Community Management: A Suitable Model?
On reflection, my posts so far have been dominated by conflict. Although this was a purposeful direction, I realised this route may overlook more subtle political discussions regarding water in Africa. Therefore, to try produce a more expansive blog, this post addresses the community-based model of water management.
Community management offers an empowering, decentralised form of water governance situating end users as active decision-makers (Schouten and Moriarty, 2003). By transferring ownership to communities and bypassing ineffective states, community-management offers a more pragmatic form of water supply. However, research points to woeful operational failure rates of 30-60% within Sub-Saharan-Africa countries (Baumann, 2006).
 |
| Figure 1: Village meeting for community water project (Source: CED) |
Community-management appealed to overstretched governments and NGOs where they could transfer responsibility of provision to users with a 'clear conscience' (Harvey and Reed, 2006). Critically speaking, community-management also stems from ignorant Western imaginaries of African communities as harmonious, simplistic groups (Poncian, 2015). Firstly, community-management may not be the preference of development subjects (Hope, 2015). Secondly, although some African communities have a history of community management, this model has been generalized as a 'one size fits all' solution, echoing Wanaina's (2005) sentiment of tact generalization in African discourses.
Across 174 cases of community-management analysed (79 from Sub-Saharan-Africa), leadership, transparency and collective initiative define successful African community-management models (Hutchings et al. 2015). Figure 2 illustrates how across cases spanning <5 years, 'high initiative' was the most prominent factor characterising 51% of cases. For example, strong initiative is illustrated in Kumbo, Cameroon, where local people staged ongoing protests in 1991, eventually overthrowing the state water supply, SNEC, and instituting the KWA as a replacement (Ben Page, 2003). However, among cases of higher duration, high institutional transparency was most common. The importance of transparency and leadership is again seen in Kumbo, where ultimately the lack of co-ordination between between the Fon of Nso and the elected Mayor led to its collapse.
 |
| Figure 2: Common 'internal' Factors in high performing cases (Hutchings et al. 2015) |
Additionally, successful community-management cases were embedded within wider institutional support. As seen in figure 3, over 88% of high performing cases had suitable financial and material resource aid. Similarly, 36% of successful models operated within a decentralized system with access to continued governmental assistance. A communal governance system operating in the shadow of hierarchy is able to draw on the required technical, managerial, resource and specialist support from a regulatory framework required for success (Cleaver and Toner, 2006). For example, a rural region in Ghana displayed successful functioning of 86% of its 44 water projects as a result of quarterly visits from an NGO offering essential support to communities (Fuest and Veronika, 2005). In contrast, in Kenya where state legislation dictates water projects should be 'self-sustaining' and that users need to encompass 'full responsibility', community management projects are less primed for success (Nilsson and Nyanchaga, 2009).
 |
| Figure 3: 'External' factors in high performing cases (Hutchings et al. 2015) Figure 4 illustrates a framework for the sustainable success of a community-management project. An adoption of this structure may help improve the contemporary inadequacies of African community-management projects by synthesizing the 'internal' and 'external' factors outlined. |
 |
| Figure 4: Optimal community-management structure (Hutchings et al. 2015) |
Regardless, we are at the 'beginning of the end' for community-management as is. Informality and voluntarism constricts its adequacy as a broader solution to water supply (Chowns, 2015). However, community-management should still be pragmatic rather than an idealised, 'cheap' fix for water supply. External institutions are required to engage in a bipartite relationship with users providing consistent and long-term support.
Hey Harry,
ReplyDeleteI really like this entry and how you use the discussions we had about Kumbo in Professor Page's class as a springboard for your argument. I especially like how you delve into the 'one size fits all' model often used for community management in Africa, and draw in examples from other African nations where this model has been less successful.
With regards to the long-term sustainability of water management projects, do you think the capital investments needed for these projects should be the state's responsibility? Perhaps regional or national governments? Or should they still be run by external institutions (with long-term support)? I remember people were torn when we discussed this in class so just wondering what you think!
Hey Aida,
DeleteThank you for your comment, that is an interesting point you've raised!
With regards to the long-term sustainability of water management projects, I believe the allocation of responsibility does not entail a theoretical answer but rather a pragmatic one. Although I'd suggest in an ideal world, funding should come from national governments, given the importance and dependence on community-management projects funding should come from anywhere! Where national governments are inadequate, responsibility should fall to NGOs, or international institutions such as the World Bank.