fit.5

1990 No. 1 COMMUNJTY WATE» SUPPLYSANITATI0N flRC)

NEW INITIATIVES INWATER SUPPLY ANDSANITATION

Australian International Development Assistance Bureau

Appraisals, Evaluation and Sectoral Studies BranchDevelopment Paper 1990 No. 1

NEW INITIATIVES IN WATERSUPPLY AND SANITATION:

PROJECT SUCCESS AND SUSTAINABILITY

LIBRARY. INTERNATIONAL RuFtfvnNCtCENTRE FOR COMMUNI! Y WA \ "R SUPPLYAND SAf-ltTATIGN <lr>C}P.O. Box 93190, 2509 AD The Hagu*Tel. (070) 814911 ext 141/142

3

ISSN: 1031-1475 May 1990

NEW INITIATIVES IN WATER SUPPLYAND SANITATION:

PROJECT SUCCESS AND SUSTAINABILITY.

This publication has been prepared by Susanna Price for the AsianDevelopment Bank Asia Regional Consultation in Manila on WaterSupply and Sanitation: Beyond the Decade (4-8 June 1990).

Susanna Price is in the Appraisal n Section of the Appraisal, Evaluationand Sectoral Studies Branch of the Australian International DevelopmentAssistance Bureau.

I. INTRODUCTION

Water supply and sanitationprojects are an important means ofachieving humanitarian, equityand growth goals. Yet often thepotential gains from such projectsare not realised because projectsare not sustained uponcompletion. Increasingly, donorsare trying to find ways to achievemore lasting benefits from theirprojects.

This is not easy. The purpose ofthis publication is to share someof the lessons learnt to date fromthe Australian experience withwater supply and sanitation(WSS) projects.

This document describes two newinitiatives in WSS which aresupported by the AustralianGovernment in Nusa TenggaraBarat Province, Indonesia.

Both projects take new steps toaddress the problem of eventualsustainability of water supply andsanitation facilities uponcompletion of construction. Bothprojects involve participation ofthe communities in WSSfacilities, one in the context ofrural water supply and sanitation,the other for small town watersupplies. In each case, attention is

also given to institutionalstrengthening and assessment ofenvironmental sustainability.

What are the strengths andweaknesses of the new initiatives?Which are the key elementsof design which are likely tocontribute to eventual success andsustainability? One of theprojects has been developedand tested since 1985; the otheris still in a trial pilot stage.Yet both examples yield usefulideas.

Lombok Rural Water Suppliesand Sanitation Project.

This project is the most developedand tested of the two new WSSinitiatives.

From the commencement of PhaseI in 1985, this project has focusedon developing a model for theparticipation of rural communitiesin the planning, construction andmaintenance of their own WSSfacilities. The model falls withinthe general guidelines of theGovernment of Indonesia, andalso draws upon governmentresources at national, provincialand kabupaten levels. The modelhas become known as the LombokRWSS "pattern of work" (polakerja).

Some 90,000 people in the dry"critical area" of Lombok Tengahreceived improved WSS facilitiesduring Phase I. The costs weredivided between the Governmentof Australia ($3.6 million); theGovernment of Indonesia(Rp773 million) and the ruralcommunities themselves (estim-ated contribution valued atRp61 million). This Phase wasreviewed by the two Governmentsin 1989.

A further 160,000 people inLombok Tengah will receiveimproved water supplies underPhase H, 70,000 from a largepiped system and 90,000 frompoint sources. Institutionalstrengthening, improvedsanitation, water qualitysurveillance, health education andcommunity development alsoform part of the proposed ac-tivities for Phase II.

Eastern Indonesia Ibu KotaKecamatan Water SupplyProject: Bima Pilot Project.

A new approach is beingdeveloped for providing watersupplies to IKK (Ibu Kota

Kecamatan, or sub-districtcapitals) in Kabupaten Bima, onthe island of Sumbawa in NusaTenggara Barat Province.

The new approach is a kabupaten-based (district) strategy forproviding water supply andsanitation improvements based oncommunity participation andinstitutional strengthening.

The Bima trial (May 1989 to June1990) cost the AustralianGovernment $2 million and theGovernment of Indonesia Rp610million. In addition, IKKcommunities are contributing tothe construction and operation offacilities.

The Bima trial provides new watersupply facilities to five kecamatancapitals serving a population ofapproximately 15,000. Inaddition, the project providesinstitutional strengthening toGovernment agencies, establisheswater loss task forces and suppliessystem improvements for fourexisting water supplies serving apopulation of approximately50,000 in three kecamatancapitals and the kabupaten(district) capital of Raba-Bima.

