Susan Davis

By Susan Davis, Executive Director

What leads to success or failure of water systems?  Everything we read points to a complex mix of factors.  In this series, we will share compiled quotes on various topics related to failure of water systems from our literature search and interviews for the resolution action brief as a way to highlight pieces of the puzzle.

Today’s blog focuses on the lack of accountability related to the building of water points and/or provision of water services in rural areas in developing countries. Generally, it seems that no-one is accountable to anyone else, except perhaps the poor communities whose accounting books we occasionally check to see whether people are paying for their poor water services. Below are some quotes and graphics related to accountability. [Note: we will have a separate blog on the accountability of water committees]

The major barriers to progress in [water, sanitation & hygiene] lie among the institutions (central and local Government), policies and realities of ‘developing’ countries. The public sector is often weak in terms of skills, structures, decision-making processes, and bureaucratic procedures. Furthermore, it is often unduly influenced by foreign institutions including donors, which do not always fully understand the context into which their advice and requirements are offered. Policies tend increasingly to follow a one-size-fits-all model, but the realities of policy implementation are often quite different from the theory set out on paper. Poor management and accountability at decentralized local Government, and consequent opportunities for corruption, exacerbate the situation. Cranfield University, AguaConsult, & IRC, 2006

 

Independent verification of outputs and outcomes is extremely rare. One can work in rural water supply for years without ever being held to account for one’s actions. A fundamental outcome of this lack of accountability is a lack of professionalism and work ethic among many. (RWSN Executive Committee, 2010)

Sadly, communities and Governments are largely unable to hold implementing organisations to account. Oversight and monitoring mechanisms as a whole are extremely weak. In general, anything goes:

• Funding agencies and do-gooders can pursue their own interests, or what they consider to be right, rather than those of the rural people they are trying to serve.
• NGOs (and Government) are not held accountable for their actions today, or five or ten years after the intervention.
• Funding agencies and implementing organisations are able to push their tight time horizons and rigid expenditure cycles onto communities, no matter what the season, capacity or time that it takes rural dwellers to plan and prepare for new infrastructure.(RWSN Executive Committee, 2010)

Greater agency accountability and greater government accountability are needed in the ongoing provision of rural water services. This means that implementing agencies, both governmental and nongovernmental, must recognize the need for long-term support for community management and develop strategies to provide this accordingly. All implementers should desist from following the project approach of the past. (Harvey & Reed, 2007)

Finally, an overarching constraint is incoherence in approach and weak communication between water development actors, including non-governmental organisations (NGOs), development agencies and government, creating an environment where it is easy for inappropriate water development to go unchecked. (Nassef & Belayhun, 2012)

[Customer] choice should not be limited to service levels and technology, but should include how, when, and by whom services are delivered and sustained. Projects often stop short of being truly demand-responsive by giving communities choice over participation and service levels, but not over how services are delivered. Supply agencies should be accountable to communities for providing agreed upon services in an efficient and effective manner. (Sara & Katz, 1997)

RWSN (2010) advocates for strengthened institutions and improved mechanisms to better hold NGOs, other Government agencies, donors and the private sector to account. What do you think it will it take to really put customers at the top?