. In line with international debates, self-supply is there to stay and can be supported as a cost-effective and sustainable complementary mode of service delivery. A last potential policy implication regards community-driven planning, design and construction of water infrastructure according to people’s priorities. This may sustainably harness the above-mentioned advantages and, moreover, communities’ ability to manage complex multiple sources, uses and multiple-use infrastructure, whether public or self-supply, as a matter of daily life.
Powered by DB/Text WebPublisher, from
