by Anisul Azam Khan BA (Hons) MA, Chief Executive, LORDS Bangladesh
WASH means Water, Sanitation and Hygiene. People cannot live with out WASH. It is the part and parcel of a human life. WASH is the symbol of civilization in the modern age. We say water is life: according to scientists, all kinds of species of life originated in water, a human body is 70% water, and all civilization was created in river basins. I don’t want to write more about water.
Sanitation is another vital component of human life. The symbol of modern civilization means sanitation system of a home. A dirty and unhygienic toilet is the symbol of poor civilization. A comparatively clean healthy toilet is the symbol of civilization. Once upon a time our society used dirty toilets, historically in Bangladesh this is not long ago. In our Society before hundred years a few numbers of people using sanitary latrine and rest of the people were non user of sanitary latrine.
Hygiene is the most important component of human life. Hygiene is divided into two parts: one is personal hygiene and another is community hygiene. Personal hygiene means – hand washing, mouth washing, cleaning the body and regular cutting of pubic hair, and regular cutting of nails etc.
Since the liberation war in 1971, Government and Non-Government Organisations have been doing social movement WASH programmes all over the Bangladesh. But it is not sufficient for our society! Bangladesh is a disaster-prone delta region. Every year, millions of people are affected by floods in the north and the coastal belt of southern Bangladesh is hit by cyclones every year and the dreams of million people are destroyed. At the same time our WASH system is also demolished by the cyclone and flood every year.
The WASH system of Bangladesh needs to be strong and sustainable. It must be inclusive in its approach, not only benefiting a few people. WASH has to be for all! It is a basic human right for all people in society: men, women and children, the rich and the poor, all types of people have the right to access the WASH system. So, WASH systems need to available for all across the country, in both rural and urban areas, and they need to withstand the shocks of floods and cyclones.
We need measures for sustainable WASH systems in Bangladesh. From practical experience I recommend:
All handpump platforms should be constructed with stronger and higher foundations so that the pump is above the high level of flood water in flood risk and cyclone-prone areas.
All latrines in flood risk and cyclone-prone areas should be constructed with a stronger foundation that is above the likely floodwater level.
In our country all people should maintain personal hygiene as well as community hygiene practice, as for example: regularly washing hands, wearing clean and hygienic clothes etc. Its need to campaign all over the country.
My name is Anisul Azam Khan, I have completed B.A(Hons), M.A in Social Work at Rajshahi Universityi, Bangladesh. Now I am volunteer with WaterAid Bangladesh. I have worked with National an International NGOs, such as PIACT Bangladesh, Dhaka Ahsania Mission, DPHE-DANIDA Project and Enfants du Monde(EDM Bangladesh). I am committed to establishing Local Resource Development Society (LORDS Bangladesh) A Non-Profit, Non-Political Development Organization.
Our goal is to improve the lifestyle of marginalised people, and our objectives are:
To develop capable human resources & skill development training.
To develop technical assistance for marginal People.
To promote Social Development activities.
To provide relief &Rehabilitation support to the disaster people after natural calamities
Notes: Local Resource Development Society (LORDS) Bangladesh is registered with the Directorate of Social Service Govt. of The People Republic of Bangladesh Vide Registration No Dha-06268. Rupayan Kutir, 33 North Road, Dhanmondi, Dhaka-1205 Bangladesh
About the RWSN member eXchange
Exchanging ideas and experience is at the heart of what RWSN is about, but the online world is overloaded with content. Over the last 6 years, RWSN has run over 120 webinars in 3 languages, but that is only scratching the surface of what is out there and we want to give a platform to our members who are working on rural water at an operational level around the world. The RWSN member eXchange is an experiment to see if we can do that.
If you would be interested in submitting a blog post or video then download the guidelines:
Disclaimer: Any claims in an RWSN member eXchange article or video have not been verified and any views presented or services provided the individual organisation are not necessarily endorsed by RWSN or any of it executive partners or Secretariat.
This is a guest blog by RWSN Members Lance Morrell and Michael Ashford.