2. THE CHALLENGE:WHY ADDRESSSUSTAINABILITY?

Why donors fund water supplyand sanitation projects

Water is a basic need, essential forsurvival. Clean water in sufficientquantities improves health; andthese gains can be increased byenvironmental sanitation andhealth education. Reducingmortality and morbidity fromwater related diseases, togetherwith time savings from moreaccessible facilities, leads to bet-ter quality of life and increasedeconomic productivity.

Water sector projects allowdonors to support humanitarian,equity and growth goals in the oneproject. If they are designed andimplemented well, such projectscan have important linkages withother key aspects of development,including environmental improve-ment, broad health gains,community development, basiceducation; and can enhance theposition of women in develop-ment, as women are so often thedrawers and bearers of water.

Clearly, WSS projects canrepresent a good use of aid funds.

However, donor experience showsthat many projects are notsustained or sustainable.Sustainability means maintainingthe flow of benefits uponcompletion of the project. Non-sustainability may be due toadverse policy factors, a weakinstitutional framework, lack oflocal participation, socio-culturalincompatibility, lack of recurrentcost financing, poor technologychoice, or environmentalimbalance, reducing the capacityof the water resource to providewater of good quality andquantity.

If the water supplied is not used,or if quality, quantity andreliability are not maintained, thenthe initial investment is wastedand expected benefits in terms ofimproved health, time savings andquality of life will not beachieved.

For these reasons donors andrecipients alike are searching forproject strategies which willenhance the prospects for eventualsustainability.

Australia's Experience in WaterSupply and Sanitation.

Australia has spent A$248 millionin bilateral aid funds on water

sector projects over the period1978/79 to 1987/88, constituting13 per cent of total bilateralexpenditure during the period.Funding for WSS increasedsharply after the declaration of the1981-90 decade as theInternational Drinking WaterSupply and Sanitation Decade(IDWSSD).

This experience has been analysedin an AIDAB publication AIDABand Water Development: SectorReview (1990).

The sector review found that, inorder to be successful, WSSprojects must have clearobjectives, specific develop-ment goals and formal projectdesigns.

Australian water sector projects inthe past have been dominated bytechnical concerns, often inresponse to a request for "stateof the art" structures andtechniques from the recipientgovernment. This has had adverseeffects for achieving sustainableprojects.

In many cases, the physicalconstruction of works wasconsidered a more importantindicator of developmentthan the actual utilisation ofthese works by the people;

Water projects have rarelyaddressed the issue ofsustainability in their goalsor design;

Projects had rarelyattempted to involvecommunities in planning,design, implementation andoperation;

Projects had rarelyattempted to involve orbenefit women specificallyin operations, althoughwomen are usually theprincipal water drawers andcarryers, responsible forhousehold water use, childcare, sanitation, hygiene andfood preparation;

Projects had assumed thatimproving the quality,quantity and management ofwater would lead toimproved health, eventhough it is difficult inpractice to establish thisrelationship. However theachievement of healthbenefits for WSS projectsrequires interlinkedcomponents which includehealth education, nutrition,food hygiene, environ-mental sanitation andmedical care;

Projects had rarelyattempted to addressenvironmental issues in theirgoals or designs, forexample the sustainability inquality and quantity ofsurface or groundwatersupplies; or the managementof waste water.

So in the past projects have notnecessarily been designed toenhance prospects forsustainability in social,institutional or environmentalterms upon completion. The studyfound that the construction ofWSS facilities in isolation isinadequate, and that the design ofWSS projects requires attention tobroader issues:

country water sector studiescan be prepared and utilised,in order to draw uponexisting strategies, exper-ience and knowledge;

social and communityinvolvement, especially ofwomen, in all phases isimportant for eventualsustainability;

education, training andinstitution building isimportant in building localinstitutional capacity;

environmental assessmentand resource evaluation arenecessary to ensure waterresource sustainability;

complementary healthpackages (of healtheducation, nutrition,housing, and medical care)are essential if the healthbenefits of WSS are to beachieved.

These concerns have implicationsfor project design and implemen-tation. Longer inception phasesare needed which incorporatecommunity and institutionalprocesses; allow time for thepreparation of baseline studies,and the design of appropriatemonitoring and evaluationsystems which can address theissue of sustainability.

The methods for financial andeconomic assessment of WSSprojects used in appraisal andevaluation should be carefullyapplied, taking account ofessential human resourcedevelopments and the long-termself-sustaining elements of projectsuccess. Where benefits aredifficult to quantify and value,cost-effectiveness analysis andrecurrent cost financingapproaches may be moreappropriate.

