SUSTAINABILITY OF DELEGATED WATER SUPPLY MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS

FOR BLANTYRE’S LOW INCOME AND PERI URBAN AREAS

EPHRONE B.D. MWENITETE

A thesis submitted to the Faculty of Engineering, University of Malawi, The Polytechnic,

in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Science in
Infrastructure Development and Management (IDM)

May 2015
SUSTAINABILITY OF DELEGATED WATER SUPPLY MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS
FOR BLANTYRE’S LOW INCOME AND PERI URBAN AREAS

EPHRONE B.D. MWENITETE

A thesis submitted to the Faculty of Engineering, University of Malawi, The Polytechnic,

in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Science in
Infrastructure Development and Management (IDM)

May 2015
 DECLARATION

I, Ephrone Balinasyo Mwenitete, declare that this thesis is my own original work. Where other
sources of information have been used, they have been acknowledged. I hereby certify that this
work has not been submitted before in part or full for any other degree or examination.

SIGNATURE :

DATE :

ii
 CERTIFICATE OF APPROVAL

We, the undersigned, certify that we have read and hereby recommend for acceptance by the
University of Malawi a thesis entitled “Sustainability of Delegated Water Supply Management
Systems for Blantyre’s Low Income and Peri Urban Areas”

Dean - Postgraduate :

Signature :

Date :

Main Supervisor :

Signature :

Date :

Co-Supervisor :

Signature :

Date :

Head of Department :

Signature :

Date

iii
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I wish to sincerely thank my supervisors, for this work could not have been done without their
unfading interest, constant guidance and supervision.

"For I know the plans I have for you," declares the Lord. "Plans to prosper you and not to harm
you, plans to give you hope and a future." (Jeremiah 29.11)

iv
 DEDICATION

To the author’s departed mum and dad, Esther and Robert, the fledgling foundations they built in
me have been a truly magnificent revelation in my life. To God, be all the glory.

v
 ABSTRACT

Since 1985, the provision of water in low income and peri-urban areas of Blantyre City in Malawi
has been dominated by the kiosk system. This study investigated the sustainability of eight (8)
Water User Associations (WUAs) in Blantyre City by comparing their model of operation with
other forms of delegated water supply management systems (DWSMSs). This research study is
necessary as it will add to the growing knowledge on water supply sustainability and delegated
water supply arrangements in developing countries. It will enhance knowledge on the sustainability
of different models of delegated water supply arrangements as regards rural and low income areas
in developing cities. It offers a unique opportunity to evaluate the sustainability of delegated water
supply arrangements from a perspective of the supplier and the consumer by analysing the
relationship between water supply sustainability and customer satisfaction. It will also complement
the Malawi government’s efforts in developing strategies to achieve the policy goals of water for
all, always. This study offers an opportunity of enhancing efforts aimed at engaging local
communities and consumers in taking part in development activities that affect them.

This study will also broaden the available information on sustainability of community managed
water supply systems in peri-urban areas and share success factors and performance of different
models of delegated water supply management arrangements.

Seven (7) sustainability attributes were isolated for the study i.e. policy and regulation,
organizational arrangements, financial management, operations and maintenance, service levels,
social capital, gender relations and environmental management. The attributes were scored by
respondents using structured and semi-structured questionnaires. A sustainability score was
calculated. It was established that Private Operator model is the most sustainable model for
delivering water supply to low income areas followed by the WUA model. The Water Committee
model is challenged by difficulties to regulate its operation, resulting irregular and high tariffs and
nonpayment of water bills. The Private Operator and WUA models are effective in most respects
such as the existence of an effective management structure, tariffs are managed in such a manner
they cover operational costs and that a level of transparency and accountability exists enough to
ensure both operational and financial sustainability. However challenges still exist in the

vi
functionality of the institutional arrangements that support DWSMSs as well as the regulation of
social obligations such quantity of water supplied, access rights, pricing and tariff affordability. It is
recommended that BWB’s build its capacity to produce enough water to meet demand and that local
capacity of both BWB and WUAs must be strengthened to enhance their effectiveness and
efficiency, hence ensuring long-term sustainability.

vii
Table of Contents

DECLARATION ............................................................................................................. ii

CERTIFICATE OF APPROVAL .....................................................................................iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ............................................................................................... iv

DEDICATION .................................................................................................................. v

ABSTRACT .................................................................................................................... vi

LIST OF FIGURES .......................................................................................................... xi

LIST OF TABLES ...........................................................................................................xii

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................... 1

1.1 Background ............................................................................................................................. 1

1.2 Statement of the Problem ........................................................................................................... 4

1.3 Research Question .................................................................................................................... 5

1.4 Main Objective......................................................................................................................... 6

1.5 Specific Objectives ................................................................................................................... 7

CHAPTER 2.OVERVIEW OF DELEGARED WATER SUPPLY MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS IN

BLANTYRE ................................................................................................................... 10

2.1 Blantyre City and Blantyre Water Board.................................................................................... 10

2.2 Delegated Water Supply Management Systems in Blantyre, Malawi ............................................. 15

2.2.1 Public Provision ............................................................................................................. 15

2.2.2 Private Provision .............................................................................................................. 16

2.2.3 Community based provision............................................................................................... 16

CHAPTER 3: LITERATURE REVIEW ............................................................................ 25

3.1 Decentralization and Service Delivery ....................................................................................... 25

3.2 Water Supply Governance ....................................................................................................... 27

3.2.1 Water Service Delivery models .......................................................................................... 28

3.3Comparison of the Different Delegated Models of Water Supply ................................................... 30

3.4 Delegated Water Supply Systems in Peri ................................................................................... 32

3.5 Specific Studies on Water Supply to Low Income Areas in Malawi .............................................. 34

viii
 3.6 Sustainability ......................................................................................................................... 36

3.6.1 Sustainable Development .................................................................................................. 36

3.6.2 Sustainability in the Water Supply Sector ............................................................................ 38

3.7 Sustainability Attributes of Water Supply Systems ..................................................................... 40

3.7.1 Financial Sustainability ..................................................................................................... 40

3.7.2 Operational and Maintenance ............................................................................................. 42

3.7.3 Community and Social Aspects .......................................................................................... 43

3.7.4 Management and Institutional Arrangements ....................................................................... 48

3.7.5 Policy and Regulation ....................................................................................................... 49

3.7.6 Gender ............................................................................................................................ 50

3.7.7 Environment: Inclusion of environmental issues in the management model ............................. 51

CHAPTER 4: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY .................................................................. 54

4.1 Study Area............................................................................................................................. 54

4.2 Research Approach ................................................................................................................. 54

4.3 Data Collection ...................................................................................................................... 54

4.3.1Water point data collection ................................................................................................. 55

4.3.2 Desk Study ...................................................................................................................... 55

4.3.3 Use of Secondary Data ...................................................................................................... 55

4.6 Data Analysis ......................................................................................................................... 56

4.6.1. Conceptual Framework for Analysis .................................................................................. 57

4.6.2 Water supply sustainability Analysis ................................................................................... 60

CHAPTER 5: RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ................................................................... 66

5.1 Policy, Legal, Administrative and Organisational Framework ...................................................... 66

5.2 Water Point Sustainability ....................................................................................................... 68

5.3 Financial Sustainability ........................................................................................................... 72

5.4 Operational Sustainability .................................................................................................. 74

5.4.1 Administrative Arrangements within the DWSMSs .............................................................. 74

5.4.2 Water User Satisfaction ..................................................................................................... 75

ix
 5.4.3 Water Supply Availability ................................................................................................. 79

5.4.4 Water Supply Quantity at the water point ............................................................................ 81

5.4.5Water supply quality .......................................................................................................... 81

5.4.6 Appropriate technology for water supply and Availability of Spare Parts................................. 82

5.4.7 Expansion of water supply to new users .............................................................................. 82

5.5 Community and Social Issues ............................................................................................. 83

5.5.1 Tariff affordability to most users ........................................................................................ 83

5.5.2 Water Users satisfaction with quality and quantity ................................................................ 84

5.5.3 Universal access to water................................................................................................... 85

5.6 Gender .................................................................................................................................. 85

5.7 Environment .......................................................................................................................... 87

5.8 Comparisons of Sustainability within the Individual DWSMSS .................................................... 87

CHAPTER 6: CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................... 92

6.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................... 92

6.2 Research Conclusions ............................................................................................................. 92

REFERENCES ............................................................................................................... 98

APPENDIX A: INTERVIEW PROTOCOL ...................................................................... 105

x
 LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1: Blantyre Water Board Water Supply Area............................................................................. 11

Figure 2: Blantyre City Townships .................................................................................................... 12
Figure 3: Map showing the 21 Low Income Areas of Blantyre .............................................................. 14
Figure 4: Conceptual Framework for Analysis .................................................................................... 59
Figure 5: Sustainability comparison of Ndirande Matope WUA and Ndirande Committees ...................... 71
Figure 6:Variations in Sustainability Metrics per DWSMSs (percentage scoring) .................................... 73

xi
 LIST OF TABLES

Table 2.1: Populations of Low Income Areas in Blantyre City (2013) ............................................. 13
Table 3.1: Service Delivery Models and Variants ............................................................................. 28
Table 3.2: Service Delivery Models, (Miranda et al, 2011) .............................................................. 29
Table 3.3: Comparison of Different Forms of Peri Urban Delegated Management Systems .......... 31
Table 3.4: Sustainability Factors and Qualifiers ................................................................................ 52
Table 4.1: Water point sustainability Scoring -1 ............................................................................... 62
Table 4.2: Water point Sustainability Scoring-2................................................................................ 63
Table 4.3: Relative satisfaction index of each factor affecting water user satisfaction ..................... 64
Table 4.4: Interpretation scale of satisfaction scores ......................................................................... 65
Table 5.1: DWSMS mean water point sustainability......................................................................... 69
Table 5.2: DWSMS Mean Water Point Sustainability per Administrative Region ........................... 69
Table 5.3: Relative water user satisfaction levels .............................................................................. 76
Table 5.4: Relative water user satisfaction levels: gender desegregated………………………….77
Table 5.5: Water point Sustainability Metrics for all DWSMSs ....................................................... 80
Table 5.6: Staff members managing DWSMSs desegregated by gender .......................................... 86
Table 5.7: correlation significance of different metrics to sustainability…… 89

xii
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

BCC Blantyre City Council

BWB Blantyre Water Board
CBM Community Based Management
CBO Community Based Organisation
DWSMS Delegated Water Supply Management System
EIB European Investment Bank
EIB European Investment Bank
EU European Union
GoM Government of Malawi
HH Household
KMU Kiosk Management Unit
LIA Low Income Areas
M&E Monitoring and Evaluation
MASAF Malawi Social Action Fund
MGDS Malawi Growth and Development Strategy
MoIWD Ministry of Irrigation and Water Development
NGO Non-Governmental Organization
NSO National Statistics Office
NWDP National Water Development Program
O&M Operation And Maintenance
PO Private Operator
PSP Private Sector Participation
PUA Peri Urban Area
THA Traditional Housing Area
UN United Nations
UNICEF United Nations Children’s Organisation
UWSS Urban Water Supply and Sanitation
WB World Bank
WHO World Health Organisation
xiii
WUA Water Users Association

xiv
 CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background
Blantyre City’s population is estimated at 738,696 people in 2013. The population growth rate for
Blantyre City is estimated at 2.8% per annum (NSO, 2008). Blantyre Water Board is a parastatal
organization established and reconstituted under the Malawi Water Works Act No. 17 of 1995 to
supply potable water for commercial, industrial, institutional and domestic use in the supply area of
Blantyre City and surrounding areas. The Board is responsible for the abstraction, treatment and
distribution, and the water quality monitoring within Blantyre City. Its area of jurisdiction has been
extending rapidly due to the extension of the city boundaries and its responsibilities increasing due
to rapid urbanisation in the city (Chipeta, 2009).

The provision of safe water in poor urban communities is dominated by the kiosk system. The
kiosks were introduced to ensure regular and affordable supply in traditional housing areas and
squatter settlements when the government launched the Urban Communal Water Point Project in
1981. The project was financed by the United Nations Capital Development Fund and the World
Health Organization (WHO). The objective of the project was to construct 600 communal water
points in 50 urban settlements in Malawi, in order to provide affordable and safe drinking water to
over 24,000 low-income urban families (Fabiano, 1993). The kiosks were managed by the local tap
committees.

Although, this objective was achieved in 1985, problems developed with water-point management
and people stopped paying the tariffs to the local tap committees. A new project, the Piped Supplies
for Small Communities (PSSC) was initiated in 1988. The objective of the new project shifted from
mere supply to development of more appropriate, sustainable and successful methods to plan,
implement and manage piped water supplies with rural and peri urban communities (ibid).

As a result of these projects and following subsequent investments from UNICEF and the Malawi
Social Action Fund (MASAF) and international NGOs like Water for People, access to water
facilities increased significantly. For example, the number of kiosks in Blantyre increased from 36

1
in 1990 to 359 in 2008 following investment from organizations like UNICEF and MASAF
(Manda, 2009).

Historically, kiosk water supply in the low-income communities was managed in different ways.
Water would be supplied by the water boards and managed by the different stakeholders such as
community committees, CBOs, NGOs, faith groups, private persons and the Blantyre Water Board
itself. Although Blantyre Water Board is mandated by law to supply piped water to the residents of
Blantyre City, due to insufficient capacity of the existing network and the fact that many households
in poor urban communities cannot afford to install individual connections, kiosks are provided to
afford them piped water at a subsidised rate.

Community-managed water kiosks were installed at the request of communities keen to access
water closer to their homes. The communities elected a water committee to oversee revenue
collection, cleanliness, minor maintenance and payment of bills. Lack of transparency led to failure
to pay bills and consequent disconnections. Water-committee members fraudulently used revenue
meant for bills and some community members illegally used the water. This led to frustration, and
forced some households to either buy water from other individual households at higher prices or use
unprotected sources(Manda, 2009).
.
In some cases, the Blantyre City Assembly installed kiosks in low-income communities as a social
responsibility to ensure adherence to public health. These kiosks were either managed by the
Blantyre City themselves, or the responsibility to manage them was devolved to communities.

In the late-90s, there were an alarming number of disconnections of community-managed water

kiosks in peri-urban Blantyre due to non-payment of water bills to BWB. Frequent cases of hostile
takeovers and clientelism ensued whereby water revenue would be siphoned off towards political
party activities/members (Cammack, 2012). Relevant public authorities responsible for water
services and sanitation to such areas succumbed to ruling party pressures as it was safer, for one’s
career prospects, not to be seen to be anti- government.

2
The disconnections of kiosks due to non-payment of water bills led to an immediate and
spontaneous dire water crisis that left the urban poor at risk of contracting water-borne diseases like
cholera. This led to a massive public outcry and authorities were forced to reconnect the water
immediately.

It is also noteworthy to learn that service delivery in these areas has been characterized by
challenges like poor political and traditional leadership influences, irregular payment of bills (that
lead to the accumulation of arrears), different charging systems, and different prices within one
location. These challenges coupled with the heavy subsidy associated with delivery of services to
Low Income Areas (LIAs)have made the work of the Board in such area, unsustainable.

In addition, Governments’ inability (largely because of lack of resources) to maintain water and
sanitation infrastructure has also been the major factor leading to the promotion of community
participation in development programmes. Yet, communities rarely have the sustainable capacity to
manage their own infrastructure, in complete independence of government or Non-Governmental
Organizations (Ademiluyi and Odugbesan, 2008).

Despite the numerous challenges, there have been several initiatives to remedy the water supply
management at community level. For example, Water For People Malawi, an international NGO, in
partnership with BWB, facilitated the establishment of a Water Users Association (WUA) in the
pilot area of Nkolokoti-Kachere in 2007. The idea remained that of empowering communities to
manage the water supply, but with the added facet of creating a sustainable business model. By
dedicating resources on consensus building (with political actors), knowledge sharing, mobilization
and advocacy, the WUA was able to overcome a situation of intense corruption, disrepair,
vandalism and near-total service disruption. By December 2010, Nkolokoti-Kachere WUA had
settled all its outstanding bills and had never had supply disruptions for non-payment of bills. The
model is currently being scaled up across all 21 peri-urban areas of Blantyre (Water For People,
2009).