Achieving SDG6, clean water, and sanitation for all by 2030 requires estimated investments of US$114 billion per year. The present value of the total investment needed is US$1.7 trillion, and these estimates do not include costs of operation and maintenance. At three times current levels, this far exceeds the financing capacity of the entire public sector and donor community, combined.
We in the development community need new tools and approaches to address this gap. Using donor and public funds to “crowd-in” private investment can help. USAID’s recently announced Private-Sector Engagement (PSE) Policy, for example, recognizes the urgency of using development funding to attract private sector capital into development of infrastructure and services around the world. Similarly, USAID’s Water, Sanitation and Hygiene Finance (WASH-FIN) program is developing and piloting specific interventions to increase private and public investment in WASH. The World Bank’s Public-Private Infrastructure Advisory Facility (PPIAF) is another important source of information and successes on how to leverage the public and donor sectors’ financial power to increase private investment in public infrastructure and services. In all cases, the policies and prescriptions call for the use of market-based approaches as the only sustainable path to sustainably support communities in achieving development and humanitarian outcomes.
While “billions and trillions” of capital for WASH feels overwhelming, outside of 20th century Soviet-style economies, public infrastructure was never meant to be financed, funded, and operated with public resources alone. Commensurate with the growing financing gaps, there is today a glut of private sector capital looking for reliable investments that meet their investment criteria. Globally, pension funds, insurance companies, sovereign wealth funds and commercial banks hold approximately US$100 trillion in assets. In this light, the global financial system is out of balance, and the challenge is to attract private capital and other types of private sector participation into the water and sanitation sector. Development professionals, working with their government counterparts, must now “put skin in the game” without sacrificing the broader objective of shared, public benefits and economic growth.
Changing Project Funding to Crowd-In Private Investments
If the private sector has the capital needed to expand and improve the performance of the WASH sector, why haven’t governments been able to access it? How do we crowd-in the private sector?
The first step is to stop crowding-out private investment with donor funds. Governments and donors crowd-out private investors by providing grants or ill-designed concessional financing against which the private sector cannot compete. Financing and funding are products that banks and donors, respectively, want recipients to “buy;” the price is the interest rate. Free or cheap money from donors is not something private capital can beat.
There are numerous real-world examples of crowding-out in development, which follow the same basic scenario: Donor X works with a government to develop a project that will use public and donor funds to attract commercial financing to the project. In order to attract – or crowd-in – the commercial financing, government will work with financiers to understand their concerns and design appropriate risk mitigating measures. To crowd-in the private sector, the project designers require time to develop both the demand and the supply side. As this project preparation is proceeding and nearing agreement, Donor Y approaches the government and offers grant financing for 100 percent of the cost of the project, and crowds-out the private sector.
In contrast, as USAID’s PSE policy emphasizes, governments must engage and collaborate with the private sector, and the private sector must be allowed to manage its level of risk and to earn a reasonable profit. Adhering to an enterprise-driven development model, USAID and other donors are aiming to play a catalytic role in achieving results, rather than fully funding and managing the majority of its projects. The PSE model recognizes that the private sector represents nearly 90 percent of the direct foreign investment to developing countries, and the model represents a strategic approach through which USAID would consult and collaborate with the private sector for greater scale, sustainability and effectiveness. Under this approach, USAID will attract, or crowd-in, the private investors.
Increasing Government Commitment
Government is the key stakeholder in attracting private sector financing to the WASH sector. To effectively express these commitments, government officials need to understand the benefits and costs of the WASH sectorfrom the perspective of commercial finance. Some of the potential policies and actions include the following, with the commitment type identified in parentheses:
Sharing capital costs or providing limited guarantee of recovery of capital costs (lump sum);
Guaranteeing continuous payments during project performance to recover capital costs overtime or sharing in expected revenue from tariffs to cover financing costs (revenue flows);
Indirect market development by requiring improved operational performance of the utility, whether publicly or privately owned, to reduce expenses and increase revenue, so the utility can enter into direct lending arrangements (regulatory enforcement);
Contractually transferring asset management of utilities, if owned by government, through performance-based contracting with private sector service providers (give up control of asset).