3. NEW INITIATIVES.

New AIDAB projects areattempting to address these issues.Two such projects are assessed inthis publication.

A. Lombok Rural WaterSupplies and SanitationProject

The Lombok model

The Lombok model involved thecreation of a "pattern of work"(pola kerja) which has fourprinciples:

a community process;

management which isoriented to the people;

appropriate and affordableWSS technology which ismaintainable on completion;

planning based on a strategyfor resource use at fourlevels: central, province,kabupaten (district) andlocal levels.

The community process wasdeveloped in the following way:

A desa (village) fund wasestablished at the kabupatenlevel from AIDAB andGovernment of Indonesia

funds for constructing WSSfacilities. Each village wasinformed that it wouldreceive an equitable share ofthe funding on a populationbasis. The money was to be"theirs" rather than theprojects;

A local non-governmentorganisation was establishedto recruit and traincommunity organisers tolive in the village andfacilitate the process ofparticipation and to workwith official governmentstructures;

The villagers were invited toparticipate in the planning ofWSS facilities. Theydiscussed the social,economic, health, and waterresource features of thecommunity and itsenvironment; defined theirown needs; and decidedupon a village WSS plan;

The villagers could matchfunding available againsttheir own WSS plan, andrank priorities. The villagersdecided how to spend theirshare of the desa fund;

The villagers decided onadditional resources of

labour, land, materials andcash which they couldprovide to supplement thedesa fund for constructioncosts;

The villagers discussed theWSS plan with projecttechnical staff and thecommunity organiser, toensure environmentalsustainability and approp-riate technology choices forWSS facilities which couldbe operated and maintainedrelatively easily at villagelevel. Where necessary, thetechnical staff suggestedchanges in the WSS plan;

The plan was used as thebasis for construction.Villagers could monitorexpenditure of their part ofthe desa fund as workproceeded;

The community organiserhelped the villagers toidentify and form water usergroups to take responsibilityfor the WSS facilities andparticipate in healthtraining.

The community organiserhelped to identify additionaldevelopment activities,principally in women'sincome raising, which could

be funded through theproject.

Community self survey methodsof problem solving (mawas diri)were introduced subsequently in afew communities. Mawas diriallows communities to defineproblems, assess their causes, planstrategies to overcome theproblems, and implementactivities which can then bemonitored for their effectiveness.The method helps communities toconceptualise problems andsolutions in the areas of familyand community welfare, includinga healthy environment, a healthyway of life and socio-economicconditions. Female health andcommunity workers are trained inthe use of the method, and theirrole is to assist the community toplan and monitor activities. Eachcommunity can set the aims andagenda which meet its own needsand conditions, and can programactivities at a pace which isattainable yet challenging.Communities can requestassistance from the village leadersand local government officials ifthey so wish.

Review Findings

How successful has this modelbeen in providing sustainableWSS facilities?

The findings of an AIDAB reviewin 1989 are summarised below.

1. Project Performance

(i) Community Participation.

The model for the planning,design, construction, operationand maintenance of rural WSSfacilities was developed duringPhase I and is being consolidatedduring Phase II.

A local non-governmentorganisation was formed duringPhase I and community organiserswere trained to mobilisecommunity resources throughvillage-based work. Thecommunity organisers trainedvillage volunteers in theorganisation of water-usergroups.

The community organisersattempted to form water usergroups for each WSS facility, witha role in operation andmaintenance as follows:

For wells, sanitation andbathing facilities: the wateruser group organises thecommunity to clean andrepair the facility throughvoluntary labour orfundraising; and securesagreement on use if water

rationing is necessary duringthe dry season.

For standpipes connected tothe reticulated watersystems: the water usergroup organises thecommunity to meet tariffcharges payable to the waterenterprise; and to clean andrepair taps, distributionpipes and drains as needed.Tariffs are reduced if thewater user group maintainsthat standpipe.

In addition, water user groupswere the focus of health educationactivities.

The desa fund was established,comprising all donor and Govern-ment of Indonesia funds allocatedto the construction of WSSfacilities. The fund isadministered at the kabupatenlevel, but each village is informedof the total amount available(calculated on a population basis).Each village is able to plan on thebasis of a firm figure, which canbe supplemented by communityresources, and monitored. Someinitial problems with fundsdiversion occurred becauseofficials and leaders did notunderstand the importance ofcommunity level planning. Theseproblems had to be resolved

through explanation andeducation of the individualsinvolved. Subsequently, thissystem has worked well as a basisfor community financial planning.

(ii) Technology andconstruction.