A Water Users Association (WUA) is a grouping of water users for the purpose of operating and
maintaining water supply in a sustainable manner to ensure equitable water supply everyone. A
WUA can also be seen as an organisation that provides social services to its members. WUAs bring

3
community cohesion and empowerment in ways that can spread to other development activities
within the area (MoIWD, 2009).

A WUA, as opposed to a Water Point Committee, has an area-wide representation and manages all
the communal water points in an area while a Water point Committee just manages single water
point. Therefore instead of an area having multiple water point committees, there would be only one
WUA managing multiple water points, like a mini Water Board

Blantyre Water Board has therefore has been operationalizing this WUA model for the provision of
efficient, reliable and sustainable water services in the low-income communities since 2009 with
funding from the European Union, European Investment Bank and the Malawi Government. To
date eight WUAs have been established and are functional. These are Nkolokoti-Kachere WUA;
Ndirande-Matope WUA; Michiru WUA; Mitsidi-Sanjika WUA; Mudi WUA; Bangwe WUA;
Namiyango-Chigumula WUA and Soche WUA.

While this is a major shift in the way water supply services are provided to low income unplanned
areas in Blantyre, no evaluative studies or empirical descriptive studies have been conducted to
determine the effectiveness and the sustainability of the different forms of Delegated Water Supply
Management systems (DWSMSs). Therefore this study suggests an investigation of the
sustainability of the different forms of DWSMSs currently in operation in Blantyre’s low income
areas.

1.2 Statement of the Problem

It is clear that the mode of water supply to low income areas and peri urban areas of Blantyre city
has greatly evolved from then Urban Communal Water point Project of 1981 through to the current
efforts through the Water User Associations (WUAs) and private operators at present. Previous
strategies and methods of supplying water through water point committees have proved problematic
as bills were not being paid and led to water point disconnections reducing access to safe and
potable water to the residents of Blantyre city (Manda, 2009; Commack, 2012).

The establishment of the WUAs and the Private Operators as models for supplying water to LIAs
and PUAs is a major shift in the way water is being supplied to these areas. For example, the first
WUA in Blantyre had opened in Kachere and was having some success at repaying arrears, fixing

4
infrastructure, expanding the public water network, and selling water to residents (Commack,
2012). This represents a marked departure from the performance previous arrangements of water
committees managed kiosks which were beset with non-payments of water bills and therefore
disconnections (Water Aid, 2008).

Furthermore, Mughogho and Kosamu (2012) deduced that the state-informal sector (WUAs) and
the private provision, as opposed to a wholly centralized public system is one of the modes that if
formalized can extend coverage of water supply to low income areas.

However, to date, no evaluative study or empirical descriptive study has been carried out to analyse
the sustainability of those management systems. It is this gap that lies at the heart of the problem
area for this study.

1.3 Research Question

The system to distribute water through water kiosks under the Community Committees has
problems in that water service delivery was being patronized by powerful politicians and elite
groups leading to nonpayment of bills, high and unregulated tariffs and infrastructure deterioration
due to insufficient O&M (Manda 2009; WaterAid, 2008). This collaborates with findings of the
study of the water supply arrangements for Blantyre City, Malawi by Mughogho and Kosamu in
2012 who argue that the challenge of small scale informal service providers is that it has been
associated with high charges, provision of poor quality water, unreliable and intermittent water
supply, and a general deterioration of water infrastructure. They suggest other modes of delegated
service delivery (State-Civil Society, State-Informal Sector and the State-Civil Society-Informal
Sector) which if formalized and institutionalized may extend the coverage to the low-income
neighbourhoods in a transparent and inclusive manner. This concurs with Chirwa and Junge (2007)
who in identifying the various structures for managing communal water points in the low income
areas of Lilongwe and Blantyre (i.e. City Assembly, Water Boards, Committees, WUAs, Churches,
Development Associations, NGOs, Private Business Persons, and local politicians) concluded that
local committees and political groups managed kiosks are beset with problems of non-payment of
water bills and funds squandering, the public managed kiosks become eventually uneconomic to
manage as employment and funds management is costly for public entities. Private persons
managing kiosks, although they are efficient at distribution and increasing access, have a tendency

5
of overpricing and therefore leaving the poorest with no choice but to revert to unprotected sources..
In analyzing and evaluating the impacts of different modes of water service delivery, the most
effective mode was found to be the Small Scale Private Sector Providers in a distribution contract
with the reformed Water Boards (Miranda et al., 2011).Chipeta (2009) approached the study of
service provision in Blantyre low income areas from a gender perspective and argues that
participation of user beneficiaries would be very important, especially women, who are mostly
affected with water problems. Cammack (2012), details the extent of political interference in the
management of kiosks in some low income areas in Blantyre. Political functionaries have interfered
with kiosks management since their inception in the 1980s as they are seen as vehicles for funds
mismanagement.

It should be noted that the foregoing studies, although provide very useful background information
about service provision in low income areas and achieved their objectives in their own right, have
not tackled a comparative sustainability analysis of the different DWSMSs.

Therefore, this study seeks to answer the following research question: How sustainable are the
different forms of DWMSSs (Water Committees, WUAs and Private Operators) currently in
operation in Blantyre’s low income areas? Answers to this research question will help to understand
the current levels of sustainability of the DWSMSs and any external and internal factors that are
likely to affect their sustainability in future. It should be emphasized that, since this study was
conducted at a point in time, the results indicate the likelihood of sustainability rather than absolute
sustainability, which would require a longitudinal study. Furthermore, this study is context specific
to Blantyre low income areas which would make the task of generalization and claims to global
application difficult.

1.4 Main Objective

The overall objective of this study is to examine the sustainability of Water Committees, Private
Operators and WUAs as delegated water supply management systems to the low income areas of
Blantyre in a comparative manner.

6
1.5 Specific Objectives
The specific objectives are as follows:
1. To determine and examine the existing policy provisions that support the different delegated
water supply management systems
2. To examine the institutional arrangements that support delegated water supply management
systems.
3. To determine and examine the financial and operational sustainability of the delegated
models for water supply.
4. Provide independent feedback from water users on their experience and perceptions as
regards management and governance of the DWSMSs.

1.6 Justification
This research study has been carried out as one way of adding to the growing knowledge on
sustainability of water supply to informal and peri urban areas in developing countries with regard
to delegated water supply arrangements in developing countries. It will enhance knowledge on the
sustainability of different models of delegated water supply arrangements as regards rural and low
income areas in developing cities. It offers a unique opportunity to evaluate the sustainability of
delegated water supply arrangements from a perspective of the supplier and the consumer by
analysing the relationship between water supply sustainability and customer satisfaction. It will also
complement the Malawi government’s efforts in developing strategies to achieve the policy goals of
water for all, always. This study offers an opportunity of enhancing efforts aimed at engaging local
communities and consumers in taking part in development activities that affect them.

Additionally, this study will broaden the available information on sustainability of community
managed water supply systems in peri-urban areas and share success factors and performance of
different models of delegated water supply management arrangements.

1.7 Research Methodology

The research methodology adopted for this study comprises mainly of five tasks. These tasks are
presented below:

Task 1 - Literature review of journals, reports, books and theses to determine

what is known and identify the attributes that define sustainability as a

7
 development phenomenon and specifically as applied to water supply
sustainability. Different delegated water supply models with regard to
water supply to low income areas in developing countries were
studied.

Task 2 - Develop a survey questionnaire to be used to gather primary data

from water points managed by different delegated water supply
management systems in Blantyre, Malawi.

Task 3 - Use secondary data from previous related work to measure consumer
satisfaction with the different delegated water supply arrangements
that exist in Blantyre low income areas. The method for measuring
consumer satisfaction is based on the Relative Satisfaction Index
principle, RSI (Enshassi et al., 2009).

Task 4 - Survey of the delegated management structures, legal, policies and

administrative tools that affect delegated water supply systems and
each and every water point managed by different delegated models in
Blantyre to measure the likelihood of their sustainability.

Task 5 - Analyse the data that provides insights into the various likelihood for
sustainability of the different delegated water supply models.

1.8 Research Delimitation

In general delegated water supply models take various forms of management structures and level of
delegated authorities. This study concentrated on those models that are given the mandate by
Blantyre Water Board to supply water to low income areas of Blantyre. As such, their sustainability
is heavily dependent on the performance on Blantyre Water Board as the sole supplier of water to
these structures. Specifically, this study investigates the likelihood of sustainability for private
operators, water user associations (WUAs) and water point committees operating in contract with
Blantyre Water Board. Furthermore such Blantyre city context specific study would make
generalisation of findings difficult as different geographical areas exhibit characteristics (policy,
legislation, contract arrangements and social attributes) that are unique to those areas Additionally,
the study discusses the likelihood of sustainability of delegated water supply models by studying the
attributes at a given point in time. However, a more robust sustainability picture would require a
longitudinal study.
8
1.9 Outline of the Research Report
The report format follows the general logical steps of conducting research studies. This includes
establishing of the research question, development of methodology, data collection and analysis and
drawing of conclusions and recommendations. Therefore the report is organised into the following
chapters.

Chapter 1 discusses the introduction of the research study. The introduction highlights the
background, statement of the problem, research questions, general objective, specific objectives,
and justification of the research, research methodology, research delimitations and outline of the
research report.

Chapter 2 presents a general background of water supply to Blantyre City by Blantyre Water Board
and the different forms of delegated water supply management models existing in Malawi. It covers
a rapid appraisal of polices, institutional, legal, and regulatory frameworks for water supply
management in Malawi.

Chapter 3 presents the literature review as regards water supply governance, delegated water supply
management models, sustainability as a development phenomenon and water supply sustainability.
It discusses the various pieces of literature as regards sustainability factors and attributes with
respect to water supply to low income areas and rural areas. Additionally, the Chapter discusses
customer satisfaction as an element of sustainability. The discussions in this chapter culminate into
the identification of sustainability factors and attributes as regards water supply. These are the
factors that are used to measure the likelihood of water points’ sustainability and the sustainability
of the water supply service.

Chapter 4 describes the methodology used in the research study. The methodologies that were
adopted to determine the sustainability of the delegated water supply models were to study
sustainability attributes for each water point at a point in time. Additionally, secondary data was
analysed to measure customer satisfaction with the delegated models. The methodologies mainly
include research strategy, sampling procedure, data collection and analysis.

Chapter 5 presents and discusses the results of the study. The sustainability of the delegated water
supply arrangements are discussed.

9
Chapter 6 is the concluding chapter and discusses the research conclusions and relevant
recommendations of the study.

CHAPTER 2.OVERVIEW OF DELEGARED WATER SUPPLY MANAGEMENT

SYSTEMS IN BLANTYRE

2.1 Blantyre City and Blantyre Water Board

Blantyre Water Board extracts water from Shire River (an outlet of Lake Malawi) at Walkers’ Ferry
about 40 kilometres away and 800m below Blantyre City. As BWB’s main treatment plant,
Walkers’ Ferry provides water to about 85% of Blantyre City’s population of 1.4 million for
domestic, institutional, commercial and industrial purposes. The BWB’s main treatment plant at
Walkers’ Ferry has a production capacity of 78,000,000 litres per day. BWB also has Mudi
Treatment Works which produces about 8,000,000 litres daily. Blantyre Water Board supplies water
to Blantyre City and other surrounding areas that include Bvumbwe, Chileka, Lunzu, Chiradzulu,
Limbe and Mapanga (See Figure 1)

10
Figure 1: Blantyre Water Board Water Supply Area

Source: Blantyre Water Board, (2009)

11
Figure 2: Blantyre City Townships

Source: Blantyre City Council (2009)

12
Table 2.1 Populations of Low Income Areas in Blantyre City (2013)

Area No. Name of Area Population (Estimated)

1 Sigerege 7311
2 Chilomoni Mulunguzi 32094
3 Nancholi 9148

4 Misesa/CheNsomba 39079
5 Mzedi 15482
6 Bangwe/Namiyango/Ntopwa 39805
7 Machinjiri 28965
8 Naotcha 14843
9 Chilobwe/Chatha/Chimwankhunda 18970
10 Ndirande 118429
11 Chirimba-Chileka Road 33834
12 Chigumula, Chiswe/Chipanda 22317
13 Manase 6600
14 Soche 52473
15 Kameza 8558
16 Mbayani/Che Mussa 27872
17 Chiwembe Village 13341
18 Mapanga Njuli 1520
19 Manyowe 8493
20 BCA 22491
21 Nkolokoti Kachere 25612

Source: Blantyre Water Board (2009)

13
Figure 3: Map showing the 21 Low Income Areas of Blantyre

Source: Water For People(2010)

14
2.2 Delegated Water Supply Management Systems in Blantyre, Malawi

For the Blantyre city, there are four identifiable delegated water supply management systems for the
low income areas of Blantyre that are recognized and who enter into contracts with the supplier, the
Blantyre Water Board.

1. The Public Provision – the Blantyre Water Board

2. The Private Provision – The Small Scale Private Operators
3. The Community Provision – Water Committees
4. The Community Provision - Water User Associations

2.2.1 Public Provision

Public provision refers to a water supply arrangement when the water supply system is managed or
is dependent on central government, local government or a parastatal organisation. This can be done
through a public Water Board. This model tends to be expensive as there are increased overhead
costs from maintaining staff and equipment required for a proper O&M. The other disadvantage is
that there is lack of ownership which leads to misuse and vandalism of water supply infrastructure
and the delays in repairing and attending to faults (Sami and Murray, 1998). Because it is dependent
on central government for financing, it is prone to frequent budgetary cuts typical of a developing
country like Malawi.

In Blantyre’s public provision, the Blantyre Water Board manages some of the kiosks directly. In
this model, water sellers are employees of Blantyre Water Board and are tasked to sell water at an
agreed tariff. The funds collected are deposited at Blantyre Water Board which has plumbers and
supervisors that manage the funds reconciliation and maintenance of the kiosks structures. For this
management arrangement, accountability is a challenge in that funds collected cannot be fully
accounted for leading to loss in revenue by Blantyre Water Board. It also becomes expensive to
employ full time staff to manage kiosks.

15
2.2.2 Private Provision
Private provision is when a private company is providing the water service and it is charging its
customers directly for the services. Since it is motivated by profit, they tend to be more efficient and
have a drive to extend service provision to cater for more customers.

In the case of Blantyre, the Water Board mandates the small scale private operators to manage the
whole network in a designated area i.e. Blantyre Water Board supplies water through a bulk meter
to a ring-fenced network. The management of all connections in that ring-fenced network is the
responsibility of the private operator. The private operator is responsible for maintenance, meter
reading, bill processing and collection of revenue, connecting new customers and general customer
service.

Some private individuals have invested in building kiosk structures and paying for a kiosk
connection. In this case, the private sellers enter into a connection agreement with Blantyre Water
Board whereby they are supposed to pay the monthly bills accumulated from the supply to their
kiosks. They resell the water to willing consumers in the communities they serve. In most cases, the
tariff regulation with these private sellers is a challenge in that it is difficult for Blantyre Water
Board to regulate individual connections who resell the water, thereby rendering poor consumers in
the peri urban Blantyre to high water tariffs.

In the absence of adequate regulation, this “informal” economy is often accompanied by substantial
health risks, seasonal inflationary spirals and speculative mechanisms which penalize particularly
the most vulnerable households (Jaglin, 2002). It is common for customers in the resale circuit to
pay much more for a cubic metre of water than those who pay for the public service.

Moreover, in view of its weak investment capacity and lack of a long-term strategy, the informal
private sector does not provide an adequate response to the challenge of making water widely
available and reaching scale (ibid.)