Developing a business relationship between governments, utilities and commercial lenders takes time and patience, and the path forward should be gradual to allow all parties to develop trust and confidence. For example, commercial lenders could start with financing smaller projects that enhance revenue for the utility, such as new or upgraded water meters or increasing customer connections. If the utility then dedicates the additional revenue attributable to the project to the private investor, the private investor’s and utility’s interests align around ensuring performance during operation. After the loan is paid off, the additional revenue accrues back to the utility. Once the utility passes this kind of test with private investors, it can expand follow-on borrowing to finance further extensions of the water supply system –again using new cash flow that is “ring-fenced” to repay next the loan. Meanwhile, scarce public funds are protected and can be used for projects which have high economic value but low financial viability, such as a new sewage treatment system. Overall, the goal is to create more incentives for private capital to partner with donors and government toward shared development goals.
About the authors
Lance Morrell is a financial specialist with more than 35 years of professional experience, and is the Founder and Managing Director of FEI Consulting;
Michael Ashford is senior clean energy and infrastructure professional with more than 20 years of experience, and is the Global Practice Lead for the Water, Energy, and Sustainable Cities practice at Chemonics International.
This blog post represent the views of the authors and does not necessarily represent the views of Chemonics.Photo credit: Gerardo Pesantez / World Bank.
This is a guest blog by Joshua Azaki, a young professional from South Africa enrolled as a mentee in the 2020 RWSN Mentoring Programme.
I was introduced to RWSN by Professor Ulrike Rivett in March 2018 and I signed up to receive updates about the activities of the RWSN. In 2019, when I received the notification about the application for the 2020 mentoring programme, I applied immediately. I saw it as an opportunity to learn more about the water sector from experts, professionals and other participants. I was open to learning how they overcame the challenges of working in the water sector. I was glad to be among the successful applicants and privileged to be matched to Dr Vassiki Sanogo as my mentor. My mentor and I soon developed a working plan which included the time frame, the activities to carry out, the aim and objectives and our expectations from the mentoring programme.
The RSWN mentoring programme became one of the outstanding events for me in 2020. As a mentee, the programme was a journey of self-discovery and sharpening of my capabilities. My mentor was an astute, honest, relentless, and very resourceful person. He provided guidance and valuable inputs that will facilitate achieving my personal and professional goals as an upcoming researcher in the water sector. Table 1 summarises the activities we carried out during the mentoring programme. We met virtually nine times via Zoom and Microsoft Teams while keeping in touch through emails. We achieved our goals as spelt out from the beginning of the mentoring programme between March 2020 and December 2020.
Meetings and activities
To expose the mentee on how to explore and exploit networking opportunities
To improve the writing skills of the mentee by exposing him to tips on writing to the academic community.
To sharpen the critical reasoning and problem-solving skills of the mentee through analysing journal articles.
To help mentee explore the best ways to professionally present himself
To guide mentee towards choosing the appropriate ways of collecting data and conducting data analysis
To discuss further on the webinars organised by RWSN
To expose mentee to potential work or research opportunities in the water sector
Time management and record-keeping
To improve mentee’s organisational skills through scheduling of meeting, taking of minutes of and keeping records of meetings
Table 1: Activities carried out during the 2020 RWSN mentoring programme
Impact of the 2020 RWSN mentoring programme
The impacts of the mentoring programme are numerous, some are listed below:
I learnt more about how to craft a credible research question through identifying gaps in the literature, generating smart and achievable research objectives, ways of conducting research (data collection and data analysis methods) as well as reporting my findings.
I learnt how to select journals to publish in (which includes knowing the target audience of a journal, their writing and referencing style and the impact factor of the journal).
I learnt what an Individual Development Plan (IDP) is and created one.
My organisational, record keeping, and time management skills were sharpened.
The above-listed points were key to me, especially now that I am about to start my doctorate. The mentoring experience provided me with the opportunity to be better prepared to take on the task associated with pursuing my doctorate and future career.
My mentor was pleased and excited that we worked as a team to achieve all our goals.
