| |
Contributions from
the Column
Focus
Middle East: “Exchange of ideas”
Indian illusions about water abundance
Tanzanian model case: Tanga
Untold strengths of German agencies
03/2006
|
|
Untold strengths
Germany is one of the world’s biggest donors to water and wastewater projects. German policymakers have learned the right lessons from previous failures, but rigorous debate of the issues is still needed.
[ By Frank Kürschner-Pelkmann ]
Germany’s governmental and non-governmental development institutions have been involved in water and wastewater projects for decades. They have gained experience, which has noticeably improved development cooperation in this area. A graphic example is the construction of wells. Initially, this task was considered primarily a technical challenge. Today, all involved have recognised that the social context must be analysed first. One essential feature of successful implementation is participation by the local people, particularly women.
Similarly, extensive knowledge has been gained in the construction of large dams for the supply of drinking water, agricultural irrigation and power generation. The International Commission on Dams achieved a breakthrough in this area in 2000, with German involvement. It defined ecological and social standards which should now be observed with any large dam project.
The standards for environmentally responsible use of water are now also observed to the greatest possible extent in irrigated agriculture. Nevertheless, hundreds of irrigation projects, which were funded by development assistance in the past, still do not comply with these standards. As a result, water is wasted – with pesticides and other agricultural chemicals being applied excessively. Apparently, redeeming such old problems is only of low priority in development cooperation. Even with little funds, however, some damage could be repaired.
It is impossible to ignore the sorry condition of the water supply systems of many municipalities in poor countries. Typically, little was done to maintain or even upgrade the mains systems for decades. It is not uncommon for more than half of the water to be lost because of leakages in the network and illegal use. As the water quality is often too poor for consumption, water must be boiled before drinking.
The causes of these problems have been identified in detail. They range from mismanagement and corruption, to insufficient investment capital and the unwillingness – or inability – of many customers to pay. There have been attempts to solve these problems for several decades with active participation of German experts and intensive use of development assistance. In many cases, the result was surprisingly good, for example in the Tanzanian town of Tanga (see page 106) and in the Ugandan capital of Kampala. In many other cases, money and expertise disappeared as quickly as the water did through continuing leaks in the mains. Such experiences raise fundamental questions of governance and suggest that there are limits to outside assistance.
The situation is even worse when it comes to the drinking water supply and sanitation in rural areas. Professor Frank Bliss from Hamburg University believes that even successful projects and programmes often do not adequately reach the poorer population. An evaluation report by the Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development (BMZ) in late 2004 clearly showed shortcomings in this area. According to the report (p. 54), the development bank KfW Entwicklungsbank has conceded “that in the past there was not a sufficiently thorough analysis of the poverty effects of the projects, particularly in the area of urban water supply and sanitation.” The report’s recommendations (p. 7) state that the water sector is still perceived mainly as a technical issue, and that a stronger conceptual link is needed to issues of poverty reduction, gender equality, crisis prevention, conflict management and social inclusion.
Beyond the PPP controversy
In recent years, the takeover of state or municipal water services by private companies in the form of public-private partnerships (PPP) has been promoted – and to some extent even required – by the World Bank, BMZ and various other donor institutions as a way to solve urban water problems. However, implementation has led to considerable conflicts in large agglomerations such as Manila, Buenos Aires, Jakarta and Johannesburg.
These conflicts, along with failure to garner the operating profits expected, have caused international water companies to downscale their investments. The French Suez group has reduced the capital invested in Africa, Asia and Latin America by at least one third. The German RWE group even announced in late 2005 that it is selling its subsidiaries Thames Water and American Water, thus discontinuing all involvement in developing countries.
Meantime, the World Bank and many politicians in the field of development also recognise that involving private companies in the water supply systems of poor countries is of only limited use. The hope was that this approach would mobilise billions of dollars to improve supply. It has not been fulfilled. With regard to efficiency gains by private corporations, the World Bank stated in a study in February last year: “Probably the most important lesson is that the econometric evidence on the relevance of ownership suggests that in general, there is no statistically significant difference between the efficiency performance of public and private operators in this sector.”
Private involvement in the face of local resistance is doomed to failure, as international water companies have learned in El Alto in Bolivia, for instance. The consequence should be to promote private involvement only in places where the government and the local people are in favour of doing so.
Moving beyond the PPP controversy, better use should be made of the advantages offered by cooperating with private corporations. Many of them have decades of experience in the construction of water and wastewater systems and also sell plant and know-how to countless local businesses in Asia, Africa and Latin America. This cooperation should be structured more effectively – with the simultaneous involvement of local companies, for them to gradually acquire expertise in complex hydraulic engineering. It is also necessary to support the technology transfer from water companies in Europe to those in developing countries. Their cooperation is gradually beginning. InWEnt’s seminars and dialogue programmes make a considerable contribution in this respect.
On top of all this, there is a widespread social taboo which must be broken by development agencies. In many societies, issues relating to toilets and sanitation are not discussed publicly. Nor do government talks deal with such ‘unsavoury’ subjects often enough. It is telling that sanitation issues were initially omitted when the Millennium Development Goals were drafted. It was only at the 2002 World Summit on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg that they were included among the list of goals to be achieved by 2015.