2.2.3 Community based provision

Community provision is a supply model where local communities and non-state and/or informal
providers are left generally alone in providing their water service.

16
2.2.3.1 Water Committees
Water committees emanate from the fact that when kiosks were being constructed through social
development projects, communities elected a project committee to oversee the construction. The
same committees would then remain in place to see the operations of the kiosk. So each kiosk
would be managed by a water committee who would collect tariff and pay a monthly bill to
Blantyre Water Board. They have a connection agreement with Blantyre Water Board

2.2.3.2 Water User Associations

Water User Associations are community organizations that are mandated to manage water supply
through communal water points only. They get supplied by Blantyre water Board through kiosk
meters and resell the water per fetch to consumers in the low income areas at a commercial tariff
agreed with Blantyre Water Board enough to cover cost of operations. Water User Associations are
run by a board of trustees that is democratically chosen by the water users in areas of their
jurisdiction. The board of trustees works on a voluntary basis. The Board of Trustees employs a
Secretariat which comprises a WUA Administrator, plumbers, inspectors and water sellers. The
WUAs are responsible for the maintenance of the kiosks and the small pipeline after a Blantyre
Water Board meter.The WUAs are recognised within the policy, institutional and legal framework
governing water supply in Malawi.

In Blantyre City, Water Users Associations are set up with the help of civil society and are
mandated by the Blantyre Water Board to manage communal water points, commonly called kiosks.
The WUAs manage a well-coordinated system of water sellers (usually one per kiosk), plumbers
and supervisors. The WUAs buy water from Blantyre Water Board and resell to the water users at a
fee that, at a minimum, is able to recover cost of water and operational costs for the water user
association. Individual connections within WUA areas of jurisdiction are managed separately and
directly by the Blantyre Water Board. The Blantyre Water Board has been encouraging home
owners to have an individual connection so that households do not walk distances to fetch water.

In Blantyre, there are plans to establish ten (10) WUAs with their own constitution and operating
guidelines and separate individual contracts with BWB. Currently there are eight (8) WUAs in
operation in Blantyre City. The WUAs have been in operation since 2007.

17
The Kiosk Management Unit at Blantyre Water Board is responsible for managing the WUAs and
cooperating with other kiosk operators, ensuring that all kiosks are operated by legally recognised
entities. The KMU also monitors their performance and reselling prices, records bill payments,
provides technical assistance and conducts repairs and maintenance to the meters, which are
situated next to the kiosks.

2.3. Policies, Institutional, Legal and Regulatory Frameworks for Water Supply in Malawi.

This section is the result of a comprehensive desk study to rapidly appraise of policies, legal and
institutional frameworks associated with and that have a bearing on the sustainable management of
water supply to Blantyre Peri-urban and low income areas. In order to evaluate their effectiveness in
promoting delegated water supply management models, the study synthesized the frameworks that
affect water supply. Furthermore, the study attempted to assess and describe how policy, legislation
and institutional frameworks impact on the delegated water supply management systems in
Blantyre.

The Malawi Constitution of 1995 lays out strong foundation for policy and legal reform in water
resource management. It also provides for promotion of the standards of living of communities and
to bring about sustainable development. The Constitution’s Chapter III declares: “The state shall
actively promote the welfare and development of the people of Malawi by progressively adopting
and implementing policies and legislation aimed at achieving the following goals: (i) manage the
environmental responsibly in order to prevent the degradation of land, provide a healthy living and
working environment for the people of Malawi, accord full recognition to the rights of future
generations by means of environmental protection and the sustainable development of natural
resources, conserve and enhance the biological diversity of Malawi, and; (ii) enhance the quality of
life in rural communities and recognize rural standards of living as a key indicator of the success of
government policies.”

The Constitution also encourages gender equality, non-discrimination and the protection and
support of vulnerable groups such as women, children and the elderly in terms of provision of
community services and to encourage their full participation in the life of the community. Therefore
the Malawi Constitution is very clear in the provision for community participation, gender equality

18
and providing a platform for the creation and development of policy and legal frameworks that
support them.

The Malawi Vision 2020 was developed in 2000 and sets out a long-term development perspective
for the nation. It emphasizes long term strategic thinking, shared vision and visionary leadership,
participation by the people, strategic management and collaborative national learning and
responsibilities. In particular, the Malawi’s Vision 2020 presents the long-term development
perspective: “By the year 2020, Malawi, as a God-fearing nation will be secure, democratically
mature, environmentally sustainable, self-reliant with equal opportunities for and active
participation by all, having social services, vibrant culture and religious values and a
technologically driven middle-income economy”. Embodied in Vision 2020 is the desire to achieve
sustainable economic growth and development based on a multi-sectoral approach and outline the
need to achieve improved access to water as a major aspect of development.

The Malawi Growth and Development Strategy II (MGDS II)provides an overarching national
development framework for the attainment of Malawi’s vision 2020. It aims at reducing poverty
through sustained economic growth and infrastructure development and runs from 2011 to 2016.
The MGDS II focuses on six priority areas, one of which is irrigation and water development.
Progress is reported upon annually against a set of MDGS outcome indicators and/or sector outputs.
The MGDS II is centered on achieving strong and sustainable economic growth, building a healthy
and educated human resource base, and protecting and empowering the vulnerable. The pre-
requisites for good performance of the strategy are infrastructure development and good
governance. It recognizes that water development is important for life, agriculture and industrial
development. In this particular regard, the goal is to improve access to water through integrated
water resource management. It aims at increasing access to safe water and improved management of
water resources. More importantly, it also provides for community management and private sector
involvement in the delivery of water supply services. This is therefore in tandem with DMSs in that
communities and the private sector can take part in the delivery of water supply services as sub-
contractors to the water utilities.

The water sector is governed by the National Water Policy (2005), the National Sanitation Policy
(2008), National Irrigation Policy (2000), National Environmental Policy (2004), Water Resources

19
Act (1969), Waterworks Act (1995) and Environmental Management Act (1996); and supported by
the Gender Policy (2000), Decentralization Policy (1998) and Local Government Act (1998).
Currently, there are efforts being made to develop the Water Resources Act and to develop a
regulatory framework.

The Malawi Government launched and adopted a Water Resources Management Policy and
Strategies document in 1994. This is the document currently guiding water resources management
in Malawi. The focus has been to improve potable water supply and sanitation services through
decentralisation and commercialisation of the services

The National Water Policy (2005) was adopted to guide the country in the management and
development of its water resources using the Integrated Water Resource Management principles,
improving the institutional and legal framework, ensuring sustainable delivery of water supply and
sanitation services, effective involvement of the private sector, protection of the environment and
conformity with the regional and international conventions and agreements in the management of
shared water resources.The overall national water policy goal is to achieve sustainable management
and utilization of water resources

Specifically, in urban water supply, the policy provides for advocating effective and efficient
development, management and utilization of water supply and sanitation systems; encouraging
public-private partnerships; promoting appropriate management for water supply and sanitation
schemes; and developing suitable management arrangements for improved water supply and
sanitation systems. The water policy encourages active participation of local service providers in
water and sanitation, according to set standards for conservation, management, development,
provision and use of water resources and disposal of wastewater.

The National Water Policy (2005) aims at advocating for and encouraging the development of
suitable management arrangements for improved water supply; incorporating local government and
communities in planning, development and management of water supplies and sanitation services,
Strengthening and supporting Water Utilities through establishment of effective institutional and
governance arrangements, and major infrastructure developments;

20
The legal instrument for regulation of water resources management is the Water Resources Act
(1969) and its subsequent amendments. The Act provides for the control, conservation,
apportionment and use of water resources. The Act established the Water Resources Board as a
regulator of abstraction and use of public water.

The Water Works Act (1995) provides the legal framework for implementing the 1994 Water
Resources Management Policy and Strategies. The Water Works Act (1995) has established five
Water Boards including the Blantyre Water Board. Each Board has a management established to
run its day-to-day operations. Blantyre Water Board is a parastatal organization established and
reconstituted under the Malawi Water Works Act No. 17 of 1995 to supply potable water for
commercial, industrial, institutional and domestic use in the supply area of Blantyre City and
surrounding areas. The Water Works Act (1995) empowers the Boards to delegate water supply
service delivery to peri urban areas as the Boards see fit.

The National Sanitation Policy (2008) has a vision of a transformed country where all the people
have access to improved sanitation and where safe hygienic behaviour is the norm. The policy
provides recycling of solid and liquid waste as an income generating avenue. The objective of the
policy is to achieve a better life for all the people of Malawi, through healthier living conditions, a
better environment and a new way for sustainable wealth creation. Some of the strategies in the
National Sanitation Policy (2008) include ensuring that new urban water supply programmes and
projects will make adequate provision for wastewater treatment or disposal in either onsite septic
tanks or offsite sewage treatment works. Owners of houses installing new water supply connections
will make adequate provision for wastewater treatment or disposal. Those installing water closets
will have either onsite septic tanks or piped connections to offsite sewage treatment works.
Specifically, for delegated water supply to urban areas, the policy guidance is that each kiosk and
standpipe should have adequate drainage mechanisms so that water spillage does not result in
ponding.

The National Environmental Policy (NEP) (2004) and its legal instrument, the Environmental
Management Act (1996) give guidance and direction on efficient and effective management of
water resources so as to promote its conservation and availability in sufficient quantity and
acceptable quality. It recognizes that all people should have access to clean potable water in order to

21
reduce the incidence of water borne diseases and reduce the time devoted by individuals to water
collection. The NEP guides that all programmes related to water should be implemented in such a
manner that mitigates environmental degradation and at the same time promotes enjoyment of the
asset by all beneficiaries and that the development of strategies for the efficient allocation,
investment and pricing require a common approach to the value of water. It also recognizes that the
participation of all stakeholders in water management must be promoted to instill a sense of
ownership of projects and programmes and that local communities and the private sector should be
encouraged to sustainably manage natural resources. This therefore creates a conducive policy
environment for community and private participation in delegated water supply management
systems in Malawi.

The Decentralization Policy (1998) and its legal instrument, the Local Government Act (1998),
aims to devolve administration and political authority to the local level and to transfer
implementation responsibilities to the local councils and promote popular participation in the
governance and development. The idea is to promote accountability and good governance by the
communities and mobilise them for socio economic development. This is in agreement with the idea
of engaging organized water users in managing water supply services in their areas.

In peri-urban communities in low-income countries, conventional centralized approaches alone are

not adequate in the delivery of water supply services as housing and settlements are unplanned,
residents do not have title to land and the poor cannot afford an individual connection. However,
there are opportunities for implementing water management systems based on a decentralized
approach that may offer opportunities for a more efficient water supply delivery service as well as
improvements in local environmental health conditions. Decentralized approaches also offer
increased opportunities for local stakeholder participation by involving the users in planning and
decision-making. Decentralized approaches give power to the users to actively participate in
planning, construction and management of their water supply systems and this enhances the
sustainability of the systems in place.

The Gender Policy (2008) provides for equal and equitable participation of women, men, girls and
boys and other vulnerable groups in the sound management, conservation and utilization of natural
resources and the environment for sustainable development. The policy strategy is to promote
22
women’s participation in community water management programmes and to empower both women
and men to sustainably manage their own water points.

The importance of gender in water resources use, development and management is well recognized.
Sustainable water resources management is possible only with the involvement of all stake-holders,
including women and the youth (Solanes and Villarreal, 1999). One of the principles of integrated
water resources management is that women play a central part in the provision, management and
safeguarding of water (ibid). As such, they need to be engaged in water resources management at all
levels. Similarly, youth cannot be left out of management programs. They are an emerging force as
activists in social, economic and environmental issues (Schaap and van Steenbergen, 2001).

The Dublin Statement on Water and Sustainable Development (UN, 1992) notes that women play a
central part in the provision, management and safeguarding of water. This pivotal role of women as
providers and users of water and guardians of the living environment has seldom been reflected in
institutional arrangements for the development and management of water resources. Acceptance
and implementation of this principle requires positive policies to address women's specific needs
and to equip and empower women to participate at all levels in water resources programmes,
including decision-making and implementation, in ways defined by them.

The Trustees Incorporation Act (1962) regulates the registration of associations and other
organizations charitable in nature. In Malawi, associations are non-profit making organisations
registered under the Trustees Incorporation Act. The association must be for the benefit or welfare
of the inhabitants of Malawi. An association is established as a legal entity in accordance with the
laws of Malawi and can be registered as a trust or an association. Thus, the Act enables water users
to form legal associations that can be contracted in a delegated water supply management model.

In summary, there is adequate policy and legal provision in the sector to guide the implementation
and operationalization of the delegated management models in peri urban cities of Malawi. Water
users, community groups and private individuals can form legal institutions that can enter into legal
contracts with water utilities to manage water supply services in peri urban areas. The policy and
legal instruments advocate for effective and efficient development, management and utilization of
water supply and encourage public-private partnerships. They also provide for the promotion of
appropriate management models for water supply systems and developing suitable management
23
arrangements for improved water supply and sanitation systems. In addition, there is policy
provision to promote women’s participation in community water management programmes and to
empower both women and men to sustainably manage their own water points.

However, there seems to be weak regulatory mechanisms, as in most cases, the utilities as the water
supply service provides also act as regulators themselves in a process known as self-regulation.
Thus, the tariffs and pricing mechanisms are still regulated by the utilities, thereby removing an
element of competition in the service delivery models that can result in a more efficient service and
more affordable tariffs to the end user. In addition, there are weak administrative documents and
implementation guidelines for use by implementers to operationalize the policy directions.

24
 CHAPTER 3: LITERATURE REVIEW

3.1 Decentralization and Service Delivery

Decentralisation is defined as the transfer of responsibility for planning, management, and resource
raising and allocation from central government (Rondinelli, 1981). Decentralisation focuses on the
relationship between the public sector, the private sector and the voluntary sector. Thus in the case
of this study, the focus is on the relationship between the utility operator, the Blantyre Water Board
and the organizations providing water on a resale basis to the water users in the poor low income
areas of Blantyre.

Decentralisation takes different forms, namely; Deconcentration, Delegation, Devolution,

Partnerships and Privatisation (Smith, 2001). This study has focused on delegated form of water
provision to low income areas. Delegation is when central governments transfer responsibility for
decision-making and administration of public functions to semi- autonomous organisations not
wholly controlled by the central government, but ultimately accountable to it (UNDP, 1997).
Delegated organisations may be exempt from constraints on regular service personnel and may be
able to charge user fees directly for the services.

Therefore in the case of water supply to Blantyre city, central government have delegated authority
and mandate to supply water to Blantyre city residents to Blantyre Water Board who in term have
delegated service provision to poor unconnected households in low income areas to WUAs, Water
Committees and Private Operators through some form of contracts.

Robinson (2007) notes that the developmental importance of decentralisation rests on a series of
assumptions and theoretical justifications. These are; that decentralisation leads to improvements in
equitable allocation of resources, welfare and equity, participation, accountability and
responsiveness on the part of local service providers. A leading rationale for decentralisation is that
it can lead to efficient and effective use of the scarce resources with the argument that productivity
of services can be maximized by local authorizes making decisions since they have local knowledge
and a better sense of local preference. In the process the local authorities can become more
accountable since the constituents they serve can provide immediate feedback. It is further argued

25
that decentralisation can improve equity and quality of service delivery since they the service
providers will be more sensitive to local variation and more open to feedback form users of the
resources (Azfar et al, 2004).

Robinson (2007) also argues that decentralisation may lead to increased access to information about
local needs, conditions and priorities which can then be incorporated into local development
planning. In theory, decentralisation should lead to localization of decision making, increased
resource availability and enhancement of local administrative performance.

However, unless decentralisation translates into improved service delivery and welfare of the poor,
the claims for positive development cannot easily be sustained.

