Can Communities Manage and Deliver Basic Services - Essay Example

Can communities manage and deliver basic services Researched through Case Studies Introduction. Bradbury (2003) defines a communityas a group of people who are socially related by virtue of identity with a particular location. This paper is aimed at determining whether communities are capable of managing and delivering basic services. The paper begins by looking at the problems with the delivery of basic services, next the different governance structures for basic service delivery are considered, some case studies follow and later on a conclusion is presented at the end. 2. Problems with Basic Service Delivery Basic services according to UN-HABITAT (2005) are of different types and include among others water supply and sanitation, waste management, energy transportation, and communication. These services require heavy infrastructure, education, health, and public safety, which imply important operating costs. According to a UN Draft Report on Best Practices and Principles, basic services contribute to human dignity, quality of life and sustainable livelihood. Basic services are a prerequisite to the provisions of other services and improve everyone's potential to hold an economic activity. There has been a tremendous increase in the number of people leaving from rural to urban areas in recent years. In Bangladesh for example, rapid urbanization has taken place because of three contributing factors which include (Singha, 2001): Rural to urban migration; Geographical increase of urban territory; Natural growth of population in urban centers. Payne and Associates (2006) quoting from the UN (2006: p. 7) estimates that 998 million people were living in slums in 2006 worldwide. The population of Africans living in Urban areas is doubling every 20 years and majority of these people live in slums. It is estimated that nearly 3 billion additional people will need housing and urban services by 2030 (Payne and Associates, 2006) quoting UN (2005: p. 4). Payne and Associates (2006) attributes the rapid growth of the urban population to the unrivalled ability of urban areas to attract inward foreign direct investment and absorb surplus labour from rural areas without external subsidies. In addition, urban areas contribute disproportionately high percentages of government revenues in many developing countries, whilst remittance from urban workers provides a significant contribution of rural incomes. Payne and Associates (2006). Following the increasing number of people in urban areas, the capacity of the government to provide for basic services is challenged. (Singha, 2001: p1). The growth rate of the urban population which currently stands at 25million a year represents a major challenge for local and national governments as well as the international community. (Payne and Associates, 2006). UN-HABITAT (2005: p. 2) asserts that governments do not always provide residents with basic services, but they are invariably involved in their provision and usually claim to be working to ensure that all residents have access to adequate water and sanitation. UN-HABITAT (2005: p. 2) defines urban governance for basic services as the full range of arrangements through which government and other actors work together to install and manage the water and sanitation systems. However, these arrangements often fail to adequately cater for the urban poor, who are at a disadvantage in both the market and in the public policy arena. (UN-HABITAT, 2005: p. 2). These disadvantages lead them to end up using water and sanitation systems that are unhealthy and even illegal. (UN-HABITAT, 2005: p. 2). The UN Draft Report on Best Practices and Principles reports that basic services are unequally available and accessible throughout the world. Accordingly, many individuals, families, communities, and even entire cities and regions remain without basic services. Irrespective of the reasons, the report asserts that the result is that the poor are deprived from leading descent and dignified life thereby facing great difficulties to improve their situation. Consequently, they are trapped in a vicious circle where the lack of access to basic services is at the same time the result and cause of poverty. (UN Draft Report on best Practices and Principles, ND) The issue of inadequate household access to basic services remains the most critical and widespread problem in low-income urban settlements. (UN-HABITAT, 2005: p. 2). Inadequate household access to basic services is also one of the most important factors that account for high infant and child mortality rates encountered in so many deprived neighbourhoods. (UN-HABITAT, 2005: p. 2). As well as creating health hazards it also poses non-health problems, to women in particular, who tend to be especially inconvenienced by inadequate sanitation and typically have to fetch the household's water supplies and care for the sick infants and children. (UN-HABITAT, 2005: p. 2). In addition, in some urban centers, water for agriculture is also of critical importance to low-income residents, who depend on growing food and raising livestock to supplement their diet as well as their incomes while other live in flood plains or other vulnerable locations, and especially vulnerable to flooding. (UN-HABITAT, 2005: p. 2). The urban poor can make their interests felt at different levels. For example, they may have an interest in whether and how water utilities are regulated by the national or municipal government, whether the