In conclusion, the 2020 RWSN mentoring programme was very engaging, educative, interactive and well organised. We thank the organisers and sponsors of the programme for this platform.
About the mentee and his mentor
Joshua Azaki is a Christian, a husband and a postgraduate student with the iCOMMS research team at the University of Cape Town, South Africa. His research interests are broadly in Information and Communication Technologies for Development (ICT4D), knowledge management in the water sector and the use of persuasive information campaign to encourage water-saving practices. He is about to start his doctorate at the time of writing this blog.
Dr Vassiki Sanogo is a well-organized and dependable professional, equipped with a positive, can-do attitude in leading and educating diverse levels of team member. Armed with expertise in applied economics, health economics, health/water policy, economic development, public policy, payer/clinical decision-makers, comparative study, cost-effective, budget impact, assess risk, quantitative methods, statistics, business analytics, machine learning, deep learning, visual text analytics, data project architect, forecasting, optimization, experimental and case studies, and data science. Equipped with exceptional ability in working and interacting with students and colleagues in a professional manner. Known for strong work ethic, complemented with unparalleled professionalism and proven ability to conceptualize new ideas as necessary. Articulate communicator, fluent in English, French, and Dioula. Technologies: SAS, SQL, STATA, R, Python, Cplex, Gurobi, Java, C++, TreeAge, Tableau, MATLAB.
About the RWSN Mentoring Programme
For more information on the RWSN Mentoring Programme, see here. RWSN thanks the Swiss Development Cooperation and World Vision for their support to the mentoring programme in 2020.
This is a guest blog by Juste Nansi, Country Director for IRC Burkina Faso. It is is reposted with thanks from the IRC blog; you can find the original blog post here.
Systematic or systemic inequalities are grounded in our mindsets; in the way, we think, in the way we plan, in the way we see people, and in the way we interpret the rights to water and sanitation.
A lot has changed, practically all events have gone virtual over the past year due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Something positive though is, we have realised the exciting potential, built new skills, reached more audiences, and discovered that virtual is not all bad.
At this year’s Annual Water and Health Conference: Science, Policy, and Practice hosted by University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill’s (UNC) Water Institute [October 26–30th], more than three thousand participants attended this registration free well-executed virtual conference. The 2020 conference was anchored by major panel conversations covering timely topics such as WASH response during the COVID-19 pandemic and Systemic Inequalities in WASH.
Systemic Inequalities in water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH)
The plenaries were an opportunity to explore critical themes emerging in 2020. While a lot of information was shared over the week, this reflection stems from one of the most challenging and interesting themes – Systemic Inequalities in WASH – at which I was one of the panellists. This plenary, just like all the others, was used to challenge us, to review the evidence to stimulate critical thinking and to try to look at our work in new ways so that we can learn and do better. Systemic inequalities in WASH gets to the heart of who we are as a sector and why we do what we do. Recognising that it is not all about water and sanitation for some, but for everyone.
It happens that we are allowing either consciously or unconsciously for systemic inequality to get in the way of our achieving SDG6 and achieving the real impacts that we hope to have for the beneficiaries of our work.
In his elaborate and eloquent introduction of the theme and discussion, Dr Aaron Salzberg from the 2020 UNC Water and Health Plenary Panel honestly said that he was somewhat afraid of the topic. He touched on several forms and examples of systemic inequalities, ranging from people in the south struggling at odd hours to find a place with good wi-fi to join the conference, the unequal treatment of people of colour within the United States, in particular black indigenous and Latino communities that have been ignored. The deeply rooted systemic practices that have led to the indiscriminate attacks on and the discriminatory treatment of communities of colour, the growing wage and wealth inequalities in the United States and across the globe. It is highly likely that even our children will not see gender parity in our lifetimes. At the current rate, and this was before COVID 19, it will take 257 years according to the World Economic Forum to close the economic gender gap deeply impacting communities of colour and low-income communities around the world. Countless others have had to die before Black Lives Matter, and that one in every 100 indigenous Americans has died…. Aaron’s list of inequalities was not exhaustive but clearly gives a true picture of what the reality has become…
This is also true for the work that we do on water, by providing water and sanitation services to an informal settlement on the outskirts of a city we are allowing the government to skirt its fundamental responsibilities and continue its oppressive practices of not legally recognising marginalised communities. It may be easier for us to provide the services than to force governments to recognise the rights of these individuals and grant them land tenure access to capital and extend municipal services. Also, realising that we have let the SDGs define success and have invested in vanity metrics the number of people served rather than measures related to capacity and autonomy of communities.