Indeed, Bunki et al.(1999) cited in Robinson (2007), notes that there is no assurance that
decentralisation will lead to improved service delivery as there are challenges to a decentralisation
process. Some of the challenges include the risk of dominance by elites within the local
communities which may compromise equity in delivery of service and there may be insufficient
capacity at local level to manage infrastructure operations and maintenance.

In Africa, it has been reported that no real success in terms of improved service delivery can be
found at local level (Aamolekun as cited in Fransis and James, 2003). This is collaborated with
findings by Olowu and Wunsch (2004), who attributes such failure to factors such as over-
centralisation of resources, limited financial allocation to local authorities, a weak local revenue
base, lack of local planning capacity, limited conducive legislation and regulation and the absence
of meaningful local political process.

It may be tempting to conclude that decentralisation is no better that the centralized approach since
it does not bring about improved service delivery. However, available evidence points to the fact
that increased participation and accountability resulting from decentralized systems are benefits that
cannot be underestimated (Crook and Manor 1998, Blair 2000).

Decentralisation may not achieve improved service delivery because the actual effects of
decentralisation depend on the type of service, the design of decentralisation, the way it
implemented, the capacity of local administration, and wider economic, social and political
environment. Other government policies may affect decentralisation (Robinson, 2007).

26
Therefore the challenge is to find conducive environments under which decentralisation leads to
improved service delivery for the poor. These may be a combination of political, policy, financial,
institutional, and technical factors. Political commitment is necessary for the success of
decentralisation. Managerial and technical capacity of local authorities is an important factor to
ensure improved service delivery and also influences the behavior of staff towards service users.

3.2 Water Supply Governance

Water Governance refers to the range of political, organizational and administrative processes
through which communities articulate their interests, their input is absorbed, decisions are made and
implemented, and decision makers are held accountable in the development and management of
water resources and delivery of water services (Bakker, 2003)

Rogers (2002), adds that the concept of governance as applied to water refers to “the capability of a
social system to mobilise energies, in a coherent manner, for the sustainable development of water
resources. The notion includes the ability to design public policies and mobilise social resources in
support of them, which are socially accepted, which have as their goal sustainable development and
use of water resources, and to make their implementation effective by the different
actors/stakeholders involved in the process”.

Thus effective water governance should include clear and coherent organisational and institutional
roles and responsibilities and must be acceptable to the people that they affect; in this case the
primary stakeholders are the users themselves. The policies and regulatory framework should also
be in place to govern the implementation of sustainable water resource development and use.

The National Water Policy (2005) recognizes that different water resources management systems
can yield desired results with varying degrees of success if employed in different social and
geographical settings. It is clear the policy does not dictate management arrangements. It is upon
stakeholders to participate in deciding what the best management arrangement is in a particular
case. Thus the National Water Policy (2005) recognizes the different management arrangements
that can be applied in this country, namely the community based approaches, and the private sector
based approaches, the public supply arrangements and the private-public arrangements.

27
3.2.1 Water Service Delivery models
In Table 3.1 are the various service delivery models as identified by Lockwood and Smits, (2011)

Table 3.1: Service Delivery Models and Variants

Service Management Main variants in management models

Model
Community Based  Small scale systems directly managed and operated by water
Management committees
 Larger or more complex systems managed by water committees
with individual operational functions out-sourced to private
individuals or small companies
 Larger and more complex systems managed by water
committees with all O&M out-sourced to private operators
 Associations of water committees providing economies of scale
for certain O&M functions.
Public Sector Operators  Municipal water company providing management services to
rural communities
 Associations of municipal companies providing management
services to rural communities
 Local, regional and national utilities providing management
services to rural communities, including maintenance contracts
Private Sector Operators  PPPs, with private sector operators to maintain and manage
larger systems under contract
 Formal private operators working under licence
 Informal private sector providers
 NGOs and CBOs
Self-Supply  Individual households
 Clusters of or neighbouring households

Source: Lockwood and Smits (2011)

28
Miranda et al. (2011) identified five water service delivery models. These are the Public Provision;
the Private Provision; the Community based Provision; the Public-Private Partnerships and the
Multistakeholder provision. Table 3.2 is a summary of the different arrangements:

Table 1.2: Service Delivery Models

Water Management Service Model Definition/Explanation

a. Public Provision
b. Private Provision
c. Community based provision
When a central, sub-national, or local government is directly
providing water service with no other intervention. This can
be done via Water Boards or state-owned water companies.
When a Private company is providing the water service and
it is charging water “clients” directly for their services
When local communities and non-state and/or informal
providers are left generally alone providing their water
service. In most cases no big infrastructure is involved.

d. Public –Private Partnerships When there is an association and/or collaboration of public

– two different approaches – and private entities, providing water services using either a
market led and community market-led or community-led approach with the engagement
led of formal or informal community associations.
e. Multistakeholder provision Multistakeholder platforms for water management are
and/or Multistakeholder institutional innovations for combining the diverse agendas
arrangements of a number of actors who recognize a common
management problem and realize their interdependence in
solving it. These could be multi-actor; multi sectoral or
several organizations being involved.
Source: Miranda et al. (2011).

These different water management service delivery models are recognised in the Malawi National
Water Policy (2005) and the country has since engaged in the piloting and testing of different
models in different societal and geographical settings in order to improve service delivery to the
users. These forms of service delivery in Malawi include: the Public Provision, the Public-
29
Community led Provision; Community Based Management Models and the Public-Private Model.
The Public-Private model has existed at a small scale but will be tested on a larger in Blantyre’s
Mbayani Township by Blantyre Water Board. In Mbayani, Blantyre Water Board procured a Private
Operator to manage the whole network in the township with delegated responsibilities including
O&M, billing and expansion of communal water points. The Private Operator will be supplied
through water meters installed at each kiosk.

3.3Comparison of the Different Delegated Models of Water Supply

Literature is scant on the comparison on successes of the different types of models. What is clear is
that different models can be applied in different settings and no single model is the panacea for
improving water supply delivery applied to all settings. As Mughogho and Kosamu (2012)suggest,
other modes of delegated service delivery (State-Civil Society, State-Informal Sector and the State-
Civil Society-Informal Sector) which if formalized and institutionalized may extend the coverage to
the low-income neighbourhoods in a transparent and inclusive manner. They just need to be
supported by relevant policy and legislation. Indeed this is supported by Chirwa and Junge (2007)
who in identifying the various structures for managing communal water points in the low income
areas of Lilongwe and Blantyre (i.e. City Assembly, Water Boards, Committees, WUAs, Churches,
Development Associations, NGOs, Private Business Persons, and local politicians) concluded that
Private persons managing kiosks are efficient at distribution and increasing access but have a
tendency of overpricing and therefore leaving the poorest with no choice but to revert to
unprotected sources, which indicates that with proper regulation and monitoring, they can thrive in
water supply delivery to low income areas. Chira and Junge (2007) recommend that government
should adopt policies that allow liberalization of water supply distribution in low income areas to
include the private sector and associations. Miranda et al (2011) found that the most effective mode
in water supply service delivery to low income areas was the Small Scale Private Sector Providers
in a distribution contract with the reformed Water Boards (Miranda et al., 2011).

Table 3.3 is a location-specific analysis of the challenges and advantages of the different models of
supply to low income areas in Lilongwe.

30
Table 3.3: Comparison of Different Forms of Peri Urban Delegated Management Systems

Water Supply Arrangement/Mode Disadvantages Advantages

Management by Water Board:
The Board places its own kiosk
attendants to sell water and collect
funds
Management by Small
Private Operators:
Management of kiosks by private
business persons or entities
 Open to defrauding by  Employment to kiosk
revenue collectors and water attendants
sellers from the Water Board  Board able to collect revenue
from kiosks
 Money shortages are charged
to kiosk attendant rather than
absorbed by Water Board
Scale  Require good regulatory  Facilities would be
mechanism to ensure maintained
operator doses not  Bills settlement will be done
overcharge the poor  Services will be available
 Business to run the kiosks most of the times as the
would be offered to any incentive is profitability
interested bidder: the
communities would not have
a chance to run their own
systems.
 Profits are the incentive
rather than service expansion
 Vandalism is rife as
communities lack ownership
of the facilities

Management by Water point  Massive defaults of bills by

Committees: committees and
Communities appoint water disconnections
committees, one per kiosk  No sense of responsibility to
the rest of the community
 Difficult to regulate tariff
Management by Water User  Takes a lot of time to form.  Water sold at a tariff agreed
Associations: with the Board
Communities establish a legal  Association is owned by the
business entity and register it with community
government to operate all water
31
 facilities within a designated area.  Association accountable to
the users
 Association legally
registered by the government
and enters into a contract
with Board

Source: Water Aid (2008)

3.4 Delegated Water Supply Systems in Peri Urban Africa

In Kumasi Ghana, at around 2012, Water Supply for the Urban Poor (WSUP) supported a delegated
water supply management project whose aim was to improve water supply service delivery to the
Peri urban village of Kotei. Previously, there were numerous private borehole owners and water
vendors who were supplying Kotei and the peri urban Kumasi. Their services were unregulated and
the tariff varied from vendor to vendor. The new model was to explore a regulated delegated water
supply management mechanism for Koei by utilising ground water boreholes as a means of raw
water supply. The model involves the Ghana Urban Water Limited (GUWL), as the operating utility
of two mechanised boreholes. The boreholes supply to elevated water reservoirs which supply to
eight (8) kiosks which supply to 4,000 people. The water supply network and the kiosks are
managed by the Community Management Committee (CMC). The GUWL supplies the CMC with
bulk water through bulk meters installed at the reservoirs. The CMC appoints 8 water vendors to
manage the daily operations at the 8 kiosks. The water vendors sell to consumers. The water kiosk
vendors retain only 20% of the sales. The 80% of the funds is paid to CMC for onward payment to
GWCL for bulk water supplied. The surplus is used by the CMC for O&M and other expansion
works. The model is showing signs of sustainability and community ownership (WSUP, 2012).

In Naivasha, Kenya, as reported by WSUP in 2011, Private Borehole owners own and manage a set
of boreholes which supply raw water to a network that is managed by a private operator. The
network consists of pipelines, reservoirs and kiosks. There is a Water Board whose responsibilities
are to set water tariff and carry out capital maintenance of the system. The private operator carries
out raw water treatment at the reservoirs, operates the network and manages water treatment at
kiosk level. The private operator employs kiosks attendants who sells water to consumers and are
responsible for maintenance at kiosks. The end tariff is also set by the Water Board. Some successes

32
include local ownership, sustainability and capacity development al local level to manage water
services delivery (WSUP, 2011).

In Liberdade, a low income area in the peri urban Maputo, Mozambique whose population was
estimated (in 2010) at 25,000 people a delegated water supply management model involves, the
utility company that has the mandate to supply water to the peri urban areas of Maputo is Aqua de
Mozambique (AdeM). AdeM has fully delegated the management of the water supply services to
Liberdade to a Private Operator known as EMA. The responsibility of the Private Operator is to
carry out billing, new connections, revenue collection, operating and maintenance and overall
network management (WSP, 2010)

In Kisumu, Kenya,as reported by Water and Sanitation Program (WSP), a utility known as Kisumu
Water and Sewerage Company (KIWASCO), sells bulk water to Contractors known as Master
Operators (MOs). Master Operators manage sub-networks in form of billing customers, collecting
revenue, and performing minor maintenance. KIWASCO charges MOs bulk rate for consumption.
The MO retains any surplus revenue after paying the KIWASCO. MOs supply customers through
several modes such as: private connections, shared standpipes and commercial kiosks. The
KIWASCO retains licensing authority and regulatory powers for tariff and overall management
arrangements. Through delegating this way the KIWASCO reduces administrative costs and brings
services closer to the customers. There has been marked improvement in the technical and financial
performance of the KIWASCO and that water has become more affordable to the community
(WSP, 2009).

All the above case studies were undertaken to improve water supply service delivery, improve
technical and financial performance of the water utilities; bring about community participation and
ownership in the delivery of services and bring about local capacity in the management of water
supply services. They were set up as an effort to institute a sustainable system for the management
of water supply services to the peri urban residents. The case studies show that the objectives of the
delegated management systems are being achieved.

33
3.5 Specific Studies on Water Supply to Low Income Areas in Malawi
Water Aid (2008) found out that the system to distribute water through water kiosks under the
Community Committees was not working. Poor households owed huge sums to the Lilongwe Water
and were payingmore than those with individual household connections: prices at communal kiosks
in low-income areas were twice as high as those in high-income areas. Charging systems were
inconsistent and billing was not transparent. Political and traditional leaders corruptly controlled
kiosk management committees and failed to pass on funds they collected from communities to the
Lilongwe Water Board. The private operators who were able to pay their utility bills resold water to
poor people at high and unregulated tariffs. Many meters were vandalised but even those still
working were often not read for over a year. The water board charged customers for estimated, not
actual, consumption. Without consultation with users, the utility factored in arrears into water bills
to cover money misused by community leaders.

In their study of the water supply arrangements for Blantyre City, Malawi, Mughogho and Kosamu
(2012) argue that the challenge of small scale informal service providers is that it has been
associated with high charges, provision of poor quality water, unreliable and intermittent water
supply, and a general deterioration of water infrastructure. They argue that privatization of water
supply in developing countries may not work for all income groups. However, the study shows that
there are other modes of delivery which if formalized and institutionalized may extend the coverage
to the low-income neighbourhoods in a transparent and inclusive manner, and may be offered at
affordable rates. They identify those water supply arrangements that may work in a sustainable
manner for low income areas as State-Civil Society, State-Informal Sector and the State-Civil
Society-Informal Sector partnerships given that national authorities in Malawi spearhead public
policies that will effectively regulate the operations of water service providers.

This appears to concur with Chirwa and Junge (2007) who in identifying the various structures for
managing communal water points in the low income areas of Lilongwe and Blantyre (i.e. City
Assembly, Water Boards, Committees, WUAs, Churches, Development Associations, NGOs,
Private Business Persons, and local politicians) concluded that local committees and political
groups managed kiosks are beset with problems of non-payment of water bills and funds
squandering, the public managed kiosks become eventually uneconomic to manage as employment
and funds management is costly for public entities. Private persons managing kiosks, although they
are efficient at distribution and increasing access, have a tendency of overpricing and therefore
34
leaving the poorest with no choice but to revert to unprotected sources. Water User Associations in
contract with the water boards, (although sell at lower prices, the tariff may not be affordable to the
poorest) have managed to reconnect kiosks that were disconnected thereby greatly improving access
to water by the poor. In addition, it has become easier for the Water Boards to regulate consumer
tariff at WUA managed kiosks than other forms of supply in low income areas. The study
recommends that government should adopt policies that allow liberalization of water supply
distribution in low income areas to include the private sector and associations. In analyzing and
evaluating the impacts of different modes of water service delivery, the most effective mode was
found to be the Small Scale Private Sector Providers in a distribution contract with the reformed
Water Boards. It should be noted here that the WUAs, as they function at present represent a
community driven Private sector provider (Miranda et al., 2011)

Chipeta (2009) approached the study of service provision in Blantyre low income areas from a
gender perspective and argues that participation of user beneficiaries would be very important,
especially women, who are mostly affected with water problems. In some peri-urban areas in the
country women participation in water management has shown to be very effective. Chipeta (2009)
argues that in Malawi it has been proved that women when given the responsibility of managing
communal water management responsibilities both sanitation and water management improve
significantly and he further infers that for the success of programmes of service delivery among the
urban poor this strategy should be emulated in all unplanned settlements. Engaging local
communities to manage their water supply and claim their right to clean water is proving successful
in urban and rural areas

Community committee managed kiosks lack transparency in their management which leads to
failure to pay bills and consequent disconnections if water-committee members fraudulently use
revenue meant for bills, or some community members illegally use the water without paying
(Manda, 2009). This leads to frustration, and forces some households to buy water from other
individual households at even higher prices, or indeed to use well or stream water. Water Users
Associations (WUAs) emerged recently as legally constituted community trusts to give autonomy in
kiosk management and to ensure sustained water availability through effective revenue collection
and prompt bill payment. The WUAs have since taken over some of the kiosks that were managed
by water boards. The emergence of WUAs came from a backdrop of failure by communities to
settle water bills (Manda, 2009).
35
The idea is that due to the fact the WUAs are elected by the water user themselves and due to their
organisation and set up, they are said to be more accountable and responsive to water users and
therefore the water supply service levels improve. It is believed that WUAs organisational structure
would ensure that there are enough checks and balances in ensuring sound financial management
and be responsive to water supply operational and maintenance demands of the system.

