Go to the id21 home page   ID21 - communicating development research
Rural Development
 
Search the whole id21 database
 

Help page and other search methods
    id21 Rural Development
  Community
organisation
  Rural transport
  Rural communication
  Rural water and
sanitation
  Rural employment
and income
  Rural energy
 
    id21 Global Issues
 
    id21 Health
 
    id21 Education
 
    id21 Urban Development
 
    id21 Natural Resources
 
    id21 Home page
 
    Gender and Violence in African Schools
 
    id21 Publications
 
    id21 Viewpoints
 
    About id21
 
    Links
 
    Contact id21
 
    id21News
 
    id21 Insights
 
    id21 Media
 
     
New approaches to manage rural water supplies in India

Across India, agencies owned by state governments are typically responsible for constructing and managing water supply systems. Realising that many rural water supply systems have failed to work as well or as long as expected, policymakers are searching for new ways to meet their operation and maintenance costs.

A paper from the World Bank’s Water and Sanitation Program looks at the consequences of neglect of rural water operation and management in the state of Maharashtra and describes innovative demand sensitive approaches.

The central government’s Ministry of Rural Development claims more than 95 percent of rural Indians have access to regular water supplies. However, independent reports show drinking water shortages in about half the villages of India. Despite heavy investment, the gap between coverage on paper and village level realities has been increasing.

Water agencies are not sensitive to consumer demands and have poor incentives. They treat users as ‘beneficiaries’ rather than empowered stakeholders. Although agencies have an interest in creating supply systems, very often they are not suited to local needs. They are often technically sophisticated and maintenance costs are high so local people find it hard to look after them. There are also doubts about financial sustainability as electricity – which typically represents more than half of total operating costs – is heavily subsidised by the state.

Recently established schemes in which users set up committees to oversee project management and construction also have their problems. The users may be diverted from pursuing their income-earning activities. Such approaches do not encourage professional management or promote sharing of experience on a wider scale. When this approach is extended to non-water sectors a large group of user committees can cause confusion.

Four alternatives to tackling operation and management problems – none of them involving government agencies ­– are described:

  • Service provision by informal private providers of water to low-income communities – demonstrating that full cost recovery is possible through the use of appropriate technology and being responsive to user concerns.
  • Management by a self-help group: there is evidence they can manage schemes without government assistance provided they receive support from non-governmental organisations.
  • Giving operation and maintenance responsibility to new organisations set up to manage multi-village schemes: these can lead to new and more accountable avenues for community-local government partnerships.
  • Bringing in a private operator to run a government-owned system.

With any alternative, policymakers should be cautious and recognise that:

  • private schemes can worsen groundwater contamination: mechanisms are needed to monitor water quality and regulate the use of groundwater
  • government setting of prices is not critical where there is competition in the market and where provision of an alternate public service is available
  • effective operation, management and cost sharing depend on precise rule-based agreements between different agencies
  • in multi-village schemes it is preferable to separate responsibilities, so that bulk water suppliers are not responsible for distribution
  • contracts with private operators must be structured to ensure they bear some element of risk, are given incentives to collect revenue and are required to be accountable to village councils and users.

Source(s):
“Focus on Maharashtra: alternate management systems for village water supply systems” Water and Sanitation Program, World Bank, by Vivek Srivastava and Pooja Sharma, January 2004 Full document.

Funded by: World Bank

id21 Research Highlight: 15 June 2005

Further Information:
Vivek Srivastava
Sr. Public Sector Specialist, Africa Region
MSN J8-802
The World Bank
1818 H Street NW
Washington DC 20433
USA

Tel: +1 (202) 458-4290
Fax: +1 (202) 473-8368
Contact the contributor: vsrivastava@worldbank.org

World Bank

Water and Sanitation Program
World Bank
55 Lodi Estate
New Delhi 110 003, India

Tel: + 91 11 24690488, 24690489
Fax: +91 11 24628250
Contact the contributor: wspsa@worldbank.org

World Bank Water and Sanitation Programme, Africa Region

Other related links:
Achieving sustainable water supply in rural Africa

Tackling India’s rural water crisis: new developments in managing water supplies

Rural water supply in Zambia: local solutions are best

Can South Africa’s rural poor be guaranteed water?

Views expressed on these pages are not necessarily those of DFID, IDS, id21 or other contributing institutions. Unless stated otherwise articles may be copied or quoted without restriction, provided id21 and originating author(s) and institution(s) are acknowledged.

Copyright © 2007 id21. All rights reserved.

Week beginning Monday 6th October 2008
FREE Information Delivery services from id21:
Get updates by email: id21 news
Insights: research digests
Contact id21

 

 

Go to the World Bank site.

 

 

Go to the World Bank Water and Sanitation Programme, Africa Region site.