The WSS facilities developedhave largely met the essentialcriteria set for technical works:

simple and suitable formanual implementationusing local materials andlocal expertise;

acceptablecommunity;

to the

low cost, easy to operate andmaintain;

environmentally sound.

This meant that, in cases wherethe technical specificationsdeveloped by project personnel tomeet community needs differedfrom the official specifications,special permission had to beobtained from local authorities.

Standpipes for reticulated waterwere of a simple and appropriatedesign. However, the waterreticulation systems overall wereunable to meet all the demands forincreased volumes of water

through the extra outletsconstructed. The water enterprise,which has responsibility foroperating and maintaining thesystems, suffered from technical,management and financialproblems which limited its abilityto distribute water to potentialconsumers.

There were some problems withwell construction due to expansiveclays which easily crack the wellaprons, but these seem to bewithin the communities' abilitiesto manage.

The construction and coverageachievements were:

Non-piped water supplysystems: 648 facilities werecompleted and functioningserving an estimated 65000users, which is more thandouble the project target.These include new wells,rehabilitated wells andspring captions.

Piped water systems: 247standpipes were constructedbut only 147 were operating,serving 14,700 users or 60per cent of the project target.

27 sanitation and 67 bathingfacilities were constructed,but targets had not been set.

10

(ii'i) Health Education

Health education materials wereprepared during Phase I. Healtheducation was integrated into thecommunity education process bymeans of the communityorganisers and volunteers. Theyattempted to ensure that wateruser groups had a reasonableknowledge of hygienic personaland domestic behaviour bycreating a demand for latrines,developing an interest inproductive use of water, effectiverubbish disposal, cattle yarding,and increasing the demand for safewater. The success of theseefforts is unknown, as publichealth processes were notformally being monitored.

Assistance with health educationmaterials and teaching methodol-ogy was given to the healthdepartment, but lack of resourceshas limited the effects.

The introduction of communityself survey (mawas diri) seems torepresent the most promisingprospect so far of introducinghealth education initiatives at thevillage level in a self- sustainingway. This is because it allowscommunities to prepare andmonitor their own plans toimprove environmental sanitation,health and hygiene, through both

physical outputs (drains, latrines,cattle yarding, etc) and throughbehavioural change (boilingwater, washing hands, etc).

(iv) Training.

Training has been divided intotwo categories:

Model specific activities,which were designed toprovide project andcommunity personnel withthe skills and understandingnecessary to work with themodel. Some initialresistance to the idea ofcommunity planning andmanagement amongstadministrative staff at alllevels of the governmentstructure had to be over-come. This was achievedthrough education anddemonstration of possib-ilities for achieving results,through staff workshops andmeetings for provincial andkabupaten personnel. Thenon-government organ-isation developed anextensive training programfor newly recruitedcommunity organisers incommunity mobilisationskills. This was alsoextended to villagevolunteers.

11

Project-specific training wasprovided to increase thetechnical and managerialcompetence of project staff,consisting mainly ofin-country and overseasfellowships, computer train-ing and English languagetraining. Kabupaten staffreceived on the job technicaltraining.

Non-community training activit-ies began in an ad hoc manner. InPhase II a new focus wasbeginning to emerge formanagerial and technical trainingof staff in key governmentagencies outside the principalcounterpart agency, but thisneeded to be strengthened andtargetted.

(v) Institutional Strengthening.

This occurred during Phase Iprimarily with the principalcounterpart agency, the HealthDepartment; and with the non-government organisation. Theproject succeeded in creating amanagement framework support-ive of the community process.

However, there are a range ofagencies at provincial andkabupaten level with respons-ibilities in rural WSS (includingthe Departments of Public Works,

Health, Home Affairs, and theBappeda); and the division ofresponsibilities changed duringthe project life. The project wasless successful in clearly definingthe roles of the key agencies asthey interacted with the project; inidentifying areas of institutionalweakness for targetted projectsupport; and in developing goodworking relations between keyagencies.

This was particularly true in thecase of the water enterprise whichhas responsibility for managingthe reticulated piped systems intechnical and financial terms, butwhich had only marginally beeninvolved in planning anddeveloping piped water suppliesunder the project. Managementand technical resources within thewater enterprise were weak, butthe project institutional strength-ening program had not addressedthem.

A financing system, whichincluded user contributions toconstruction, operation andmaintenance, was successfullydeveloped for non-piped watersupply and sanitation facilities.Water user groups organisecommunity contributions forrepairs and maintenance as theyare required. Yet the project wasnot able to develop systems for

12

financing operation andmaintenance of piped systemsduring Phase I. There wasconfusion over the tariff structure,the water charges and the methodof payment to the waterenterprise.