As regards the Private Operators, the idea is that, unlike the volunteer water committees, the private
operators operate like any business: they will be motivated by profits and sustainability of the
business from which they accrue financial benefits. They would therefore ensure that bills are paid,
disconnections are avoided and break downs are repaired swiftly and that users are satisfied with
their services so that they can sustain the business of selling water.

Cammack (2012), details the extent of political interference in the management of kiosks in some
low income areas in Blantyre. Political functionaries have interfered with kiosks management since
their inception in the 1980s as they are seen as vehicles for funds mismanagement. The political
functionaries fail to pay water bills and kiosks end up disconnected. The study argues that “Water is
a public good but, when it is scarce, tariffs can be collected by providing it: fees paid by users can
be siphoned off; wages can be earned by selling it; a higher price can be demanded; allowances can
be received for managing it; kiosks can be sited on one’s property, which may not confer control
but certainly access; and respect (votes) can be earned by being seen to deliver it. Politicians and
their clients organized in party-political networks are keen to control it for these reasons. Naturally
they come into conflict with others, such as bureaucrats, chiefs, other politicians’ networks, water
boards, and NGOs.

3.6 Sustainability
3.6.1 Sustainable Development
The Stockholm United Nations Conference on the Human Environment in 1972 marked the
beginning of global efforts to place protection of the biosphere on the international law and policy
agenda and placing issues of sustainability as central to any development. In 1987, the Brundtland
report Our Common Future defined the concept of sustainable development as “development that
meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their
own needs” (Brundtland, 1987, p.24). The thrust of this statement stresses that economic
36
development will not be sustainable if the balance between economic, environment and social
pillars of sustainable development is not managed through a win-win process. It contains within it
two key concepts: the concept of needs, in particular the essential needs of the world’s poor, to
which overriding priority should be given, and the idea of limitations imposed by the state of
technology and social organization on the environments ability to meet present and future needs.

Our Common Future also provided the basis for the Rio Earth Summit in 1992, which put
sustainable development firmly on the international and local agenda for development. Three major
agreements – Agenda 21, the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development, and the statement
of principles for a global consensus on the management, conservation and sustainable development
of all types of forests – were adopted at the summit. As such sustainability has become the top item
on many development agendas since the Rio Earth Summit.

Pearce (1993) agrees with the Brundtland definition of sustainable development by stating that it is
the development of society in which society activities and processes do not negatively impact on the
development potential of future societies or where they are, attempts are made to mitigate against
such costs that may arise as a result of such activities and processes (as cited in Ceigis,
Ramanausskiene & Martinkus, 2009). Harwood (1990) defines sustainable development as a system
that gives rise to indefinite human utility and resource use that does not negatively affect the
favourable environment to human and other species. Realising that nothing physical can grow
indefinitely, WWF (1991) and Holdgate (1993) argues that sustainable development gives rise to
the improvement of the quality of life now and in future, but only within the restrictions of the
carrying capacity of the ecosystems and respecting the limits of the development process. Conway
and Barbier (1990) define sustainability as the ability to maintain productivity. This is in agreement
with the World Bank description of sustainable development as “development that continues”
(World Development Report, 1992)

As natural resources are finite, it is difficult to imagine any form of development without adverse
effects on the environment and therefore impacting on the need of future generations. In addition,
development is needed to satisfy the economic and social needs of the human race. Therefore the
solution to satisfying the needs and protection of the environment is to recognize the
interdependence of human activities and nature’s ecosystems and strike a balance in a manner that

37
development should consider measures that ensures regeneration of the environment so that future
needs are not compromised by present actions.

Ciegis et al. (2009) noted that sustainable development concept is difficult to define, complex and a
multi-domain issue. Therefore, it is common to best express sustainable development in terms of the
Brundtland commission’s report: that sustainable development is the development that satisfies the
needs of the current time period without jeopardizing the ability of future generations to satisfy their
needs.

In summarizing the different attempts to define sustainability above, it may be argued that
sustainable development programs are those that bring continued benefits, now and in future; have
social, economic and environmental considerations and bring about advancement in the quality of
life of the people.

3.6.2 Sustainability in the Water Supply Sector

In the water supply sector, aiming for sustainability means ensuring that water supply services and
interventions continue to operate satisfactorily and generate benefits over their planned life. In
broader terms, it means ensuring that water supply project interventions support, rather than
threaten, overall environmental sustainability.

Sustainability in the water supply sector has environmental, institutional, financial, technical, and
social dimensions. Fundamentally, it is about the operation and maintenance of installed facilities,
but it has to be considered from the very start of a project, to ensure that the prerequisites for long-
term sustainability are in place (Well, 1998).

Carter et al. (1999) considers a number of attributes as necessary for sustainability of water supply
schemes i.e. the service has to be desired and demanded by the community; the capital and/or
recurrent costs are affordable for the community; community ownership; the benefits must be felt
by the community and that community members must be trained and skilled to operate and maintain
the water scheme.

If the projects are supply driven and forced on the people, there will be no sense of ownership of the
resulting infrastructure and therefore the infrastructure would be prone to misuse, vandalism and

38
lack of repair. The technology and infrastructure should be such that users are able to pay for its
operation and maintenance; otherwise the whole system will fall in a state of disrepair with time.

Further, Carter et al. (1999) identified four elements as critical to sustainability of a community
water supply system: community motivation, maintenance, cost recovery and continuing support.
According to IRC International Water and Sanitation Centre (undated), a water and sanitation
service is sustainable when:

i. it is functioning and being used;

ii. it is able to deliver an appropriate level of benefits (quality, quantity, convenience,
continuity, health) to all, including the poorest women and men;
iii. it continues to function over a prolonged period of time (which goes beyond the life
span of the original equipment);
iv. its management is institutionalized;
v. its operation, maintenance, administrative and replacement costs are covered at the
local level;
vi. it can be operated and maintained at local level with limited but feasible external
support; and
vii. It does not affect the environment negatively.

Sustainability is also defined in a pragmatic sense as “whether or not something continues to work
over time”, (Abrams, 1998). In the context of a water supply system, this means that the system
must continue to supply the expected amount of water for an expected amount of hours in a day,
just as it was designed. However, Abrams definition is a generalized definition which does not take
into account some important parameters such as the need to protect the environment and whether
the system is maintained at local or central level.

In unpacking Abrams’ definition of suitability of a water supply project, Carter and Rwamwanja
(2006) argued that if the service continues to work, it implies that that service is being used,
maintained and paid for, otherwise it would deteriorate.

Abrams et al. (2000) further identified the natural environment; durable gender equity and
institutional arrangements as three more elements that affect the sustainability of a water supply and
39
sanitation project, especially in developing countries. Furthermore, sustainable water supply meets
service expectations and satisfies public health requirement (Binder, 2008).

In summary, authors agree on the elements of sustainability of water supply systems, in that they
have to be demand driven from the onset, their operation and maintenance should be financed by
the water users themselves, through payment of user fees that are sufficient to cover operation and
maintenance, including the user’s ability to carry out operation and maintenance of the technology
and infrastructure involved. They further argue that for a water supply system to be sustainable the
system itself must produce enough quantities as demanded by the users and of the quality that
satisfies public health requirements. Furthermore, they add that for such a system to operate over a
prolonged period of time, its management must be supported by institutions recognised by policy,
regulatory and administrative frameworks and that thesystem itself should not be a hazard to the
environment. In the recent times, when gender issues have become cornerstone of development
work, the authors argue that a truly sustainable water supply system is that which is gender
responsive and where women take a leading role in matter of water supply, since culturally, in most
developing countries, fetching of water is viewed as a female gender role.

3.7 Sustainability Attributes of Water Supply Systems

3.7.1 Financial Sustainability
Financial sustainability refers to the ability of the water supply system to generate enough funds to
cover the operational and maintenance and in some cases the replacement of major capital
infrastructure components of the water supply system (Harvey and Reed, 2006)

Financing strategies often consider the installation of infrastructure only while neglecting putting in
place financing mechanisms for operation and maintenance and replacement of capital items. As
Harvey and Reed (2006) notes, access to safe, sufficient and affordable water in poor communities
will not increase unless sustainable financing strategies are developed which ensure the
sustainability of water services that ensure operation and maintenance and long term rehabilitation
needs.

40
3.7.1.1 Cost Recovery
The term Cost recovery means that the system costs, including those related to infrastructure
development and operation and maintenance, should be paid for by the users. In order to ensure that
benefits continue to be derived from a water supply system, there is need for mobilisation of
maintenance funds that are sufficient to keep the system in operation and to replace system
components after their useful life.

The common trend is to place the burden of recurrent cost of O&M on the user community. Carter
et al. (1999) argues that whether this is right or wrong, it is a pragmatic response to the fact that
developing country governments are grossly under-resourced, and even international NGOs have
finite resources. Despite growing acceptance that it is unrealistic to expect poor communities to
meet full cost recovery, community financing to meet O&M costs is a critical issue in the quest for
sustainable water services (Evans, 1992). Oftentimes it is inaccurate to assume that poor people
have no resources at all to finance operation and maintenance which leads to unsustainable
subsidies. In fact many poor people are already paying a high price for substandard services (ibid.).

Tariffs are set with the aim of either full cost recovery or partial cost recovery depending on
affordability levels of the water users. Partial cost recovery is defined as tariff rates which cover
operation and maintenance while full cost recovery is defined as tariff rates that cover operation and
maintenance plus replacement of assets after their life cycle. The poorest people in developing
countries often pay more on average per litre of water than their better off compatriots (Webb and
Iskandarani, 2001).

Although the ethics of low income users paying more than others still exist, the fundamental issue is
to ensure that user tariff are fair, reasonable and realistic. If water user fees are prohibitive, users
tend to look to cheaper sources of water; these cheaper sources are in most circumstances are unfit
for human consumption.

3.7.1.2 Transparency and Accountability in management of funds

Since the burden of paying for operation and maintenance of water supply systems is often the
responsibility of user communities, it becomes imperative that measures are put in place to
incentivize communities against default. Accountability and transparency in the management of the
maintenance and operational funds is a major factor in incentivizing water user to pay for services.

41
Transparency and accountability can contribute significantly towards water users to contribute to
O&M costs (Tayong and Poubom, 2002).

It is important for water users to know how their contributions are going to be used and for water
management committees to report back to water users on the use of funds. Community sensitization
and clear explanations on expected O&M costs and hence how much tariff should be paid
confidence in the water users that their contributions are worth being paid, hence ensuring
sustainability of the water supply services they enjoy.

3.7.2 Operational and Maintenance

Sustainable O&M involves appropriate technology selection. Technology choice is an important
factor in ensuring sustainable water supply systems. Technology choice should ensure that the
technology is low cost, easy to maintain, simple to use and readily available. The spare parts used in
maintaining broken down or dysfunctional technologies should be readily available and affordable
(Brikke and Bredero, 2003). Appropriate technologies are integral to the concept of Village Level
Operation and Maintenance (VLOM) which emerged in the Water Decade (1981 – 1990). The
VLOM principles, which ensure that the technology be simple enough to be operated and
maintained at community level but robust enough to ensure long life of the equipment, are still
relevant in guiding the implementation of water supply projects in Malawi. In community rural
water supply in Malawi, in order to ensure sustainability of water supply services, it is necessary to
have a community ownership and management approach, making the end users directly responsible
for operation and maintenance.

Operation and maintenance is a crucial element of sustainability and a frequent cause of failure of
water supply facilities. Operation and maintenance is closely linked to other factors affecting
sustainability such as social, financial and institutional issues. For example, many facilities failures
are not technical ones. They may result from poor planning, inadequate cost recovery and lack of
external support (DFID, 1998). Brikke (2000) suggests that although O&M issues were only
considered after project completion in the past, the importance of O&M has gained considerable
importance and visibility recently and it appears project managers and designers are more conscious
of the links between improved O&M practices and sustainability of water supply services.

42
Additionally, in order to keep the physical infrastructure working, an adequate supply of spare parts
and maintenance tools is obviously of primary importance to long-term sustainability. Successful
O&M can be hampered by lack of spare parts or limited access to available spare parts. Once an
appropriate technology has been chosen, efforts should be made to develop local manufacturing
capacity and/or supply chains for spare parts for the technology. Where spare parts have to be
imported, it becomes a constraint to make them readily available in times of foreign exchange
shortages. In Malawi, policy direction has led to standardization of technology choices which in
turn has helped in stocking of a comprehensive range of spares easier.

Furthermore, a sustainable water supply system will ensure that there is water available at the water
point and that the water quantity and quality has remained as designed.
As can be deduced from this, successful O&M has direct links to system finance and water
availability. As Abrams, Palmer and Hart ( 2000) point out, if the water continues to flow, it means
financing operation and maintenance is available, the water source is adequate, and design and
construction was adequate.

It may also be argued that for a water supply system to be sustainable, it must cater for the need of
new users. The system should be able to be expanded to cater for population growth and also
expanded to meet the need of those that are not serviced yet. Expansion of water supply to new
users must be planned and designed before construction and must be taken care by the O&M issues
during use. This means that the tariff rates should be enough to cover system expansion during its
design life.

3.7.3 Community and Social Aspects

3.7.3.1 Community participation
Community participation in development programmes is fuelled by governments’ inability (largely
because of lack of resources) to maintain water supply infrastructure (Carter et al., 1999). However,
communities rarely have the sustainable capacity to manage their own water supply infrastructure,
in complete independence of government or non-governmental organizations. Therefore it is
important that the institutional framework within which community participate in development
projects that affect them allows for that external support to take place when needed.

43
It is common practice for village water schemes to be managed by a village committee of some sort;
the creation of which is intended to enable communities to have a major role in the project, to have
a sense of ownership over the scheme and to ensure its on-going operation and maintenance
(Harvey and Reed, 2004). It has been suggested that ‘beneficiary participation is the single most
important factor contributing to project effectiveness’ (Narayan, 1994). Without participation, it has
been argued that systems are unlikely to be sustainable even if spare parts and repair technicians are
available. It is therefore important for communities to be fully involved in the formation of the
different forms of DWSSs. Participation is viewed as a tool for improving the efficiency of a
project, assuming that where people are involved they are more likely to accept the new project and
partake in its on-going operation. It is also seen as a fundamental right; that beneficiaries should
have a say about interventions that affect their lives (Pretty, 1995).

Communities should be allowed to participate in projects that affect them. Kumar (2002) asserts
that participation is a key instrument in creating self-reliant and empowered communities,
stimulating village-level mechanisms for collective action and decision-making. It is also believed
to be instrumental in addressing marginalization and inequity, through clarifying the desires,
priorities and perspectives of different groups within a project area.

In conducting a comparative research to review a range of practices in accessing water and

sanitation by peri urban poor residents and producers in five cities in developing countries i.e. Cairo
(Egypt), Caracas (Venezuela), Chennai (India), Dar es Salaam (Tanzania) and Mexico City, Allen at
al (2006) found out that innovative ways of service provision can be achieved by communities
themselves using a broad range of individual and collective solution to varying degree of
effectiveness. In addition, they contend that conventional centralised approaches to service
provision fail to recognise that the urban poor are exposed fully to market forces and hence should
not be regarded as less acceptable investment base.