utilities operators are public or private, as well as a more direct interest in whether a piped water network is extended to their neigbourhood or what sot of sanitation systems are made available. (UN-HABITAT, 2005: p. 2). They can express these interests in many ways including the following (UN-HABITAT, 2005: p. 2).: Paying money to a provider; Voting in an election or a referendum; Asserting rights through a legal system; Moral or religious suasion; Supporting or working with a community-based organization or other intermediary on improving provision; or Installing their own facilities (e.g., digging wells and constructing latrines). Providers may respond (or fail to respond) to the above interests of the urban poor for many reasons, depending on how water and sanitation provision and the provision of other basic services is organized and regulated. While some governments may be favourable to the urban poor than others, it is difficult to generalize about specific practices and arrangements. (UN-HABITAT, 2005: p. 3). UN-HABITAT (2005: p. 3) quoting from the Institute on Governance (based in Ottawa), defines governance as "the process by which stakeholders articulate their interests, their input is absorbed, decisions are taken and implemented, and decision makers are held accountable." In addition "governance is understood to include not only the political and administrative institutions of government (and their organization and interrelationships) but also the relationship between government and civil society". (UN-HABITAT, 2005: p. 3), quoting (McCarney, 1996). The above therefore implies that "governance for the provision of basic services refers to the range of political, organizational and administrative processes through which communities articulate their interests, their inputs is absorbed, decisions are made and implemented, and decision makers are held accountable in the development and management of water resources and delivery of water services as well as the provision of other basic services". (UN-HABITAT, 2005: p. 3). Basic services have often been provided either by the state alone or descentralised to be provided by the private sector. These services have also been co-provided by the government and the private sector. In some cases NGOs have worked in collaboration with the government as well as the local communities to provide for basic services. The main interest in this paper is to review some case studies on how the local communities have been working to provide for basic services. Before going into the case studies, the paper will try to look at the different methods of providing basic services and assess their ability to deliver these services efficiently. 3. Governance Structures For Basic Service Delivery. According to Ugaz (2003: p. 1), the push towards State subsidiarity has tremendously affected the sphere of provision of basic services through the application of two sets of policies including commercialization/privatisation and decentralization. The objective of these policies were to improve efficiency in the area of service delivery since publicly provided services have been perceived to be inefficient. (Ugaz, 2003: p. 1). Provision of basic services had been a huge burden on the government budget and to add more salt to the injury they were often not accessible to the poor. (Ugaz, 2003: pp. 1-2). For example, infrastructure services such as water supplies were accessible at subsidized tariffs only to those connected to the main infrastructure networks (typically the richer and middle classes as the poorest were not connected to the services). (Ugaz, 2003: pp. 2). Consequently, the poor had to pay higher prices than more affluent users to access lower quality services. (Ugaz, 2003: pp. 2). Lack of efficiency was rationing social services like health and education resulting in long queus, crowded facilities and lack of supplies such as medicines, instruments and textbooks. (Ugaz, 2003: pp. 2). As a result, the rich opted for private provision, while the poor had to put up with public services that were increasingly unable to cover their basic needs. (Ugaz, 2003: pp. 2). According to Ugaz (2003: pp 2-12), the different solutions that have been proposed as solutions to the above problems include: commercialization and cost recovery, which is based on the principle of cost recovery through user charges. It has been justified by the fact that the poor were in effect paying for services. However this method has been challenged by a number of studies, for example Whittington, 1992; Bellamy, 2001) showed that irrespective of the initial subsidy provided, block tariffs don't necessarily benefit the poor for a number of reasons: firstly, the poor are usually not connected to networks. They usually get water from vendors who are connected. These vendors resell water. Vendors therefore represent high water consumers who pass on their surcharges to the poor. Secondly even if the poor are connected, the absence of meters (which are expensive to install and therefore not present in most cases in poor areas) makes it difficult to implement accurately block tariff scheme. (Ugaz, 2003: pp. 2); the next option was Private-public partnerships which can be seen as a popular way to designate these different arrangements between the state and the private sector in the area of service delivery; the next means of provision has been decentralization, which is also another means of reducing inefficiency in service delivery. According to Ugaz (2003: p. 