The main causes of disease and poor health in southern Africa are water related. Management of water resources is difficult however, because of low water availability and poor quality. To address their problems, countries in the region have implemented integrated water resource management (IWRM), promoting democratic water management through stakeholder participation, transparency and responsiveness to citizens’ needs. But are the preconditions for the democratic management of water in place in the region?

A paper from the University of Zimbabwe and the International Institute for Environment and Development in the UK examines water governance in the Southern African Development Community (SADC). Co-operation between the 14 member countries of SADC has helped to popularise the new water management approach. However, the author highlights some constraints to achieving IWRM.

Water is scarce in southern Africa due to the semi-arid and arid environment. Food security is threatened because of watershed degradation, over-cultivation, overgrazing and deforestation. One in three SADC residents now live in drought prone areas. Water bodies are increasingly polluted as poor waste disposal systems are increasingly burdened with ever-growing numbers of urban dwellers. The management of river basins by different national authorities worsens the situation.

The research findings from Zimbabwe’s experience of implementing IWRM include:

• Zimbabwe’s experiment to create democratically elected catchment and sub-catchment councils has been weakened by the inability of representatives from rural communities to pay for transport to meetings, the use of English as the working language and the exclusion of non-farm stakeholders (such as industry and urban authorities).
• Emphasis on making all water users pay for water has led many to believe the authorities are pushing participation simply to generate revenue.
• The fast track land reform programme, begun in July 2000, with its disregard for rules and regulations, has reversed some of the gains of the water reforms and stakeholder institutions.
• The geographical and institutional boundaries of water management bodies are determined by governments and generally follow hydrological boundaries. Communities, however, prioritise traditional institutions and district and provin­cial administrative boundaries that do not necessarily follow catchment lines.

In Zimbabwe and elsewhere, spatial and jurisdictional boundaries of the new water institutions remain a problem. In all SADC states pursuing water management reform, the role of the state agency responsible for water management remains problematic. Water authorities have failed to encourage links between new institutions and local communities. The dependence on external funding to initiate and maintain water reform is risky, as evidenced by the problems Zimbabwe faced after donors pulled out of the country for other reasons.

Advocates of IWRM need to realise that:

• The participation of stakeholder does not automatically mean that water resource management has been democratised. Identifying genuine stakeholders is a challenge, as is getting them to work together.
• Improved governance should be the reason for involving the wider community and stakeholder participation should be viewed as a means of achieving that goal.
• The effective governance of water resources will require significant restructuring of ownership and access rights.
• Re-structuring of ownership and access rights can however lead to economic and political dislocation and may scare off investors: a balance has to be struck between stakeholder participation and protecting the public interest.
• How to identify and manage the relationships between different stakeholders and assessing whether real stakeholder participation is being achieved are critical issues.
• Measures must be taken to ensure that local communities are able to participate in new water institutions.

The overall political culture of a country plays an important role in shaping stakeholder participation. Effective stakeholder participation cannot occur without a supportive governance context. If carefully organised and managed, however, it may help in democratising not only water resource management, but wider society as well.

Source(s):
‘Water for All: improving water resource governance in Southern Africa’ by Emmanuel Manzungu. Gatekeepers Series 113, International Institute for Environment and Development, June 2004 Full document.

Funded by: Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (SDC)

id21 Research Highlight: 7 April 2005

Further Information:
Emmanuel Manzungu
Department of Soil Science and Agricultural Engineering
University of Zimbabwe
PO Box MP 167
Mount Pleasant
Harare
Zimbabwe

Tel: +263 4 304989
Fax: +263 4 304989
Contact the contributor: manzungu@mweb.co.zw

Department of Soil Science and Agricultural Engineering, University of Zimbabwe

Sustainable Agriculture and Rural Livelihoods Programme
International Institute for Environment and Development
3 Endsleigh Street
London WC1H 0DD
UK

Tel: +44 (0)20 7388 2117
Fax: +44 (0)20 7388 2826
Contact the contributor: sustag@iied.org

Sustainable Agriculture and Rural Livelihoods Programme, IIED, UK

Other related links:
Towards good water governance

Can South Africa's rural poor be guaranteed water?

Water management in the Yellow River Basin

World Bank Water Resources Management