In a critique of the concept of community water supply when it is invoked as an alternative to

privatization, Bakker (2008) points out that cooperatives, and other similar governance structures,
may also be able to incorporate some of the recognized advantages of delegated water governance:
access to 'local' expertise which can improve the quality of decision‐making; the ability to adapt
regulatory programmes to meet local conditions; empowerment of stakeholders (particularly those

44
traditionally marginalized); reinforcement of 'social trust' between stakeholders, and reduction of
conflict over competing uses; greater cooperation in information‐sharing; greater political
legitimacy (and thus enforceability) of water management goals (Bakker, 2008).

According to the World Bank's World Development Report (WDR) of 2004, inclusion and the
ability to participate are some of the most important elements when empowering poor people, along
with access to information, accountability, and the development of local organizational capacity.
Therefore sustainability of community development programmes is linked to popular participation
of the affected communities..This notion is supported by Ahmed and Sohail (2003) who showed
that communities, with support from government agencies, can generate cooperative action to
address their basic needs. It is also obvious that government alone cannot deliver the services, due
to its limited capacity to address the problems. It will have to rely on a mechanism of partnership
that evolves from the people’s initiative and then moves towards permanence thereby increasing the
likelihood that development projects that affect them are sustainable.

Savenije and Van der Zaag (2008) claim that empowering the public through participation in water
management processes is one of the major challenges to the establishment of transparent decision-
making procedures, achieving access to safe and affordable water and protecting the public from
water-related diseases. Dungumaro and Madulu (2003) also argue that local community
participation in water management could provide crucial experience when it comes to finding
achievable solutions to water-related problems. Therefore participation and transparency contribute
to sustainability of water management interventions.

3.7.3.2 Tariff affordability to most users

Tariff rates are dependent on demand i.e. consumption levels of the water users. Low consumption
implies low volume of water sold at the tap. The resulting low revenue from the tap can be
countered by increasing the tariff rates in order to cover the system operational and maintenance
costs. However, an increase in tariff rates can, in turn, result in a further reduction in water
consumption and a consequent further deterioration of revenue. This kind of vicious circle can have
a detrimental effect on the financial sustainability of water supply systems. If water users do not pay
for operation and maintenance, the water supply system will become unsustainable and will
collapse (Black, 1985)

45
In order to ensure demand of services, a demand responsive approach is recommended in the
selection of projects to be implemented. UNDP (2011) argues that an expression of demand
indicates an expression of value on the services demanded. This is echoed by Harvey and Reed
(2004) who indicate that demand at project inception is a measure that users will be willing to pay
for services once implementation is complete.

It is therefore important to consider a right balance between tariff rate and consumption rates in
order to ensure that even the most vulnerable water users are not precluded to the benefits of the
water supply system because the tariff is too high for their affordability but at the same time that the
tariff rates are high enough to cover the operation and maintenance of the water supply system to
ensure sustainability and continued benefits accruing from the system.

3.7.3.3 Water User satisfaction with water supply service and governance
Parker and Mathew (2001) expressed that there are two basic definitional approaches of the concept
of customer satisfaction. The first approach defines satisfaction as a process and the second
approach defines satisfaction as an outcome of a consumption experience. These two approaches
are complementary, as often one depends on the other.

Yi (1990) expressed that customers buy products or services with pre-purchase expectations about
anticipated performance, once the bought product or service has been used, outcomes are compared
against expectations. If the outcome matches expectations, the result is confirmation. When there
are differences between expectations and outcomes, disconfirmation occurs. Positive
disconfirmation occurs when product or service performance exceeds expectations. Therefore,
satisfaction is caused by positive disconfirmation or confirmation of customer expectations, and
dissatisfaction is the negative disconfirmation of customer expectations (ibid).

For this study, customer satisfaction definition used is that of Homburg and Bruhn (1998) which is
“an experience-based assessment made by the customer of how far his own expectations about the
individual characteristics or the overall functionality of the services obtained from the provider
have been fulfilled”. The relevance of this definition to this study is that it indicates that customers
assess the water supply services based on experience of use and the rating is done in accordance
with the water supply services attributes. In this study, customer satisfaction with the DWSMs
services will be evaluated based on customers’ experience of water supply level of service, like
among others, water quality, quantity, hours of operation and tariff.
46
Despite the importance of extending water supply services to improve access to safe drinking water,
little is done to assess user satisfaction with drinking water services especially in poor and peri
urban areas. Investigating user satisfaction with these services is increasingly seen as an important
element in the improvement of water supply services (Deichmann and Lall, 2007). Customer
feedback and evaluation of services is considered an effective means for improving the services.
The rationale behind customer feedback as a means of improving service delivery is that collective
or organized feedback can be used to demand accountability and transparency from service
providers thereby contributing to sustainability of the service provision.

In a water supply system, water user satisfaction has an impact on its sustainability. If water users
are satisfied, they are more willing to pay for the service and provide time and labour to engage in
the management of the system. There are many factors affecting water user satisfaction with a water
supply service, among others, water quantity, water quality, reliability, accessibility, water pressure,
and hours of operation (Sara and Katz,1997). Water users’ satisfaction may also be affected by
water supply governance, and conduct of water supply institutions and their personnel.

3.7.3.4 Inclusion of all users in access to water

In order to achieve the health objectives of a sustainable water supply system, it is important to
ensure that systems put in place for operational and maintenance does not preclude even the most
vulnerable water users. As is the case with many communicable diseases, water borne disease will
be spread in the community if the vulnerable users are attacked due to exclusion from safe water
services, either because of affordability or physical access.

In this study vulnerability is limited to the urban poor that are priced out of accessing improved
water supply services from communal water points usually because they cannot afford the tariff
rate. It is essential that the most vulnerable, members of the community are not priced out of the
opportunity to access safe water. In this respect, issues of affordability and cost recovery are vital,
since formal systems require operation and maintenance charges to be met. The Malawi Water
Policy (2005) does not detail how the full cost recovery of O&M should be achieved while
guaranteeing access to water by the vulnerable communities. Therefore it is expected that water
supply management systems work out strategies to ensure that the vulnerable have access to water
by among other things, providing cross subsidies or coupons.

47
3.7.4 Management and Institutional Arrangements
Institutions are defined as “the formal and informal rules and practices that govern behavior of
different groups” (Isham, 2002). The strength of a community institution is its ability to affect rules
and provide mechanisms for enforcement and monitoring. If a community exhibits a strong social
capital, their leaders are able to organise effective rules and enforcement mechanisms and are likely
to manage resources properly, (Ostrom, 2009). Water management committees and other similar
structures foster strength in a water management system because they are built on a basis of self –
regulation and as such are primary components of sustainability.

Harvey and Reed (2006) argue that if community managed systems are to be sustainable, there is
need to have ongoing external support from an overseeing institution (e.g. water supply utility) to
provide encouragement and motivation, monitoring, participatory planning, capacity building and
specialist technical assistance.

Abrams et al. (2000) identifies institutionalized external support to community water systems as key
to sustainability beyond the life of a project. It is clear therefore that if projects are to survive and
real services are to be delivered, equal if not more attention, investment and expertise needs to be
targeted at ensuring that the institutional support systems are established and have the capacity to
perform their functions.

It is vital to ensure sustainability of the services that there is maintained some form of sustainable
external support. This could be in form of government institutions or civil society. To leave the
management of water supply services wholly in the hand of communities may threaten the
sustainability of services. Thus, the VLOM conceptualization of the community as an island
neglects the role of external support agencies, such as the government, in achieving sustainability.

In the case of the DWSSs in Blantyre, this means that external support from government, the
Blantyre Water Board, Blantyre City Council and civil society are critical to their sustainability.
Policy, legal and administrative framework that supports the establishment and operations of the
DWSSs must be in place. Clear contractual agreements must be in place to sustainably regulate the
operations of the DWWSs.

48
In Blantyre peri urban areas, water committees, private operators and WUAs are responsible for
O&M, collection of tariff and payment of water bills from the utility organization, the Blantyre
Water Board. Blantyre Water Board provides a regulatory service which ensures that tariff setting
is done in collaboration with the delegated management structures (DWSMSs), that performance
contracts are signed with the management structures and monitors the performance of the
DWSMSs. The Ministry responsible for water supply manages policy implementation and carries
our regulatory functions. Water Supply in Blantyre City is the responsibility of Blantyre Water
Board, who is managed by the Water Works Act of 1995 to supply water to areas within the city.
The Blantyre City is the overall manager of land in the City and as city fathers they also carry out
health and hygiene functions in the low income areas. The Water Policy (2005) recognises that the
DWSMSs can play an important role in extending service coverage in rural and peri urban
communities. The policy has provisions for the implementation of different water supply
management systems including delegated models. As has been clearly demonstrated by Blantyre
Water Board, who have since 1985, allowed Water Committees to operate communal water points
and have recently been facilitating the establishment of the WUAs, and Private Operators, there
exists an environment that allows delegated models in Blantyre city.

3.7.5 Policy and Regulation

Water Governance refers to the range of political, organizational and administrative processes
through which communities articulate their interests, their input is absorbed, decisions are made and
implemented, and decision makers are held accountable in the development and management of
water resources and delivery of water services (Bakker, 2003)

Rogers (2002), adds that the concept of governance as applied to water refers to “the capability of a
social system to mobilise energies, in a coherent manner, for the sustainable development of water
resources”. The notion includes the ability to design public policies and mobilise social resources in
support of them, which are socially accepted, which have as their goal sustainable development and
use of water resources, and to make their implementation effective by the different
actors/stakeholders involved in the process”.

Thus effective Water Governance should include clear and coherent organisational and institutional
roles and responsibilities and must be acceptable to the people that they affect; in this case the

49
primary stakeholders are the users themselves. The policies and regulatory framework should also
be in place to govern the implementation of sustainable water resource development and use.

In Malawi, the National Water Policy (2005) recognizes that different water resources management
systems can yield desired results with varying degrees of success if employed in different social and
geographical settings. It is clear that the policy does not dictate management arrangements. It is
upon stakeholders to participate in deciding what the best management arrangement should be put
in place. Thus the National Water Policy (2005) recognizes the different management arrangements
that can be applied in this country, namely the community based approaches, and the private sector
based approaches, the public supply arrangements and the private-public arrangements.

The legal instrument for regulation of water resources management is the Water Resources Act
(1969) and its subsequent amendments. The Act provides for the control, conservation,
apportionment and use of water resources. It established the Water Resources Board as a regulator
of abstraction and use of public water.

The Water Works Act (1995) provides the legal framework for implementing the 1994 Water
Resources Management Policy and Strategies. The Water Works Act (1995) has established five
Water Boards including the Blantyre Water Board. Each Board has a management established to
run its day-to-day operations. Blantyre Water Board is a parastatal organization established and
reconstituted under the Malawi Water Works Act No. 17 of 1995 to supply potable water for
commercial, industrial, institutional and domestic use in the supply area of Blantyre City and
surrounding areas. The Water Works Act (1995) empowers the Boards to delegate water supply
service delivery to peri urban areas as the Boards see fit.

3.7.6 Gender
With respect to sustainability, one aspect of governance that has been receiving increased attention
is the role that women play in the provision, management and safeguarding of water.

The importance of gender in water resources use, development and management is well recognized.
Sustainable water resources management is possible only with the involvement of all stake-holders,
including women and the youth (Solanes et al, 1999). One of the principles of integrated water

50
resources management is that women play a central part in the provision, management and
safeguarding of water (ibid): as such, they need to be engaged in water resources management at all
levels. Similarly, youth cannot be left out of management programs. They are an emerging force as
activists in social, economic and environmental issues (Schaap and van Steenbergen, 2001).

The Dublin Statement on Water and Sustainable Development (UN, 1992) notes that women play a
central part in the provision, management and safeguarding of water. This pivotal role of women as
providers and users of water and guardians of the living environment has seldom been reflected in
institutional arrangements for the development and management of water resources. Acceptance
and implementation of this principle requires positive policies to address women's specific needs
and to equip and empower women to participate at all levels in water resources programmes,
including decision-making and implementation, in ways defined by them. Within the MDGs, gender
equality is considered an end in itself as it is regarded as a means of achieving the primary goal of
sustainable access to safe water. Traditionally, women have had the role of collecting water for the
household. If a water system breaks down, it is the women who have to travel long distances to
fetch water. Hence women and girls tend to benefit most when water quality and quantity improves.
They tend to take shorter trips carrying heavy containers, they may have more time for income
generating activities and the girls are able to spend more time in school. As such it is appropriate
that they should have a role in decision making involving water supply services.

The Gender Policy, Malawi (2008) provides for equal and equitable participation of women, men,
girls and boys and other vulnerable groups in the sound management, conservation and utilization
of natural resources and the environment for sustainable development. The policy strategy is to
promote women’s participation in community water management programmes and to empower both
women and men to sustainably manage their own water points

3.7.7 Environment: Inclusion of environmental issues in the management model

The National Environmental Policy, NEP (2004) and its legal instrument, the Environmental
Management Act (1996) have as their primary objective, the efficient and effective management of
water resources so as to promote its conservation and availability in sufficient quantity and
acceptable quality. The National Water Policy (2005) recognizes that all people should have access
to clean potable water in order to reduce the incidence of water borne diseases and reduce the time
devoted by individuals to water collection. The NEP guides that all programmes related to water

51
should be implemented in such a manner that mitigates environmental degradation and at the same
time promotes enjoyment of the asset by all beneficiaries and that the development of strategies for
the efficient allocation, investment and pricing require a common approach to the value of water. It
also recognizes that the participation of all stakeholders in water management must be promoted to
instil a sense of ownership of projects and programmes and that local communities and the private
sector should be encouraged to sustainably managed natural resources. This therefore creates a
conducive policy environment for community and private participation in delegated water supply
management systems in Malawi.

Table 3.4 summarizes the sustainability attributes and qualifiers to be studied.

Table 3.4: Sustainability Factors and Qualifiers

Sustainability Factor Sustainability Qualifiers
Policy and Regulation  Policy has provisions for different management
systems including delegated models
 Government water utility organizations do not
hinder delegated models

Management and Institutional Arrangements  Clear institutions available to support delegated

management models.
 Government has sufficient regulatory and
monitoring roles

Financial Issues  Water Tariffs are sufficient to cover costs (Cost

recovery)
 Transparency and Accountability in management
of funds

Operational issues Service levels  O&M sufficient and localized

 Water availability at water point
 Water Supply quantity
 Water supply quality
 Appropriate technology for water supply
 Availability of spare part supply chains
 Expansion of water supply to new users

52
Community and Social Aspects  Tariff affordability to most users
 Are the users happy with quality and quantity of
water supplied
 Vulnerability included in the system- all users’
access to water.

Gender Issues  Gender inclusion in the management model

Environment  Inclusion of environmental issues in the

management model

53
 CHAPTER 4: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

4.1 Study Area

The Study area covers the 21 Low Income areas and Peri urban areas of Blantyre city, as indicated
in Table 2.1 and shown on Maps (Figure 1 and Figure 2).

4.2 Research Approach

The Approach employed in the study was Deductive Research working from a set of known factors
that determine sustainability to study the comparative sustainability of the DWSMs in Blantyre city.
This study employed both qualitative and quantitative approach of studying the sustainability
qualifiers as identified in the Chapter 3. Since this study’s main objective was to explore the
sustainability of DWSMs in Blantyre, it attempted to bring about a better understanding and
experiences of the developments and operations of the DWSMs.

There are currently eight (8) Water User Associations in Blantyre established at different period in
time since 2007. This study carried out an analysis of all the eight (8) Water User Associations. The
study collected and used data from areas with other forms of DWSMs and made a comparative
analysis on sustainability.

At the time of this study, there were five hundred and sixty five (565) community water points in
Blantyre city, some under the management of the WUAs and some under management of either the
private operators or community water point committees. All the 565 communal water points were
studied.

At each water point, permission was sought to interview a water seller. After granting permission to
be interviewed, the interview protocol was used to source information pertaining to that water point.
The data was collected in the month of March, 2013.