8) decentralization encompasses at least some advantages with respect to centralized service provision some of which include: (1) decentralized provision of services is more efficient in a context where there is heterogeneity of preferences; (2) competition and innovation in the provision of public services by local governments enhances efficiency; and (3) local authorities are directly accountable to the local population through elections; the fourth method of solving the inefficiency is co-production which represents another term to define private sector participation on service delivery. (Ugaz, 2003: p. 9). Co-production is favoured by two factors, that of decentralization and technical innovation. (Ugaz, 2003: p. 9). According to Ugaz (2003: p. 9), the opportunity cost of organizing residents to construct or participate in decisions concerning local service delivery in one neighbourhood are much lower than trying to co-ordinate residential work teams for a whole city; Finally, according to the equity principle of service delivery donors and international financial institutions are re-thinking the strategy of basic service provision. (Ugaz, 2003: p. 9). The Role of NGOs and Community Based Organisations Today NGOs have been working in partnerships with governments and community-based organizations in many parts countries to improve the provision of basic services. This section will review a number of case studies on this issue. 4. Case Studies of NGO and Community Partnerships The following represent a series of examples in which NGOs have successfully partnered with community groups to improve on their access to basic services: The Small Grants Programme (SGP) - Under the GEF Small Grants Programme model implemented by the UNDP, NGOs and community-based organizations (CBOs) in developing countries are provided with small grants (up to $50,000; average $20,000) to support activities which protect the global environment while generating sustainable livelihoods. (Gascho et al, 2006: p. 1). The specific focal areas supported by the SGP are: climate change abatement, biodiversity conservation, pollution reduction of shared waters, reducing the impact of persistent organic pollutants and prevention of land degradation. Examples of recent projects which have resulted in the provision of basic services to the poor in rural areas include climate change abatement project in Ivory Coast which established solar water heaters in rural areas, saving firewood, improving sanitary conditions and reducing smoke inhalation. (Gascho et al, 2006: p. 1). This programme, which has been very successful has been carried out with the active participation of community-based organizations in these areas. Another important case study is the slums issue in Bangladesh. To solve this issue, the Dutshstha Shasthya Kendra (DSK) approach was adopted. There is a myth that generally exist in Bangladesh that disadvantaged people are not willing and able to pay for basic water and sanitation site and service projects. (Singha, 2001: p. 2). However, it turns out to be the contrary because people living in slums pay even higher rates than middle income or rich communities for water and other services. (Singha, 2001: p. 2). For this reason in mid 1990s DSK a project was carried out in Dhaka to improve affordable water supply to urban slum communities on the basis of participatory community engagement and sustainable community based management. (Singha, 2001: p. 2). According to Singha (2001: p. 2), based on a capital cost recovery basis it is not possible to find such infrastructure projects in urban areas because few NGOs are involved. The main challenge of DSK has been to demonstrate and prove that such initiatives are successful; and on the strength of such experience to influence and push local governments to make real investments in such projects to benefit of the depressed target groups. (Singha, 2001: p. 2). DSK started mediating piped water supply service to slums and low-income communities 5 years ago. The main target was to create provision of legal water supply services in slums, via community based organizations (CBOs) and on a capital cost recovery basis; with special emphasis on sustainability. (Singha, 2001: p. 2). The key principle of the DSK model is to respond to the demand for water indicated by communities' willingness to pay. Accordingly, communities willing to form self help groups are provided training on management and maintenance of water points; health/hygiene habits and behavioural change. (Singha, 2001: p. 2). The model facilitates processes with community participation to design water points, select specific placement of infrastructure and formulates guidelines on water access and cost sharing. (Singha, 2001: p. 2). DSK also serves as a mediator between communities and formal city authorities and utilities, lends initial capital funds and provides technical support for construction. (Singha, 2001: p. 2). It employs a system of participatory rapid appraisal to gather descriptive data through community interviews and discussions. (Singha, 2001: p. 2). The key components of the DSK Water, Sanitation And Hygiene Promotion Approach (DWASA) according to Singha (2001: p. 2), include the following: Capacity building and strengthening of Community Based Organisations (CBOs); Women's participation and leadership of CBOs; Provision of WATSAN services through communal water points; Behavioural change communication through health, hygiene education employing PRA and CTC approaches; Financial and