Participatory approach in rural water supply and sanitation - A Sri Lankan experience

Piyasena Wellakkage

(This is the third of the a series of articles preceding the 32nd WEDC International Conference 'Sustainable Development of Water Resources, Water Supply and Environmental Sanitation' to be held from November 13 - 17 at the BMICH)

ACCESS TO WATER: The 32nd WEDC international conference is held at a time when many communities in developing countries are facing severe hardships resulting from lack of access to water and sanitation facilities.

Till recent times, the real value of the services of water and sanitation was not adequately appreciated. Now it is increasingly recognized that these services can be effectively used as powerful interventions in order to reduce poverty, improve the quality of life of people and also to enhance their social and economic development.

The contribution made by WEDC in order to project the importance of water and sanitation to the world community warrants commendation. A unique feature of WEDC conferences is that it offers a platform to academics, professionals, practitioners and planners to share their experiences with each other.

We are rich in experiences in this field and wish to share them with WEDC and other countries. In early nineties a few rural development practitioners, who were not only skilled in management but also sensitive to the sufferings of the poor, took up the challenge to radically change the course of these services. Initially it was an experiment to adopt a radically different approach.

The Community Water Supply and Sanitation (pilot) Project - 1 (CWSSP-1) sponsored by World Bank became the laboratory for this experiment. Eventually it became the turning point in the evolution of the RWSS sector in Sri Lanka. Its success was overwhelming that it was rated as the "Best Practice" and "Well Managed" project among 200 similar World Bank funded projects around the world.

All the pioneers of CWSSP had an exposure to rural communities and their cultural habits and their ways of thinking. They were conscious of the limitations of the earlier schemes implemented through the top down, conventional approach. Some of the limitations included the lack of (a) clear policy, (b) national and local institutional infrastructure, (c) absence of appropriate methodology, (d) lack of beneficiary participation and mechanism for sustainability.

They knew of the hidden potential of the rural communities which had been stultified by the lack of opportunities. Development practitioners including the public officers working with rural poor had adopted a patronizing attitude towards the beneficiaries and imposed their thinking on the rural poor.

Through close interactions with the poor, they knew that water off a tap right at home would transform their lives. They witnessed with sadness young girls being pulled out of school out of necessity by parents to help them to fetch water for daily needs. They knew how poor perceive having a toilet of their own. A toilet was something more than a sanitation facility. It gave them a sense of self respect.

With best of intentions, how could these pioneers persuade people who are already burdened with their own problems of survival to even partly finance a water scheme or the construction of a toilet? What about O&M? It was clear that it would not be possible to reach out to households individually. It was in this context the need for a strong rural institution capable of offering these services surfaced strongly.

This institution could not only provide W&S services but also could be a rallying point for the village to come together in a spirit of brotherhood and look for ways and means to address other issues as well. This is the genesis of CBOs

They nursed the CBOs, initially giving them full confidence to manage their affairs. They created the environment for the rural leadership to blossom forth. They witnessed poor people gradually coming out of a dependency syndrome.

In order to give stability to the institution, they introduced simple administrative and financial systems including auditing and insisted in total transparency in respect of all transactions.

They blasted the myth that rural poor are 'bad pay masters' and that O&M will continue to be a burden for the government. Whereas it was agreed that a target of 20 percent (minimum) of the construction cost would be contributed by beneficiaries, they volunteered and contributed up to 32 percent. The community completely took over the O&M of the facility.

Whenever they needed technical assistance, they obtained it on payment. All these were made possible because they were full-fledged owners of the facility and not mere passive recipients of services. . They had a stake in the facility. Today it is no longer an experiment. We have proved the viability of this approach and it is being viewed as a possible model for other rural institutions. It is gratifying to see the RWSS sector grow in maturity over the years.

Its importance is fully recognized by all concerned including political leaders, macro planners and decision makers at all levels. The high priority given in the development agenda of the country is an indication of the priority the sector has received of late.

The contributions of World Bank and ADB during the last two decades had been very substantial. World Bank is funding the 2nd CWSSP and ADB is funding an RWSS project which is being implemented by the National Water Supply and Drainage Board. JICA too has joined funding the RWSS sector. Still there is a long way to realize the objective of full coverage to the rural sector.

Through the project, we have developed a Rural Water Policy which will provide guidelines and directions to all rural water supply and sanitation projects in the future. We can invite the private sector and even international NGOs to participate in the sector activities.

When we look back in retrospect, we find that it was a story of creative and innovative interventions all the way. Among many innovations we introduced of late, I wish to commend three of them which will ensure the future sustainability of the institutions that are responsible for management of the facility. .

(The writer is the Director General, Rural Water Supply and Sanitation Division Ministry of Urban Development and Water Supply)