COVID-19 is a time of reawakening, a lot has changed, and this situation has reminded us of how fragile life is at a global scale and how ill-prepared we are to address the challenges that we will face in the 21st century, challenges like the spread of infectious diseases, climate change, food and water, and security, access to basic services and health care.
Now let’s look at the rural situation in Africa, that I am well familiar with as the IRC country director in Burkina Faso, leading the country programme as well as the regional African programme.
Over the past decades, I have learnt more about who is left behind and who are not enjoying safely managed WASH services, what, how inequalities are shown, what are the root causes and what would be the solution.
Most of the time many of us as practitioners in the developing world start working on inequalities with the assumption that the victims are a minority of the population. We used to think that when you talked about marginalisation, these were people living with disabilities, or people living in fragile states, but when we look at the figures of the Joint Monitoring Group [JMP] data of 2017, 73% of the population in sub-Saharan countries in Africa did not have access to safely managed water services and 82% did not have access to safely managed sanitation services – this is really the majority that is left behind from enjoying adequate public services. All these figures confirm the need to address this challenge. This is a noticeably big problem, an excessively big need that we need to address.
Consciously or unconsciously somehow perpetuating this kind of discrimination
One of the things that we all know is that many of these victims of inequalities in sub-Saharan Africa are living in rural areas. One of the things that I have noticed is that when we think for example about rural water, we all kind of systematically think about hand pumps and boreholes, while when we think as sector technicians about urban water, we instinctively think about tap water household connections. This way we are consciously or unconsciously somehow perpetuating this kind of discrimination while the data from the World Health Organization [WHO] confirms that handpumps can only deliver basic services and basic services are not enough for improving health. So how do we make the decision that rural people only deserve basic services, and improved services are meant only for those who are wealthy? How do we make the decision about blaming people for being poor? This is clearly just one example of how the systematic or systemic inequalities are grounded in our mindset, it drives a lot of what we do and see, in the way we think, in the way we plan, Etc. How we make assumptions about the types of service that rural people either should have or deserve.
There is also the issue/bias around data collection, data analysis and then the fundamental assumptions that we make often at the very beginning of a scientific process that in many cases can lead to significant biases and outcomes.
Listening very carefully and regularly to what people want in the WASH sector is not something we do naturally. This is reflected in the way that we design our questionnaires and surveys. It is about the questions we want to ask and the answers that people give. These are rarely open-ended questions that point to what people want, what their priorities are, for example about sanitation.
A brief notable example of the work in our community in Banfora district in Burkina Faso is when we were doing data collection and surveys for designing the masterplan for WASH-related SDGs. Going back with the results to the community and they said: yeah, we already know our problems, but for once, you’re considering our expectations and vision in terms of service quality and not only how many handpumps we’re missing in our community as we use to hear from other partners. So, listening and creating space for people to share their knowledge and vision and not only to collect their problems from the lens of our predefined solutions.
There is no single solution to dealing with inequalities
The issue of any inequality must be tabled in a constructive manner and not be about pointing fingers at anybody. We need to acknowledge our mistakes and say what is going on despite our good intentions, what we are doing wrong so that we can improve. These issues should be discussed with the public authorities in the developing countries and their development partners.
As organisations/people providing support to the government in developing countries, we also need to recognise the fundamental and critical responsibility that the public authorities have for addressing the issues of inequalities in a sustainable manner. There is no single solution from my experience that bypassed authorities mandated by their people for taking care of their community.