A new focus on strengthening andincreasing co-ordination betweenkey agencies in areas such asfinancing, technical developmentand management was endorsedby the review team.

(vi) Monitoring and Evaluation.

These activities had been informaland action-oriented, providingimmediate and useful feedback toproject staff. However, there wasno systematic attempt to collectcomprehensive data for assessingdevelopmental effectiveness andimpact.

(vii) Expenditure and Benefit-Cost Performance.

The project was completed withintime and almost within budget,with relatively small budgetincreases due to increased pipeprocurement and constructioncosts.

Community contributions werevalued at about 2 per cent of thetotal project cost for Phase I, and

were increasing steadily duringPhase II.

The economic rate of return hadbeen calculated at between 15 an33 per cent based on the value of

time women saved in collectingwater, turned to economicallyproductive activities; but thesefigures needed to be substantiatedby a sound time allocation database.

2. Project Effectiveness.

The model has been mostsuccessful in developing acommunity participation process,and appropriate, affordable WSStechnologies, although problemsremain with the standpipesconnected to the piped systems.

The model effectiveness can,however, be improved bydeveloping smoother workingrelations between key agencies;by clearer definition of the rolesof these agencies with respect toWSS; and by directing projectresources towards clearinstitutional development targetswithin these agencies. A financingplan for the water enterprise,targetted training programs,well-defined handover plansand a focused monitoringand evaluation system areessential.

13

Point water supply facilitiesamply met the original coveragetargets. However, effectivecoverage in the piped systems hadbeen limited to only 60 per cent oftargets by technical andinstitutional problems. This hasdamaged community perceptionsof the project, reinforcing feelingsof community powerlessness overessential facilities, rather thancommunity control. Technicaland resource problems limitedthe construction of sanitationand bathing facilities duringPhase I.

Piped systems proved to be,initially at least, a less effectivewater supply option than non-piped systems. They are nearlythree times as expensive toconstruct, provide water at ahigher price and the operation andmaintenance is largely outsidecommunity control, in thehands of the water enterprise.Piped supplies may, however,be the only environmentallysound choice where groundwatersupplies are inaccessible orsaline.

The model effectively mobilisedcommunities to contribute cash,labour and materials for theconstruction and improvement ofWSS facilities. The level ofcommunity participation seems to

have increased as the modeldeveloped, when measured interms of the monetary value of thecommunity inputs to the total costof WSS facilities constructed,from an average of 24 per cent pervillage in Village Selection I, to58 per cent per village in VillageSelection 3, in Phase I. Earlyfigures from Village Selection I inPhase n show that the averagevalue of the community input pervillage has reached at least 51 percent, and may go higher.

These community investmentshave stretched governmentfunding further.

There are good grounds foroptimism that most of the non-piped facilities provided will besustained. A sample of 10 per centof wells constructed in Phase Ishowed 85 per cent in good condi-tion. Sixty-four per cent of wellshad functioning water usergroups. Yet this needs to bechecked again in an ex-postevaluation.

Whilst the project pursued thegoal of increasing the socialparticipation of women, it hasbeen difficult to involve womenequally in the non-governmentorganisation and in the formal vil-lage level organisation of wateruser committees, due to traditional

14

ideas about gender-appropriatebehaviour. Informally, however,women take much of theresponsibility for maintainingwells.

The mawas diri method ofcommunity self-survey givesbetter prospects for the project toengage in the practicalities ofwomen's lives. Female volunteersuse the method so creating asignificant role for women. Themethod generates behaviouralchange related to safe wateruse which is meaningful towomen and therefore offersgood prospects for beingself-sustaining, and forcontributing to healthimprovements.

There is no doubt that women, asthe principal users, are benefitingfrom the provision of moreabundant, clean water close totheir homes.

Contrary to what was hoped,there is no real evidence thatthe water user groups havebecome a focus for generaliseddevelopment activities, butthis may change as Phase IIplaces greater emphasis ontying water user groups toestablished village levelinstitutions which are supportedby government.

3. Developmental Impact

The model has a powerfuldemonstration effect in presentingan alternative method of gener-ating community participation indevelopment which could beadapted to other governmentprograms. Plans for replicatingthe pattern of work elsewhere inIndonesia are well advanced; butthe relatively high costs of themodel as currently conceivedmean that this is more likely tohappen with donor support.