Social sustainability of the project. The key lessons learnt from the DSK project according to Singha (2003: p. 3) include the following: DWASA Bills And Cost Recovery Of Capital. DWASA bills are being paid by assisted communities on a regular basis. For example as of June 30, 2000, DSK targeted communities had paid Tk 473,572.00 *94.12%( of the DWASA bills invoiced, outstanding bills were paid later and communities continue to meet their obligations to supply authorities. Community Management and Women Leadership Community based organizations were formed around provision of water through a street hydrant in a specific sub-community. Eighty percent of the monthly community meetings took place with average attendance of 62% where female constituted 60.48% of attendees. DSK has also helped communities to achieve maturity of leadership especially women in the community to run the management of the water points on a regular basis. Transfer To Community Management (Community Empowerment) One of the water points was transferred to "stand alone" community management with no support from DSK staff and there were plans to transfer 10 more water points to community management by 2001. The criteria used to transfer to community management was the presence of Water Point management committee; regular monthly meetings; attendance of women; women leadership; male attendance; regular payment of DWASA bills; regular payment of capital loan installments; maintenance and cleanliness of the water points; and expressed ownership of the facility. Another case study is drawn from the experience of development workshop in Angola. According to Cain et al (ND), operating from within the Ministry of Construction's Department of Urbanism, Development workshop Angola was formed in 1981 to provide technical support to the Anolan Government during the 1980s. It remained the only international NGO in Angola for many years because the Angolan government tightly controlled the presence of foreign organizations in the country and insisted that they work closely with government departments. (Cain et al, ND). The organization also provided some technical support in settlements of Namibian and South African refugees who were based in Angola. (Cain et al, ND). Development workshop Angola decided to carry out a water and sanitation programe in Launda. In meeting this objective, the organization has been working with community organizations, local governments and the official water sanitation agencies. According to Cain et al (ND), the projects had carried out in a city where: The population was growing rapidly, in part due to war forcing people to flee rural areas in a country which had had war for 40 years and economic decline; For 20 years there had been almost no provision to extend water to the peri-urban areas where much f Launda's population growth had taken place; Conflict had damaged and inhibited the political institutional foundations for ensuring basic service provision; Local governments and water companies lacked the power and resources to address the deficiencies in water and sanitation (although recent reforms aim to make local governments more accountable and effective); and Incomes were too low to allow conventional solutions, yet there was no tradition of community provision ( and government agencies were wary of working with community organizations). According to Cain et al (ND) approximately only 17% of households report that they have a water connection while only 10% of this total have an inside water supply. The population tend to rely on water bought from tankers, with prices ranging from the equivalent of US$4 per cubic meter in an area close to a water company distribution tank to US$20 per cubic meter in an area distant from the river and from where any water company connection. In addition, there is a very low percentage of families with basic sanitation. Following political changes in Angola in 1990, which allowed the emergence of community associations and NGOs, the Development workshop began to work directly with the community in the museques. (Cain et al, ND). Water and sanitation were prioritized as important components and the project demonstrated two viable approaches to improving provision: community-managed public standpipes and family dry-pit latrines. (Cain et al, ND). A larger water programme was developed from 1995 and to date 200 public standpipes each currently serving 100 families have been built in eight of the nine municipal areas of Launda. (Cain et al, ND). Prior to the implementation of the programme the city had only 10 standpipes that had been built at the end of the colonial period and the early post-colonial period but were no longer functioning because of lack of management, protection and maintenance. For each standpipe, Development workshop sought to develop a partnership between a local elected water committee that managed it, the water company and the local authority. The management committee were provided with half of the funds collected from users for management and maintenance as well as the payment of wages of those who managed it. (Cain et al, ND). The water company was provided with 30 percent while the local authority was provided with 20%. Despite the proper management carried out by the management committee, it was often difficult to get necessary support from the local government and the water company. (Cain et al, ND). The latrine program was aimed at constructing 5,000 pit toilets (latrines) between 1995 and 2000 with a particular focus