Another crucial point is that we must rethink or reframe the usage of our performance indicators that help highlight inequalities rather than hiding them. In my experience, it happens a lot that we have good indicators, but the accuracy as compared to the actual percentages can tend to hide a lot of inequalities and finally, we need to be aware of the critical needs for strengthening country sub-national and national government systems. This is all about all the mechanisms in place for policymaking, institutional arrangements, planning, budgeting, financing, monitoring, accountability and learning and adaptation.
It is the whole complex system that is actually perpetuating the inequalities and that needs to be strengthened, to be transformed in some cases, to make the change we are all pleading for.
Watch the online plenary session – Addressing Systemic Inequalities in WaSH – It’s Me; Not You –
On 30.11.2020 RWSN advertised two consultancies in partnership with the University of Oxford under the REACH programme (deadline for applications: 8th January 2020). The Terms of Reference for the consultancies are below:
3. Q: Is the offered position as “Researcher – Global Diagnostic on Rural Water Services” intended for one person? Or otherwise, could an organisation like the one I am part of apply?
A: Our thinking is that this is better suited to an individual, who can focus on the task rather than it being fragmented across a team. However, we are open to more creative solutions.
4. Q: I am interested in submitting an application to one of the consultancy opportunities for the global diagnostic of rural water service providers under the REACH programme. Now before I go any further I would like to get a better understanding of the programme and this assignment. By rural water service providers, do you mean (a) community members that have been trained to repair hand pumps (b) water utility companies, public and/ or private and/ or (c) rural water supply and sanitation units under the district or local authority?
A. The first point we need to clarify is that the proposed consultancy for the diagnostic of rural water supply providers is global in nature, and that arrangements will likely differ depending on the countries that are chosen for the study. For RWS providers to be considered, there would need to be some data related to basic operational and financial performance available to enable comparison between rural water service providers within and between countries. This would therefore probably mean that community members could not be considered, but rather (public and/or private) service providers with adequate data and scope of operations. This could mean for instance in the rural water supply and sanitation units under the district or local authority, or water utilities if they operate in rural areas. One of the first tasks under the consultancy will be to propose a typology of service providers (see activity 2 in the ToRs) that would enable us to determine exactly who/ which type of organisations we should target with the diagnostic.
5. Q: I have a question on one requirement in the desired experience section. In the sentence, “Experience in advanced data analytics, mapping and modelling, including GIS”: 1. Is there a specific model that RWSN would like the prospective consultant to use or can the prospective consultant select a model of their choice? 2. Are there parameters that RWSN would like the prospective consultant to use or can the prospective consultant select parameters they think would be informative to the study?
A. 1. There is no specific software that we would recommend to use for data analytics, mapping and modelling, and GIS but we would prefer that the consultant uses open-source software (e.g. QGIS) as we will not support the costs related to licenses for private software.
2. We would recommend that the prospective consultant thinks about potential parameters for data analytics, mapping and modelling as part of his/her proposal.
6. Q. Could you please clarify the following:
Geographic scope – the TOR and clarifications point to a global study, but the TOR highlights REACH’s work in Africa and Asia. Is the study likely to focus on Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia, or is the intention to gather examples of RWS providers from a much wider group of countries (including those in Eastern Europe given the reference to that consultancy).
Survey scope – can you clarify what the scope of the surveys is likely to be? Our assumption is that this would be online surveys of rural water service providers only (e.g. no household surveys, or attempting to survey service users). Is this correct?
Definition of advanced analytics – Do you have any examples of what you mean by ‘advanced analytics’? It may be challenging to get a high number of responses and in-depth answers to an online survey (particularly as the number of eligible RWS is unknown) which would limit the complexity of any analysis and/or modelling that would be possible.
Intensity of inputs – an earlier clarification was that the thinking of RWSN/REACH was this consultancy was best suited to an individual. Given that, the timeline, the scope of the project, and the budget available to you envisage that this will be (more or less) a full time role?
The intention is to gather examples of RWS from a wide group of countries/ geographies, not restricted to SSA and South Asia.
The survey is intended to be conducted remotely / online (no household or service user survey). The Marketing consultant will support this exercise to ensure that there is a wide variety of RWS providers who respond to the survey; responsibility for data collection and analysis remains with the diagnostic Consultant.
