| Summary: | This study is a comparative analysis of the development of the IWRM induced public policies/legislation and services relating to potable water supply and their implementation in selected cases in Zimbabwe and South Africa. It looks at the diverse patterns of municipal governance, access to potable water, different intervention mechanisms made by the local authorities and the consequences of these interventions. The study hypothesises that the adoption of the IWRM policy framework in Harare, Masvingo, Tshwane and Vhembe was not followed by comparable implementation of the policy framework. It argues that lack of ownership, lack of political and public administrative will, and low prioritisation of potable water supply translated into a lack of policy implementation and enforcement, and a lack of adequate institutional facilities for dealing with potable water issues. Furthermore it hypothesises that the level of economic development and the status of technological/scientific knowledge within a community determine the adoption of the IWRM paradigm, its implementation, effectiveness and the efficiency of existing water frameworks and institutions. The objectives of the study were to investigate the extent to which the policy, institutional, legislative and legal frameworks helped in the implementation of the IWRM paradigm in each of four case study areas of Harare, Masvingo, Tshwane and Vhembe; to identify and explain the common and differing perspectives of stakeholders regarding the IWRM paradigm and its implementation in the governance of potable water supply in the four selected locations; to give a clear outline of the challenges faced by each of the four cases in the implementation of the IWRM paradigm and the governance of potable water supply; and to draw comparative lessons from the experiences of the four cases in their attempts to implement the IWRM framework. Research methods involved both a theoretical review and an empirical study based on case studies, making use of comparative, qualitative, historical and exploratory approaches. The empirical research design was hybrid, although dominated by the descriptive survey approach. The design matched well with the target population and sample that were scattered throughout all four case study areas. Questionnaires, interviews, documentary evidence and participant observation were used in the collection of data for this study. The empirical study was undertaken in three stages. The first was a preliminary study of the four areas and their water sources. This was followed by a pilot study with ten members from the city of Masvingo, and finally, a full scale investigation was made in all four study areas. A total of 521 people were sampled for the study. Questionnaires were distributed through municipal offices, Zimbabwe Open University (ZOU) offices and local schools. Interviews were conducted with the municipal and council executives, water directors and their assistants. Informal discussions were also held with all direct research assistants. Data was then collated and analysed for presentation in narrative descriptions, tables, graphs, and actual frequencies and percentage responses. The study established that while the framework for a perfect water management system exists in Zimbabwe and South Africa, the situation on the ground does not reflect this common belief. The reform process has not progressed as expected owing to a combination of factors ranging from conflicting policies and weak institutional linkages, to insufficient funding. The effectiveness of the new system has been found wanting as far as implementation is concerned. It has been established that IWRM in southern Africa has a very strong base in the form of the internal push factors and international pull factors, but also faces an uphill task in terms of aligning local and international challenges thereby co-opting the much needed grassroots participation for human capacitation and socio-economic development as guided by the multi-faceted systems framework. All the studied municipalities were found lacking in terms of advocacy or enlightening residents and other stakeholders of the new IWRM framework adopted by the municipalities. Despite the infrastructural and technological sophistication and advancement, in South Africa, this study established that most stakeholders were still unaware of the new developments. Stakeholders, especially at the grassroots have been largely side-lined in the formulation and adoption of potable water supply policies. Due to pipe bursts and water interruptions, access to tap water is by no means always assured. During water cuts, residents depended on risky and potentially polluted sources even in urban centres. Due to agricultural and mining activities, the proximity of cemeteries, poor sanitation and toilet facilities in the peri-urban and nearby shanty communities, and also the dolomitic character of the soil in some of the study areas, there is a high probability that these substitute sources are polluted.
The study recommends an integrated systems approach to the management of potable water supply, full involvement of all stakeholders in the management process, intensive and extensive public campaigns, training, lobbying and advocacy. It is also suggested that potable water supply infrastructure be improved through the use of the business community and other stakeholders, who should be mobilised through the use of attractive incentives. Among other recommendations are the due enforcement of water laws, venturing into entrepreneurial activities, interval reviews and check-ups, and walking the talk. The study also recommends a more detailed and deeper participatory study in collaboration with major cities and rural communities in other countries in the Southern Africa Development Community (SADC) region, as well as regional comparative studies, for example SADC versus Economic Community Organisation of West African States (ECOWAS). === PhD (Public Management and Governance)|cNorth-West University, Vaal Triangle Campus, 2013
|
|---|