Community participation indevelopment has been endorsedby the Government of Indonesiaand has some prominence underRepelita V. Often, however,participation is conceived asmeaning that villagers providelabour for programs designated bygovernment officials. In contrast,the Lombok model offers moregenuine scope for real communityinput into planning andimplementation, with betterprospects for generating a sense ofcommunity "ownership" of thefacilities.

The project has assisted ruralpeople in Kabupaten LombokTengah, one of the mostimpoverished parts of Lombokwith particular water supplyproblems during the long dry

15

season, on an island which isgenerally disadvantaged incomparison with Indonesia as awhole.

Yet it was not possible to assessdevelopmental impact definit-ively, partly because of theconceptual difficulties inherent inmeasuring health impacts, partlybecause it is too early for someimpacts to appear, and partlybecause the project itself is notsystematically evaluating impact.

It appears that villagers,particularly women, are savingtime which would have been spentcollecting water, but as yet thereis no clear picture of what the timesavings mean in terms of healthbenefits; or productivity andincome gains; or how these gainsmay be distributed through villagesociety.

There have been positiveinstitutional strengtheningimpacts resulting from the project,particularly for the lead agency(during Phase I), the Departmentof Health; for the non- govern-ment agency created especially forthe project; and for communityleaders and groups who have beeninvolved in planning, constructingand operating facilities. Severalchanges in lead agency policy andoperations which make WSS

planning more flexible are at leastpartly attributable to the project.Yet institutional strengtheningneeds to be broader in its impact;and will need continuous revisionas responsibilities change(especially with Repelita V) andnew agencies need to be broughtinto the pattern of work.

Prospects for sustainability ofwells, sanitation and bathingfacilities look promising in viewof the levels of community par-ticipation in planning andconstruction, and based on thelimited survey data. Somecommunities are actuallyreplicating WSS facilities on theirown initiative. The problems ofsustainability of the piped systemsneeds to be tackled forcefully, inthe context of strengthening theperformance of the waterenterprise.

Adverse environmental impactshave been limited:

increased sullage has beenlargely contained bydrainage facilities;

increased pressure on thewater table during the dryseason means that waterrationing is often needed;but this is preferable to wellscompletely drying up as in

16

the pre-project state. So far,the wells seem to berecharged during the wetseason, but this needsmonitoring;

salinity of water from wellsoccurs in the older settledareas where bare andcompacted soil conditionshave been established. Thisneeds further investigationto develop counter measures(such as village gardens touse sullage).

B. Eastern Indonesia IbuKota Kecamatan WaterSupply Project:Bima Trial Pilot Project.

In contrast to the Lombok modelthis project focuses upon smalltowns, and initially on theprovision of water supplies only.The project is a trial for a newmodel for IKK WSS. It tests allassumptions made about the likelynature and levels of communitysupport; the rate of progress inimproving the performance of thewater enterprise; the viability ofthe new tariff system; and thetechnical viability andenvironmental soundness of thesystems being installed. Scope forreview and planning is included inthe later stages of the phase. Thekey features are presented here insummary form only.

The project aims to improve thequality of life throughinfrastructure improvements lead-ing to health and developmentbenefits.

Water supply component

Five IKK towns have beenselected for construction andcommissioning of new watersupply systems. These are alldesigned as reticulated systems,involving source development ofsprings and bores; transmission totown through gravity pipelinesand pumping systems; waterstorage for pumped systems;distribution within the townsthrough pipeline networks; andconnection to consumers throughhouse connections or communitygroup tanks.

The nature of this project mightseem to allow little scope forcommunity participation. Thesystems are relatively complexcompared to simple point sources,with more sophisticated technicalplanning, design, operation andmaintenance requirements. Waterenterprises are required to managethe systems on completion. Inaddition, the people to be servedare urbanised. Indeed, watersource development, transmissionand storage construction isundertaken by government

17

appointed contractors. However,the project design incorporatesdirect involvement by thecommunities in construction ofpipelines, individual houseconnections and communitytanks, as paid and unpaid labour,on the grounds that:

employment of local labourby the contractors providessome financial return to thecommunity from thedevelopment;

involvement of thecommunity in constructionincreases their sense ofresponsibility towards thewater supply;

the value of the com-munity contribution extendsgovernment funding andso means that largercapacity systems can beconstructed, which benefitsconsumers;

local labour will be morecareful in construction,because they are theeventual users;

community involvement inconstruction is likely to leadto greater awareness aboutthe system, and so to higherdemand for connection. The

more users, the better theprospects for a financiallyviable system.

In addition, rehabilitation work infour other towns is being trialled.