4.3 Data Collection

The study employed three distinct steps in collecting data for analysis as follows:

54
4.3.1Water point data collection
Using an Interview Protocol (Appendix 1)through a structured interview data required for
sustainability analysis was collected. The following data was captured using the Interview Protocol
a. Functionality of water points
b. Water availability at a water point
c. Quantity and quality of water supply
d. Hours of operation of the water supply service
e. Management and administration of the kiosks
i. Tariff collection
ii. Management of funds collection
f. Operation and maintenance of the infrastructure
g. Availability of spare parts for maintenance
h. Expansion of the system to meet increases demand due to population growth

4.3.2 Desk Study

Additionally, a desk study was carried out to study Delegated Water Supply Management
Systems’ (DWSMSs) operational and financial records. For each DWSMS, the study captured
data on the sustainable qualifiers as identified in Chapter 2. In summary, the following data
was collected using the following approaches and tools. The following data was captured using
the Interview Protocol:

a. DWSMs Governance structures

b. DWSMs organisational administrative structures
c. Financial records (Bank accounts and relate financial data that indicate financial
sustainability)
d. Gender Issues
e. Environmental Issues

4.3.3 Use of Secondary Data

Additionally, the study used data collected by Water for People to assess independent feedback
from water users on management and governance of DWSMSs. Water for People is an international
55
NGO working in water supply and sanitation in low income areas of Blantyre and has facilitated the
formation of the eight WUAs through a Blantyre Water Board project. Data was used to assess and
compare the satisfaction of users with the availability, quality and value for money of the water they
purchase from the water points managed by the DWSMSs and the perceptions of users on the
performance of the WUA trustees and secretariats in terms of the management of the water points
and the governance of the WUA itself. To provide a wider comparison, data from water users in
communities where there are no WUAs was used – where water is sold by BWB committees and
private sellers. Conventional statistical analysis was used to produce performance ratings of WUAs
.

The data from Water For People was desegregated into the following age and sex categories
 Men and women
 Older and younger than 18 years old.

All data responses from the Water for People governance data were recorded on a scale of 0-10
where 0=extremely unhappy/dissatisfied and 10=extremely happy/satisfied. The final Governance
section included a ‘don’t know’ option for users who are not informed about the WUA’s operations.

4.6 Data Analysis

The data collected was entered in an excel worksheet using the coding of one (1) for Yes response
and zero (0) for No response. For each DWSMS, an analysis was made on all the variables on the
interview protocol and the summarised results compared to each other for all the DWSMs.

Since the study design attempted to provide systematic information about an observed phenomenon
(sustainability), which is defined by a set of variables whose data were collected during the
interview process, descriptive statistics is used to describe the extent to which the sustainability of
the water management is being achieved by the DWSMs. Use was made of percentage frequency
distributions from observed data to describe sustainability of the DWSMs.

The study compared the sustainability variables for the WUAs to those for the water supply
management outside the WUA model. As such correlational descriptive statistics was employed to
establish the relationships between Sustainability (WUA) and that for management systems outside
the WUA.

56
In terms of use of secondary data from Water For People, the study analysed satisfaction responses
on ten (10) factors from a total of 3017 respondents across the 21 Low income areas and across all
the management models.

4.6.1. Conceptual Framework for Analysis

As detailed in Literature review in Chapter 3and summarized in Table 5, the variables that
determine sustainability include Policy and Regulation, Management and Institutional
Arrangements; Financial factors; Operational factors, Community and Social aspects, Gender and
the Environment.

For a water supply management system to be sustainable there is required to have policy, regulatory
and legislative provisions that support it (Rogers, 2002). In the absence of policy and legislative
backing, a system becomes weak and unsupported and its very establishment and long term
existence can easily be threatened. In addition, it is important that there are adequate regulatory and
monitoring mechanisms to ensure that the contractual provisions guiding the operations of the
delegated management systems established are not breached. For example, in the case of water
supply, regulation ensures that water users are supplied with water of good quality and that user fees
are not prohibitive.

Furthermore, Management and Institutional Arrangements ensure that there are clear institutions
available to support DWSMSs and that government has sufficient regulatory and monitoring roles.
Institutionalized external support to DWSMSs is key to ensuring that services provided are
sustainable (Harvey and Reed, 2006, Abrams et al., 2000).

Financial sustainability refers to the ability of a water supply system to cover for O&M and in
some cases even replacement of capital assets after their useful life cycle has expired. Therefore, to
ensure sustainability of DWSMSs, there is required to have tariffs or user fees that cover those costs
and there is transparency and management of funds (Harvey and Reed 2006; Carter et al., 1999;
Evans, 1992; Webb and Iskandarani, 2001)

Operational sustainability is concerned with the actual operation and management of the water
supply infrastructure so that it continues to offer benefits as was designed. This means that
DWSMSs should have sufficient capacity to carry out O&M to ensure that water is available at a
57
water point of enough quantity and quality that meet standards. It also infers that the technology
used in water supply service delivery should be appropriate and that spares for maintenance of
broken down systems are readily available. A truly sustainable water supply system should be able
to cater for new users either as a result of population increase or new settlements (Abrams et al.,
2000; Brikke, 2000; Brikke and Brederro, 2003).

It is not just enough to ensure that water of good quality flows from the water point in adequate
amounts. If water users cannot afford or are dissatisfied with the service, sustainability will be
threatened. One of the factors that may cause dissatisfaction and therefore hinder access to a water
supply service is prohibitive tariff. In order to ensure sustainability of the service, it has to be paid
for with tariffs that are affordable to most users. To achieve the objective of universal access to safe
water, vulnerable groups who cannot afford should be considered in the design of the tariffs so that
they too can have access to safe water (Black, 1985; UNDP, 2011; Harvey and Reed, 2006).

Gender and the protection of the environment are deemed necessary for the long term sustainability
of the water supply service. Traditionally women have had the role of collecting water and therefore
understand the importance of a water supply service that continues to work and offer benefits in a
sustainable manner (UN, 1992; Solanes et al., 1999). In addition it is important for the sustainability
of a water supply service that the environment which is central to the hydrological cycle is not
disturbed.

For each of the DWSMSs, these variables are studied and analysed to determine the variation of
sustainability across the different DWMSs.

58
 Policy and
Regulation

Sustainability
Management and (WUA)
Institutional
A Arrangements
 Collection of Tariffs at Water point
 Sufficiency of tariff to cover O&M
 Transparency and Accountability Financial
in Management of funds Sustainability
Sustainability
B Water point
 O&M sufficiency Operational Sustainability Committees
 Water availability at Water point Sustainability
 Water supply quantity
 Water supply quality
 Availability of spareparts for O&M Community
 Expansion of supply to new users And Social
Aspects Sustainability
C Private
 Water user satisfaction Operator
 Tariff affordability Environment
 Access to all users

Dependent Variable per

DWSMS
Gender Issues
Water point sustainability (Boxes A&B) &
Water User Satisfaction (Box C)
Intervening Variables Independent Variable Dependent Variable

Figure 4: Conceptual Framework for Analysis

59
4.6.2 Water supply sustainability Analysis
Having considered the literature review on sustainability of water supply and sanitation projects, the
study attempts to lay down a theoretical/conceptual framework which is going to guide the research:
in determining the sustainability of delegated water supply systems for Blantyre peri Urban and low
income communities.

The study employed two data sets to analyze the sustainability of DWSMSs in Blantyre peri urban
areas.
The first data set (water point sustainability) analyses the sustainability of water supply on the
supply side by the DWSMSs. In this, the study analyses the DWSMSs in their role as water supply
organizations in terms of financial, operational and maintenance functions. In summary, the study
attempts to establish whether water supply provision is sustainable in terms of the water points
being functional, have an institutionalized operational and maintenance structures, supply enough
quantity of water of acceptable quality accessible to all users at tariffs that are affordable to most
users and that whether the systems are able to expand to accommodate new users, either from
population growth or new settlers.

The second data set (water user satisfaction) analyses satisfaction of the service on the demand side
of the DWSMSs, to establish how, on the user side, they perceive the level of service of the water
supply service. In this part of the study, the aim is to establish levels of satisfaction of users as
regard provision of services. This includes analyzing water user satisfaction with the governance
arrangements of the DWSMSs; how they are viewed by the water users in their functions of
financial management, engagement of water users in the management and transparency and
accountability in their operations. This second part is important in establishing the sustainability in
terms of governance, gender inclusion, water user participation and financial management.

In terms of financial management, the first set of data helps establish whether the DWSMSs are
mobilizing enough funds through collection of pay-per-fetch tariff while the second set of data
helps establish whether there is satisfactory financial management of the funds collected through
transparency and accountability to the water users.

60
Additionally, the study attempts to establish the relationships between the supply side and the
demand side of the water service provision by the DWMSSs.

4.6 2.1 Water Point Sustainability Analysis

For each water point, there were 13 sustainability metrics derived from Table5 in Chapter 3 that
were studied. Then data was aggregated for each DWSMS. Below, in Table 4.1 are the
sustainability metrics and the summarized data for a DWSMS (Michiru WUA).

61
Table 4.1: Water point sustainability Scoring -1

Sustaina Total
bility Number of water number
Metric Michiru WUA Level of Sustainability points for a Yes, or of water
No. Metrics No response points
Frequency Frequency
Metric Yes No Total Yes No
1 Has Improved Water Point 49 0 49 100% 0%
2 Number of Users Meets Standards 46 3 49 94% 6%
3 Majority of Community Members Have
Access to the Improved System 43 6 49 88% 12%
4 There Is Enough Drinking Water Every
Day Of The Year 21 28 49 43% 57%
5 The System Was Down For 1 Day or Less
In The Last 30 Days 34 15 49 69% 31%
6 There Are No Current Problems With The
Water Point 18 31 49 37% 63%
7 Quantity Of Water Available Meets
Standards 38 11 49 78% 22%
8 Water Was Available On The Day Of The
Visit 38 11 49 78% 22%
9 A Tariff Or User Fee Is Collected For
Water 49 0 49 100% 0%
10 There Is A Positive Balance Listed In The
Financial Records 49 0 49 100% 0%
11 Spare Parts are Available In or Near the
Community 49 0 49 100% 0%
12 There Is Someone Responsible For Water
Point Management, Operations And
Maintenance 49 0 49 100% 0%
13 The System Has Been Expanded To
Incorporate New Users 49 0 49 100% 0%

62
The next procedure was to analyse and determine how each water point scored on the 13
sustainability metrics, and summarise for each DWSMS.

Table 4.2: Water point Sustainability Scoring-2

Level of Sustainability Number of

Michiru WUA Scores out of 13 Water Points Frequency
No improved System 0 0 0.0%
Unlikely to be Sustainable 1-9 11 22.4%
Highly Likely to be
Sustainable 10-13 38 77.6%
Total Water Points 49 100.0%

The rationale behind the scoring is as follows: All the 13 sustainability metrics are an important
element and/or indicator that water supply is sustainable at a water point, therefore a score of 1 was
allocated to a Yes answer to each question on the interview protocol, otherwise a 0 score was
entered. Conditions for sustainability were considered adequate if a water point score was between
the 3rd percentile and the maximum, (i.e. scores between 10 and 13). Each water point is scored 1-
13 points depending on the number of Yes responses on Table 4.1. Therefore if, taking Table 4.2 as
an example for Michiru WUA, 22.4% of the water points scored between 1-9 Yes responses on
questions as outlined in Table 4.1and 77.6 % of the water points scored between 10-13 Yes
responses. This was done for all the 565 water points and grouped under WUAs, Water Committees
and Private Operators to get aggregated scores.

A percentage distribution of sustainable water points was then compared across the DWSMSs.
Qualitative data captured under the Desk study was also analysed in relation to the sustainability
factors and qualifies identified in Table 3.4of Chapter 2.

4.6.2.2 Water Users Satisfaction Analysis with the DWSMSs

The study used quantitative data from Water for People, where the respondents were asked to
provide their opinions on the importance of the factors affecting water supply management and
63
governance by scores from 0 to 10, where ‘0’ represents the least satisfaction and ‘10’ the most
satisfaction.

To determine the relative ranking of the factors, the scores were then transformed to importance
indices based on the following formula.

Relative satisfaction index =

where w is the weighting given to each factor by the respondents, ranging from 0 to 10, A is the
highest weight (i.e. 10 in the study) and N is the total number of samples. Based on RSI equation,
the relative satisfaction index (RSI) can be calculated ranging from 0 to 1. (Tam et al, 2000, as cited
in Tam et al., 2004).

Table 4.3shows the relative satisfaction index of each factor affecting water user satisfaction.

Table 4.3: Relative satisfaction index of each factor affecting water user satisfaction

Ranking Factors affecting satisfaction Relative

satisfaction index
(0-1)
1 Kiosk Opening time
2 Kiosk Closing time
3 Availability of water seller at kiosk
4 Time it takes to be served with water
5 Price of water at kiosk
6 Taste/smell/colour/cleanliness of water
7 Behaviour of the water seller at the kiosk
8 Outward presentation of the waters seller at the kiosk
9 Maintenance and repair of the kiosk upon breakdown
10 Use of money collected at kiosk by DWSMS
11 Sharing of information with communities by DWSMS
12 Engagement with communities on governance
13 DWSM response to water user needs
14 Women representation on the DWSMS management

64
The interpretation of the values of the indices will be guided by Enshanssi et al. (2009) and adopted
in Table4.4.

Table 4.4: Interpretation scale of satisfaction scores

RSI Equivalent assessment scale

0 ≤ RSI ≤ 0.29 Not at all satisfied

0.3 ≤ RSI ≤ 0.49 Slightly satisfied

0.5 ≤ RSI ≤ 0.69 Satisfied

0.7 ≤ RSI ≤ 0.89 Fairly Satisfied

0.9 ≤ RSI ≤ 1.0 Very Satisfied

Source: Enshanssi et al.(2009)

65
 CHAPTER 5: RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

This chapter presents results on the sustainability of water service management of DWSMSs using
two data sets, namely: water point sustainability and water user satisfaction. The results are
presented under each sustainability attribute as discussed in Chapter 3 above. These attributes are as
follows: policy and regulation; financial sustainability; operational sustainability; Community and
social aspects; gender inclusion and environmental protection. Under each sustainability attribute,
and for each DWSMSs, attempt is made to analyse and compare the results from the supply side
and the demand side of the water service by DWSMSs.

5.1 Policy, Legal, Administrative and Organisational Framework

In Malawi, the National Water Policy (2005) recognises that the DWSMSs can play an important
role in extending service coverage in rural and peri urban communities. The policy has provisions
for the implementation of different water supply management systems including delegated models.
As has been clearly demonstrated by Blantyre Water Board, who have since 1985, allowed Water
Committees to operate communal water points and have recently been facilitating the establishment
of the WUAs, and Private Operators, there exists an environment that allows delegated models in
Blantyre city.

The National Water Policy (2005) recognizes that different water resources management systems
can yield desired results with varying degrees of success if employed in different social and
geographical settings. It is clear that the policy does not dictate management arrangements. It is
upon stakeholders to participate in deciding what the best management arrangement should be put
in place. Thus the National Water Policy (2005) recognizes the different management arrangements
that can be applied in this country, namely the community based approaches, and the private sector
based approaches, the public supply arrangements and the private-public arrangements.

The legal instrument for regulation of water resources management is the Water Resources Act
(1969) and its subsequent amendments. The Act provides for the control, conservation,

66
apportionment and use of water resources. It established the Water Resources Board as a regulator
of abstraction and use of public water.

The Water Works Act (1995) has established five Water Boards including the Blantyre Water
Board. Blantyre Water Board is an institution established by government to run day-to-day
operations of water supply to the city of Blantyre. It is a parastatal organization established and
reconstituted under the Malawi Water Works Act No. 17 of 1995 to supply potable water for
commercial, industrial, institutional and domestic use in the supply area of Blantyre City and
surrounding areas. The Water Works Act (1995) empowers the Boards to delegate water supply
service delivery to peri urban areas as the Boards see fit.