In many countries today, the standard of sanitation is much worse than that of drinking water supply. It is a positive development that, since 2001, the GTZ (German Technical Cooperation) has been promoting a whole range of sanitation projects from China to Mali in the context of the “ecosan”-programme. Goals include environmental protection and the effective utilisation of natural resources, as well as the production of fertilisers and biogas.
“Water wars”
There is a widespread thesis that the wars of the 21st century will be provoked by dwindling water supplies. To date, this has not proved to be correct. However, there is no doubt that growing water scarcity poses a considerable potential for conflict, both within and between nations. It is therefore a good thing that, in various river basins, the nations involved are attempting to avoid confrontation through cooperation. There are treaties of this kind relating to the Nile, Indus and Mekong, for example. Several of these initiatives are supported by German development funds. This is an effective form of commitment to water provision.
In this context, commitment to the “Petersberg Process” also deserves to be mentioned. This is a series of discussions on transboundary cooperation in river catchments, which was launched in 1998 at a conference at the Petersberg Hotel in Bonn. The BMZ evaluation report referred to above recommends that commitment to programmes for transboundary water usage be intensified further.
In many countries, however, development projects can also intensify domestic conflicts. The irrigation projects in the Turkana region of Northern Kenya serve as an example. They prevent the nomadic population and their cattle herds from accessing water. In recent years, this has contributed considerably to the violent conflicts between ethnic groups in the region. In German development circles, this has rightly given rise to the practice of thoroughly checking possible implications for regional conflicts before embarking on such projects.
International politics
Germany is one of the world’s richest nations, and the second-highest contributor of resources to development projects in the area of water and wastewater. As such, it has a considerable influence on decision-making on water issues. This influence is also due to Germany’s standing in the EU and in multilateral institutions such as the World Bank and International Monetary Fund.
The non-governmental organisations WaterAid and Tear Fund have studied European commitment in water issues and found it to be inadequate. Among other things, they criticise the fact that the European Water Fund has increased the administrative cost to the governments of the target countries but, on the other hand, it has actually granted only 1/15th of the funds applied for. Germany’s role in the implementation of the European initiative receives a critical assessment: “Germany makes considerable aid available for water and sanitation issues, but has done nothing for the European Water Initiative.”
Officials at the BMZ and other German development institutions will certainly reject such criticism as excessive. It does show, however, that the BMZ should actively promote a public debate on development strategies in the areas of water and wastewater. There is an unfortunate contrast between the much improved level of expertise, when it comes to programme and project practice, and public understanding of services delivered and lessons learned. Unfortunately the BMZ continues to remain silent about problems encountered in earlier work or experienced currently. The BMZ could make a considerable contribution to a broader and constructive public discussion on solutions for global water problems by making public – in Germany and internationally – the lessons it has learned.
In this context, the budget debate is relevant. Early in this decade, the Federal Republic was making available an annual amount of more than ¤ 350 million for water and wastewater projects. Activities ranged from funding the construction of sewage treatment plants to advice on the protection of water resources. Recently, however, the German NGOs terre des hommes and Welthungerhilfe (German Agro Action) (2005) made this criticism: “The commitments planned for water supply, sanitation and waste disposal are falling significantly. In 2005, the figure is only of ¤196.9 million compared to ¤ 345.05 million two years earlier.”
The two NGOs note that the amount of the commitments intended for education, health and water supply has fallen to its lowest level since 1999. “These facts show that Germany’s development cooperation evidently continues to give little priority to implementing the Millennium Development Goals,” they conclude.
Martin Kipping is head of the Water, Energy and Urban Development division of the BMZ. When questioned, he conceded that the outlay for this area may well have fallen from 2004 to 2005. He said that this drop did not stem from political decisions, however, but was due to planning cycles, the pattern of government-level negotiations and administrative procedures. In 2005, the commitments made totalled approximately € 250 million; in 2004 the figure was 286 million Euro. The BMZ also points out that some water projects are also included in other funding programmes such as agriculture, as well as in EU programmes. However, this was always the case.
It is insufficient to measure commitment to the Millennium Goals simply by looking at sector-specific budget allocations. Experience shows, as stated above, that shortcomings in governance have been a major reason for the failure of measures which were sound in a purely technical sense. Consequently, if poverty reduction is to be successful, development in an overall socio-political sense is necessary, which is not limited only to sectors such as water, education and health. In other words: the sustainability of water programmes and projects cannot be ensured solely by sums earmarked in the budget for these areas. Nonetheless, it is a pity that German funding for water and wastewater measures is dropping at a time when greater international efforts are needed to achieve the MDGs – as well as domestic efforts in the countries concerned.
Frank Kürschner-Pelkmann
is a freelance journalist and consultant in Hamburg. His publications last year included “Das Wasser-Buch”
(Publisher: Otto Lembeck).
frank.kuerschner-pelkmann@t-online.de
http://www.wasser-und-mehr.de
References:
BMZ Evaluation Report, 2004:
Strategie der deutschen Entwicklungszusammenarbeit im Bereich Siedlungswasserwirtschaft
terre des hommes and Welthungerhilfe, 2005:
Die Wirklichkeit der Entwicklungshilfe
World Bank, 2005 (February):
World Bank Policy Research Working Paper 351
|