CommunityComponent

Participation

This component aims to establisha sense of community respon-sibility for and rights over thewater supply system, so leadingcommunities to maximise thepotential economic, social andhealth benefits of improved watersupplies, including improveddomestic sanitition and drainage.

Specific objectives are to:

maximise the number ofpeople who are able andwilling to pay for connectionto the new system;

improve the future financialviability of the waterenterprise through themaximum number of houseconnections, and reducedincidence of tampering, non-payment of accounts andillegal connections;

improve community accept-ance of the inherenttechnical limitations of the

18

water supply systemwhereby zoning will controland ration water use;

foster and sustain linksbetween the community andthe water enterprise whichruns the system;

improve the technical,organisational and manage-ment skills within thecommunity;

improve household hygieneand water storage practices;

achieve construction andmaintenance of domesticsanitation and drainage;

increase community use ofimproved water supplies toderive other social,economic and healthbenefits.

The program has three elements;an information and customerrelations program; a communityparticipation program; and aneducation and training program.Bach kecamatan town has aworking group established whichincludes formal and informalcommunity leaders. The group issupported by the water enterprise,a consultant advisory team andsanitarians.

The community process outlinedhere is clearly more restricted inits scope than that of the Lombokexample. There is little liklihoodthat a direct Lombok-style senseof "ownership" by thecommunities can eventuate.Much depends upon the quality ofthe kecamatan working groups,and the nature of relationsestablished with the waterenterprise. The extent to whichflow-on benefits from WSS canbe achieved and sustained throughthis process is being carefullymonitored.

Institutional StrengtheningComponent

The sustainable operation of theIKK schemes depends upon theireffective operation by the waterenterprise, but in Bima the waterenterprise needed strengthening.

The institutional developmentaims, therefore, are to improve thecapacity of the water enterprise to:

liaise withcommunities;

local

develop the managementand technical skills tooperate and maintain theIKK systems;

achieve financial viabilitythrough introduction and

19

management of a modifiedwater supply tariff structure.

A new tariff system has beendeveloped which meets thefollowing criteria:

provides a minimum basicsupply of low cost waterwhich is affordable by themajority of households;

allows cross-subsidisationof the basic supply whilstgenerating sufficient overallincome to meet operation,maintenance anddepreciation costs;

high volume waterconsumers are charged moreto reflect the limitedcapacity of the systems;

provides equality of value toall consumers, whether theyare located in IKK orkabupaten capitals.

The new tariff structure hasdifferent charge rates for variousconsumption levels, obviates theneed for fixed meter and ad-ministration charges, and gives areduced connection fee to cus-tomers who provided constructionlabour.

A training program has beendeveloped within the waterenterprise to address these aims.

4. SUMMARY OF KEYPOINTS FORSUSTAINABILITY.

This section summarises keyfeatures from both projectexamples which show goodprospects for improving thesustainability of WSS projects.

A Supportive National PolicyFramework

The directions set out inRepelita V, the 5th, 5-yeardevelopment program forIndonesia (1989-1994) areconducive to the approaches takenin both examples. This includesthe focus on decentralisation ofplanning, budgeting and incomegenerating responsibilities toprovincial and kabupaten levels;the emphasis on rehabilitation andintegrated planning; the supportfor community participation,institutional strengthening andimproved WSS coverage.

A Focus on InstitutionalStrengthening for Key Agencies

The need to address directlyinstitutional development goalswas graphically illustrated in theLombok model where standpipesbuilt by communities did notproduce water because of institu-tional and technical weaknesses

20

within the water enterprise andsystem. Where governmentagencies play a key role inoperation and maintenance theymust be built up to effectivelevels.

Institutional change is also neededto generate positive supportamongst officials for interactionwith communities, for examplethrough allowing communities toplan, manage and monitor fundswithout interference (as inLombok); or through developinga sense of responsibility toconsumers (as in Bima).

There is also an institutional rolefor local organisations, includingnon-government organisations, inmobilising and developingcommunity support, and infacilitating the community-government interface.

Establishing Mechanisms forLocal Participation in ProjectDesign

Establishing genuine communityparticipation requires a clearstrategy and sufficient time, bothto mobilise communities to thepoint where they can define needs,plan and manage facilities; and toengender support from thegovernment structure, especiallykey agencies. In Lombok, the

model development, testing andrefinement took approximatelythree years during the course ofPhase I. The Bima trial wasdeveloped on the basis ofextensive local assessment; and istaking place over a 14 monthperiod, so that key assumptionscan be tested.