on geographic areas. (Cain et al, ND). The project was aimed at getting 90% of households in an area to invest in them. (Cain et al, ND). Families in selected areas were encouranged by mobilisers trained and supported by Development Workshop to develop the latrines. (Cain et al, ND). Another project that was underway to be undertaken by development workshop was the improvement of solid waste collection given that the state company responsible for solid waste removal in the city does not have the capacity to regularly collect solid waste from peri-urban bairos. (Cain et al, ND). This company also lacks the equipment to get into these areas (through narrow unpaved roads) as well as the experience to work with community organizations. (Cain et al, ND). Development workshop intervened by supporting a pilot project to collect solid waste from within bairos, using containers lefts at strategic points that are regularly collected by a tractor and taken to a site where the state company collects the wastes. (Cain et al, ND). It should be noted that, the success of these programmes have come as a result of the successful partnership developed between Development Workshop and the Community Based Organisations who have demonstrated their commitment to work for the development of the city. Community organsiations were developed and were accountable to residents. These organizations were also capable of managing finances and dealing with conflicts. (Cain et al, ND). Development workshop also created forums through which different community organizations involved in the management of standpipes could share their experiences and work together in seeking better services from the water company as well as from the local authorities. (Cain et al, ND). 5. Conclusions. Based on the case studies, one find that in most of the areas that NGOs have undertaken projects, the governments and local authorities have often failed to provide efficient management and delivery of basic services to the poor. Partnerships between community based organizations and the International NGOs have been found to be more successful in delivering basic services as community based organizations are nearing to the end users and can easily be held accountable for their actions unlike the government providing them with these services through a centralized management system. A UN-HABITAT and UNITAR Joint Working Document concluded that: First "in order to provide all access to basic services, - where access implies both availability and affordability, three priorities emerge": To conduct sustained pro-poor policies, which implies in particular that civil society organizations are in a position to remind governments of the commitments they made and to assist in their implementation; To develop partnerships with different stakeholders, partnerships are difficult to put in place, time-consuming and difficult to implement; nevertheless, they are necessary to mobilize the capacities and resources of all stakeholders; To give a central role to local authorities. Indeed basic services must be provided locally and it is at the local level that partnerships, including society organizations, and small or large enterprises can be more efficiently developed to reach the poor. Second, "in order to meet these priorities two main obstacles cutting across the sectors have to be overcome. They both call for national and international action": The development and maintenance of infrastructure, and day-to-day delivery of services require a significant amount of financial resources that will have to be found locally, nationally and internationally. In this respect, the issues raised by stakeholders include the allocation of resources from national budgets to local authorities, the possibility of local authorities to borrow internationally and to introduce taxes, the availability of micro-credit mechanisms and the mobilization of local savings. Following from the above one can conclude that communities can manage and deliver basic services if well empowered to do so. These include providing them with the necessary training and funding. BIBLIOGRAPHY Access to Basic Services for All Towards and International Declaration on Partnerships. UN-HABITAT and UNITAR Joint Working Document Executive Summary. Bradbury J. (2003). "community"The Concise Oxford Dictionary of Politics. Ed. Iain McLean and Alistair McMillan. Oxford University Press, Oxford Reference Online. Cai A., Daly M., Robson P. (ND). Basic Service Provision for the urban poor; experience of Development Workshop in Angola. Human Settlements Programme, IIED London. Gascho L., Shamerina A., Donithorn B. (2006). Consolidated Reply: Malaysia/Strategies to bring basic services to rural remote communities. UNDP Malaysia. Singha (2001). Changing Face of Livelihoods in Asia-Shifting entry points Making Institutions work for the poor in Asia. DFID Regional Livelihoods Workshop: Reaching the poor in Asia, 8-10 May 2001. Ugaz C. (2003). Approaches to Basic Service Delivery: Privatisation, Decentralisation, and Equity. United Nations Research Institute for Social Development (UNRISD). UN-HABITAT (2005). Issue paper on Pro-poor governance for delivery of Basic Services. 6th Global Forum on Reinventing Government. Towards Partipatory and Transparent Governance. 24-27 May 2005, Seoul, Korea. UN HABITAT (2005). Draft Report on best Practices and Principles. Access to Basic Services for all within the context of sustainable Human Settlements. Draft Report on Best Practices and Principles. Read More