Advanced analytics: as you said this will depend on the quality of data collection, which is a risk we are hoping to mitigate through the Marketing consultant. For your proposal you could perhaps suggest what you might be able to do given ideal/ less than ideal data.
Intensity of inputs: the intensity of outputs for this consultancy will depend on the level of experience of the consultant/ team.
We will continue answering your questions here as they come along. Any questions can be addressed to ruralwater[at]skat[dot]ch.
This is a guest blog by RWSN Member Dr Cheikh Hamidou Kane. This article was originally published in GeoDrilling international and is reposted with thanks. You can read the original article here.
Despite the fact that 50% of Africa’s water fresh water resources are found in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), the Congolese, especially in rural areas, have great difficulty ensuring their drinking water supplies. The very limited progress made in supplying safe drinking water to the population has meant that innovative and affordable solutions, coupled with substantial funding, have been sought.
As a result, in 2009, the DRC government adopted launched an initiative under the National School and Sanitation Village Program (PNEVA) to promote manual drilling as a low-cost water access technology. The Ministry of Health and the Ministry of Rural Development, in collaboration with UNICEF, set out to develop the skills of the private sector and NGOs on manual drilling techniques.
In the first, introductory phase from 2009 to 2012, NGOs were trained, but were not always fully equipped with the necessary skills or drilling equipment to consistently produce quality works that would be sustainable.
Faced with this situation, between 2013 and 2015, UNICEF requested technical support from the Chadian Association for the Promotion of Enterprises Specialized in Low Cost Drilling (ATPESFORC). They set out to help improve the quality of manual drilling in the DRC through the introduction of new drilling equipment of better quality (water jetting) that can be manufactured in the country. During this period, stakeholders in the sector acquired new skills enabling them to build sustainable structures that surpassed the usual drilling record of 27m to reach a depth of 42m thanks to: (i) the use of the new technology (ii) the establishment of national norms and standards for manual drilling including a technical note for water quality testing and (iii) training in administrative, financial and bidding management techniques.
The third phase of the introduction and professionalization of manual drilling in the DRC took place between 2015 and 2019 and focused mainly on the establishment of the national federation of drillers, the identification of areas favourable to manual drilling technologies and the establishment of a national database of water points. During this period and for the first time in the history of the DRC, the supervision of fieldwork was confined to specialized control offices rather than to government agents.
After a decade of learning, adaptation and promotion by UNICEF and its partners, manual drilling technology is now well known in DRC and remains one of the few low-cost technical options adapted to the logistical constraints of the country to improve access to safe drinking water supply in scattered and hard-to-reach rural communities.
Alas the UK Government financial support for PNEVA, through which this manual drilling initiative was implemented, ended in 2019. At present, uncertainties about funding for the manual drilling sector, low household income in rural areas, and the current donor trend to focus investments in urban and peri-urban areas make it difficult to guarantee the continuation of the program on the same scale after 2020. It is also to be feared that the decrease in financing for marginalized areas not considered in village water policies could significantly inhibit safe drinking water access. Such populations are in danger of being left behind.
The manual drilling sector in the DRC is at a turning point. It could either become widespread, or fail by losing the gains obtained through the PNEVA. The debate is posed and some elements of response have been developed in a publication through the Rural Water Supply Network (RWSN): https://www.rural-water-supply.net/en/resources/details/930
Dr. Cheikh Hamidou Kane, a native of Senegal, is a Lecturer-Researcher at the University of Thies. He also works as an international consultant and was the UNICEF hydrogeologist overseeing the DRC manual drilling efforts from August 2016 to September 2020.
Dear RWSN colleagues, the 4 months since the last newsletter have been eventful for the RWSN.
It has become clear that covid-19 will be with us for a long time and that people need water to stay safe. But there is still no sign of the long term investment needed to ensure services are sustainable, while the social, economic and health pressures of the pandemic are making existing inequalities worse. 28 July marked the 10th anniversary of the recognition of water and sanitation as a human right by the UN General assembly.