There was greater scope in theLombok model to develop a senseof real community "ownership" offacilities. Space was given to com-munities to plan, and most of thetechnologies were developed tosupport community requirementsand maintainance abilities. Thereis considerably less scope forcommunities to influence systemplanning and design in Bima, butstill scope for community in-volvement in construction, choiceof connections and in interactionwith the water enterprise uponcompletion.

Generating a sense of "ownership"seems to enhance dramaticallyprospects for maintaining WSSfacilities on completion of theproject. Yet what about theattitudinal changes which areessential if public health benefitsare to be achieved?

The Lombok project hasaddressed this difficult questionby introducing the mawas diri

21

method helping communities todefine and monitor their ownstrategies for achieving a healthierenvironment and healthier lives.This method complementsinstitutional strengthening in theHealth Department.

The Bima trial relies more ontraditional survey approaches todefining health and sanitationneeds. Community processes ofmobilisation which will lead toreal participation in achievinglasting health and social benefitsare less developed.

These examples show the need fora clearly defined "communityprocess" to be included in theproject design. The design shouldshow the strategy, scheduling,resource needs and organisationaldimensions of the communityprocess which is to be trialledduring the early stages of projectimplementation. Key communityinputs into planning, implement-ation and subsequent operationneed to be highlighted. In theLombok case, this approach meantthat the technical parameters ofthe project could not be finalisedin the initial design document, buthave been consistently developedand tested in parallel with thecommunity process.

Special efforts may be needed toensure that women, as the

principal water users, actuallyparticipate in the communityprocess.

Gender analysis is a design toolwhich can be used bydesign teams, by institutionsand by communities themselvesin a process of self-survey inorder to establish the division oflabour relative to WSS,constraints to women's particip-ation, and possible designoptions to maximise benefits towomen.

Achieving Socio-culturalCompatibility

Where the technical inputsaccompany a community process,socio-cultural compatibility canbe achieved through interactionbetween communities andtechnicians (for example thesensitive issue of designingacceptable bathing facilities inLombok). Where WSS systemsare more sophisticated intechnical terms (as in Bima) thereis still a need to ensure that thedesign of user facilities (taps,connections, community tanks,sanitary and drainagearrangements); and thearrangements for payment andmaintenance; are acceptable insocio-cultural terms.

22

Minimising Demands forRecurrent Cost Financing

Recurrent cost financing is oftenproblematic, as pressuresfrom donors and recipientgovernments alike divert scarceresources to meet newdevelopment targets.

WSS facilities should be designedto minimise recurrent costfinancing requirements. OnLombok, the aim has been toensure that communitiesindependently have theknowledge, materials andresources quickly and easily toremedy breakdowns. This seemsto be working well for allnon-piped facilities. This helpsto minimise the extent ofrecurrent cost funding, althoughgovernment programs stillhave responsibility fortechnical backup, water qualitymonitoring and on-going healthservices.

Where official agencies operatemore complex WSS schemes(as in Bima) the tariff structurebecomes a crucial factorin minimising demands onrecurrent cost financing. InBima, cross-subsidisation andincreasing charges relative toconsumption ensure minimumlevels of affordable, low cost

water to consumers whilstgenerating sufficient revenue tocover system operation,maintenance and depreciationcosts.

In addition, the efficiency andeffectiveness of water enterpriseoperations needs to be improvedwhere these agencies are essentialfor operation and maintenance, toprovide value for money toconsumers.

The eventual aim is for the waterenterprises to operate efficientlyon a cost-recovery basis, requiringno recurrent funding support.

Ensuring EnvironmentalSustainability

Water resources are oftenfragile and vulnerable to overuse,to salinity and pollution, all ofwhich affect the quality andquantity of water supplied. Gooddrainage, sullage disposaland environmental sanitation areall essential components ofenvironmentally sound andsustainable WSS management.

These issues need to be examinedin feasibility assessment,addressed in project design andclosely monitored during and afterimplementation.

23

Monitoring and Evaluation

The design of project monitoringand evaluation systems mustallow assessment of progresstowards sustainability in social,environmental, institutional andfinancial terms. This necessitatesa clear delineation of project goalsin which sustainability is made anexplicit aim.

Then the project can monitorprogessively whether the WSSfacilities being installed are alsobeing maintained.

In WSS projects, where specifichealth outcomes are so hard toguarantee, quantify and value,there is a need to monitor process

as well as output. This includeskey areas such as:

attitudinal change ininstitutions, amongstofficials and leaders towardscommunity planning andmanagement;

changes in knowledge,attitude and practice relativeto health goals amongstcommunity members;

participation of women inorganising and benefitingfrom improved WSSfacilities;

environmental effectsrelative to the sustainabilityof the quality and quantityof the water resource.

24