In his statement to mark the anniversary, the UN special rapporteur concludes: “On the positive side, the international community is well aware that it has the obligation, both moral and legal, to ensure access to safe drinking water and to sanitation for all, without discrimination (…) However, without a swift and considerable increase in the efforts currently dedicated to water and sanitation, and a better understanding of the legal and policy changes required by a human rights-based approach to water and sanitation, the international community will not fulfill the ambitious promises it has made.”
The last RWSN webinar series focused on the human right to water as more practitioners are looking for ways to use human rights commitments to leverage progress.
On the positive side, the pandemic has generated a new urgency for agencies and practitioners to collaborate and work out solutions. RWSN has supported many discussions through webinars and online forums, its members bringing a large range of skills, experience and perspectives to the challenges posed by covid and climate change.
An important milestone was the conclusion of the UPGro research on groundwater in Africa, which has released a huge amount of valuable insights about the potential of groundwater and how to unlock it – especially for the poor. This is the result of a long collaboration between institutions in the global north and global south, with RWSN as knowledge broker. Meanwhile, hugely enriching discussions about decolonising WASH knowledge have erupted on the LNOB group, triggered by Black Lives Matter.
Institutionalised power imbalances between water experts from the south and the north and the different value placed on their expertise were exposed. These dynamics are damaging in themselves and ultimately compromise the viability of solutions developed. I encourage everyone to join this discussion and to challenge the systemic discrimination that limits the potential of collaborative learning.
The role of RWSN has never been more important in jointly tackling the multi-dimensional challenges of ensuring sustainable water supplies for rural populations.
El 28 de julio se cumple el décimo aniversario del reconocimiento de los derechos humanos al agua y al saneamiento. 10 años y 12 resoluciones más tarde, este blog responde a preguntas frecuentes sobre el estatus legal del agua y el saneamiento como derechos humanos en la legislación internacional y nacional.
El 28 de julio de 2020 se cumple el décimo aniversario del reconocimiento de los derechos humanos al agua y al saneamiento. 10 años y 12 resoluciones más tarde, este blog responde a preguntas frecuentes sobre el estatus legal del agua y el saneamiento como derechos humanos en la legislación internacional y nacional.
El 28 de julio de 2010, la Asamblea General de la ONU aprobó la resolución A/RES/64/292, que “reconoce que el derecho al agua potable y el saneamiento es un derecho humano esencial para el pleno disfrute de la vida y de todos los derechos humanos”. 122 Estados miembros de la ONU votaron a favor del texto y ninguno en contra; 41 se abstuvieron.
Le 28 juillet marque le 10ème anniversaire de la reconnaissance des droits humains à l’eau et à l’assainissement. 10 ans et 12 résolutions plus tard, ce blog répond aux questions les plus courantes sur le statut juridique de l’eau et de l’assainissement en tant que droits humains dans le droit international et national.
Le 28 juillet 2020 marque le 10ème anniversaire de la reconnaissance des droits humains à l’eau et à l’assainissement. 10 ans et 12 résolutions plus tard, ce blog répond aux questions les plus courantes sur le statut juridique de l’eau et de l’assainissement en tant que droits humains dans le droit international et national.
Le 28 juillet 2010, l’Assemblée générale des Nations unies a adopté la résolution A/RES/64/292, qui « reconnaît que le droit à l’eau potable et à l’assainissement est un droit de l’homme, essentiel à la pleine jouissance de la vie et à l’exercice de tous les droits de l’homme ». 122 États membres de l’ONU ont voté pour le texte et aucun n’a voté contre ; 41 se sont abstenus.
28 July 2020 marks the 10th anniversary of the recognition of the human rights to water and sanitation. 10 years and 12 resolutions later, this blog answers common questions on the legal status of water and sanitation as human rights in international and national law.
On 28 July 2010, the UN General Assembly passed resolution A/RES/64/292, which “Recognizes the right to safe and clean drinking water and sanitation as a human right that is essential for the full enjoyment of life and all human rights”. 122 UN member states voted for the text and none against; 41 abstained.