The Decentralisation Policy (1998) together with the Local Government Act (1998) aims at
empowering local communities to actively take part in development activities that affect them. This
means that water users, through the local government set up, can take active role in managing
delegated water supply manage systems.

Furthermore, there is policy provision (Gender Policy, 2008) to promote women’s participation in
community water management programmes and to empower both women and men to sustainably
manage their own water points.

Malawi, in general, has clear institutions available to support DWSMSs. These include the Blantyre
Water Board, the Blantyre City Council, and the Civil Society. WUAs and Private Operators are
registered with the Malawi Government as business names. In addition, the WUAs are registered
with the Malawi Government as trustees for the benefit of the water users. The WUAs themselves
are in a process of forming an umbrella organization to strengthen their involvement in water supply
to low income areas and increase the engagement of the users in their operations and management.
As can be noted above, there is adequate policy and legal provision in the sector to guide the
implementation and operation of the delegated management models in peri-urban of Malawi. Water
users, community groups and private individuals can form legal institutions that can enter into legal
contracts with water utilities to manage water supply services in peri urban areas.

67
The policy and legal instruments advocate for effective and efficient development, management and
utilization of water supply and encouraging public-private partnerships such as private operators in
Blantyre.. They also provide for the promotion of appropriate management models for water supply
systems and developing suitable management arrangements for improved water supply and
sanitation systems.

In addition, there are weak regulatory mechanisms, as in most cases, the utilities as the water supply
service provides, also act as regulators themselves in a process known as self-regulation. Thus, the
tariffs and pricing mechanisms are still regulated by the utilities, thereby removing an element of
competition in the service delivery models that can result in a more efficient service and more
affordable tariffs to the end user. There is needed to be an independent regulatory body to where
both the Blantyre Water Board and the WUAs are answerable for service provision or the lack of it.
Lack of proper regulation has adverse effects on sustainability of services since service providers do
not have checks and balances on their mandate. The situation may result in overpricing or neglect of
duty, both of which have adverse effects on sustainability of services.

5.2 Water Point Sustainability

As shown in Table 5.1 below, the study shows that the WUAs and the Private Operator are likely to
be more sustainable that the water committees. The results indicate that water points managed
under the Private Operator model are more sustainable than water points under the WUAs and the
Committees. The water points under the committees have showed very low sustainability potential.
Overall (Table 5.1), sixty six percent (66%) of water points managed by WUAs were classified as
likely to be sustainable compared to 86% managed by POs and 22% managed by the water point
Committees.

In the study (Table 5.2), the WUAs scored from 23% to 88% on the sustainability. Mbayani and
Soche Private Operators scored 85% and 100% respectively. The results show that the committees
in Blantyre City are the least sustainable form of DWSMS.

68
Table 5.1: DWSMS mean water point sustainability

Likely to be sustainable

66%
WUA

86%
Private Operator

23%
Committees

Table 5.2: DWSMS Mean Water Point Sustainability per Administrative Region

Management Management Proportion of water Ranking

Structure Name model type points likely to be
sustainable
Soche Private PO 100% 1
Operator
Sanjika WUA WUA 88% 2
Nkolokoti WUA WUA 86% 3
Mbayani Private PO 85% 4
Operator
Michiru WUA WUA 78% 5
Mudi WUA WUA 78% 6
Ndirande Matope WUA 69% 7
WUA
Soche WUA WUA 51% 8
Namiyango WUA WUA 26% 9
Bangwe WUA WUA 23% 10
Ndirande Malabada Committees 22% 11
Committees

69
The scenario of Ndirande Malabada committees as compared to Ndirande Matope WUA is an
interesting one. These are neighbouring areas that are supplied through the same water network
distribution and have the same pressure zone, which means if water is flowing in one area or not,
the same is the case in the other. This is reflected in the results as shown in Figure 4 below.
Therefore the difference in sustainability levels may not be as a result of water shortages but other
sustainability metrics. In analysing the other factors, Figure 4shows that the main factors affecting
sustainability of water committees which operate in Ndirande Malabada are that broken down water
points are not maintained quickly and therefore have a higher downtime; there is no structured
organisation responsible for maintenance and that while tariffs are collected, there were no
indication of positive balances in the financial record books. Operation and Maintenance is closely
linked to other sustainability factors like social, financial and institutional arrangements (DFID,
1998). ) For a water supply system to be sustainable, financing O&M costs is important to ensure
that water points are functional, water is flowing and water users continue to enjoy the health
benefits of a system as originally designed. Absence of or inadequate O&M will lead to system
breaking down and collapsing (Carter et al., (1999); Harvey (2006),; Carter and Rwamwanja
(2006); Well (1998); Evans, (1992).

70
Figure 5: Sustainability comparison of Ndirande Matope WUA and Ndirande Committees

71
In general, the private operators and most WUAs have high proportion of water points showing
likelihood of sustainability than the Committees.

It is observed that in the WUAs whose water points showed low likelihood of sustainability (Soche,
51%, Namiyango, 26% and Bangwe, 23%) show that water supply by Blantyre Water Board to
those areas is erratic and inadequate.

5.3 Financial Sustainability

In this study, the parameters that define financial sustainability attribute are categorised on the water
point sustainability (supply side) as well as the water user satisfaction (demand side).On the supply
side, the collection of tariff at the water point and the positive balance in the financial record books
are the parameters analysed while on the demand side, the water user satisfaction with tariff and
transparency and accountability on use of funds are the parameters analysed.

WUAs collect sales money from each kiosk and reconcile that with the meter readings on a regular
basis. Then they save money with commercial banks and operate income and expenditure analysis
and profit and loss accounting procedures. They have a basic accounting system and issue payments
through cheques so that flow of funds can be followed. They also audit their accounts at the end of
each financial year. Each month, the WUAs show the users how the WUAs have performed
financially. At the time of the study; all the WUAs had their water bills settled.

The results as shown in Figure 5 below, show that the WUAs collect tariff on almost every kiosk
(96%) and that at the time of the study, they reported a positive balance at 100% of the kiosks. The
Private Operators collect tariff from each and every kiosk, and under this model, 100% of the kiosks
reported positive balances in their books. The Committees reported that they collect tariffs from
92% of the kiosks they operate. However an inspection of their books reported only 2% of the
kiosks to have a positive balance at the time of the study. It is either they do not keep financial
records or they spend all the revenue as it comes.

72
Figure 6: Variations in Sustainability Metrics per DWSMSs (percentage scoring)

It is clear that both, the WUAs and the Private Operators scored highly on financial sustainability as
they recorded positive balances on their financial records after all expenditures. The existence of
positive balances in their financial records, are an indication that the DWSMSs are able to meet the
costs of operation and maintenance, and have some surplus. It implies that the DWSMSs are able to
pay for the water bills; salaries; materials and supplies and other direct and indirect operational
costs. This is an indication that the tariff charged at the water point are able to recover costs in terms
of operation and maintenance. That tariffs are able to recover O&M costs implies a sustainable
water supply system (Carter et al., 1999; Evans, 1992; WELL, 1998; Harvey and Reed, 2004;
Harvey, 2006). Financing of O&M by the water users is critical to sustainability. If tariffs are
insufficient to cover O&M costs, the water supply service will breakdown and sustainability, as the
ability to maintain productivity or a service delivery, will not be achieved.

73
However, the satisfaction survey showed that across all the management models, water users are
very dissatisfied with the tariff (RSI= 0.3- 0.38). Low satisfaction rates with the tariff may also
imply that water users perceive that the DWSMSs are not transparent and accountable enough with
the use of funds. They view the DWSMSs as making money and reaping where they did not sow as
the infrastructure was put in place by Blantyre Water Board. As Tayong and Paubom (2002) argue,
transparency and accountability can contribute significantly to water users to pay for water because
the users will know their payment will contribute to O&M that ensures the water continues to flow
at the water point. This is also noted by Nayang (1994) who conclude that water user participation,
including sensitization and engagement, is a single most important factor in community project
effectiveness. The water users, since they know that the actual infrastructure belongs to
government, would feel it is their fundamental right to know what is going on DWSMSs selling
water and pocketing the funds.

5.4 Operational Sustainability

5.4.1 Administrative Arrangements within the DWSMSs

Water committees emanated from project committees that oversaw the construction of the water
kiosks. Usually, the kiosks construction under the water committees is funded by donors or
government. They then took over the operation of the kiosks. Water Committees are answerable to
no one; they open and close the kiosks as to their convenience. While they collect tariff from the
users, they do not always pay for the water bills from Blantyre Water Board. When the kiosks
breakdown, they are slow to repair them. As a result there is often a discontinuance of the water
supply service to the paying consumers. The membership of the water committees becomes more
and more informal with time. Members might migrate or they become disinterested and decide they
do not need to continue their membership, in which case, there are no formal rules for membership
termination or incorporation. With time, the committee dies off and the management of the kiosk
becomes personalised. There is no uniformity of the tariff; it is up to the managers to decide how
much to charge, in which case it results in charging exorbitantly. Political interference is high in
kiosks managed by the committees. As they are not formal institutions, powerful politicians and
their cadres easily take over the management of the kiosks, especially at times of political change,
such as after the general elections.

74
WUA management system is formalised with Blantyre Water Board through the signing of formal
contracts. Bills in time and operate the kiosks on time agreed and to maintain the kiosk in good
order. The Kiosk construction under the WUAs is funded by donors, government or the Blantyre
Water Board itself. They are required to sell the water at an agreed tariff. The contracts stipulate the
performances obligations of the WUAs, i.e. to pay water. They are also registered by the Malawi
Government as a Trust. The WUAs are therefore recognised public entities and formalised
community institutions for the management of the communal water points. WUA Board members
are elected by the water users themselves at a general meeting and they hold office for three years.
WUAs operate a number of kiosks within a defined area, usually a constituency area. WUAs
employ water sellers, plumbers, inspectors and book keepers to help manage the operations of the
kiosks. WUAs are supposed to fend for themselves from revenue collected through water sales and
should they have access, they are supposed to invest in improving water supply operations at the
kiosks and also assist in social programmes in areas within their jurisdiction.

Private Operators are usually business persons that have agreed with Blantyre Water Board to
engage in management of kiosks in an area. Usually the construction of the kiosks is funded by the
business persons themselves and they enter a supply contract with Blantyre Water Board as a
household connection. The end tariff that the consumer pays is not regulated by Blantyre Water
Board but decided by the Private Operators themselves.

5.4.2 Water User Satisfaction

The results (Tables 12.1 and 12.2) indicate that there is no marked difference in satisfaction
between the water users across all management models. In addition, there is also no marked
difference in satisfaction between male and female respondents. In particular all respondents in all
the management models are very dissatisfied with the governance issues of the DWSMs (RSI =
0.02- 0.18) and are dissatisfied with the tariff (RSI= 0.3- 0.38). Respondents across all the models
are highly satisfied with the water quality (RSI=0.94-0.98). In general, apart from the tariff charged
on water at the kiosks and water supply governance, respondents are satisfied with all the
management models (RSI = 0.68 -0.98

75
Table 5.3: Relative water user satisfaction levels

RSI = Relative satisfaction index

WUA Private Committees Response
Operator Validity (%),
n=3017

1 Time for opening 0.77 0.80 0.77 100

2 Time for Closing 0.81 0.80 0.79 100
3 Water seller availability 0.80 0.79 0.79 100
4 Time it takes to be served 0.72 0.76 0.70 100
5 Tariff 0.38 0.36 0.30 100
6 Water quality 0.94 0.98 0.98 100
7 Cleanliness of water kiosk 0.81 0.79 0.72 100
8 Behaviour of waters seller 0.82 0.77 0.77 100
9 Outward presentation of waters seller 0.89 0.86 0.92 100
10 Maintenance of broken down kiosks 0.68 0.71 0.74 100
11 Governance (Use of funds, financial information sharing, 0.18 0.04 0.02 17
water user engagement, and response to water user needs)

76
Table 5.4: Relative water user satisfaction levels: gender desegregated

RSI = Relative satisfaction index

WUA Private Operator Commitees

Male Female Male Female Male Female
1 Time for opening 0.77 0.77 0.69 0.82 0.80 0.75
2 Time for Closing 0.73 0.83 0.84 0.81 0.79 0.79
3 Water seller availability 0.77 0.81 0.88 0.78 0.79 0.80
4 Time it takes to be served 0.68 0.72 0.57 0.78 0.66 0.71
5 Tariff 0.46 0.37 0.41 0.35 0.30 0.31
6 Water quality 0.93 0.94 0.96 0.98 0.96 0.98
7 Cleanliness of water kiosk 0.80 0.81 0.76 0.80 0.82 0.71
8 Behaviour of waters seller 0.81 0.82 0.87 0.76 0.63 0.80
9 Outward presentation of waters seller 0.85 0.89 0.91 0.86 0.85 0.93

10 Maintenance of broken down kiosks 0.66 0.68 0.62 0.81 0.75 0.74

77
Considering the demand side of the system, the results in Table 5.3 indicate a very low response
(17%) rate to the governance questions which asked respondents on their perception on DWSMSs
use of funds, sharing of financial information, water user engagement in the activities of the
DWSMSs and their response to water user demands. Eighty three (83%) of the respondents entered
“do not know” response. This indicates that water users are either unaware of who manages their
water supply service and/or are in the dark on their rights to hold the service providers to account
for service delivery and actively engage themselves in participating in management of water supply
that affects them. Of the respondents that knew (17%); they scored very low satisfaction levels in
water supply governance across all DWSMSs (RSI-0.02-0.18). The low satisfaction levels across all
DWSMSs implies that by virtue of their management arrangements, Water Committees and Private
Operators are not obliged to comply with most of the governance elements e.g. disclosure of use of
funds and financial information and water user participation. This is particularly worrying for the
WUAs whose very objective and nature management structure is supposed to ensure inclusion,
ownership, transparency and accountability to the water users. All DWSMSs are however obliged
to respond to water user needs in a manner that satisfies them. It may be concluded then that all
DWSMSs are poor in transparency and accountability to the users and engaging the users in the
operation of the water supply systems designed to serve them.

This is in stark contrast to claims on the supply side of the system, that the WUAs share monthly
financial information with the users and audited accounts at annual general meetings. The disparity
in the supply and demand sides of the study may mean the following:

i. That water user are not aware of their role to actively participate in water supply
service that affect them, especially those under the jurisdiction of the WUAs, since
the WUAs are designed to be elected and owned by the water user communities
themselves.
ii. That DWSMs, especially the WUAs, do not effectively engage the WUAs, or
deliberately hold back information and are not transparent and accountable enough
the water users that elect them into office.
As Bakker (2002) points out, water supply governance ensures communities articulate their
interests, their input is absorbed, decisions are made and implemented, and decision makers are held
accountable in the development and management of water resources and delivery of water services.
Clearly, in the case of Blantyre, this important suitability attribute is lacking, despite some efforts

78
by the WUAs use of performance boards and annual general meetings to disclose to the public
operational and financial information. Indeed Rogers (2002), adds to the importance of the concept
of governance to ensure sustainability and as applied to water supply, by alluding that by actively
engaging water users in mobilising their energies in a coherent manner, sustainable development of
water resources can be achieved. Additionally water user engagement and holding service providers
to account for service delivery is a driving force behind the Malawi National Water Policy (2005)
and the Decentralisation Policy (1999). The policies give guidance to the formation of local
community led associations as a delegated management arrangement for water supply to rural and
urban poor communities.

5.4.3 Water Supply Availability

The results (Table 5.5) show that in areas under the WUAs, the lowest number of kiosks that had
water on the day of the study was reported to be 25% in Bangwe WUA, while the highest number
was reported in Sanjika WUA (85%). This corresponds closely to the water point sustainability
results in Table 5.2 above. For example the sustainability levels in Bangwe are estimated at 23%
(lowest) and those in Sanjika WUA are estimated at 88%. This indicates that water availability is a
critical factor in ensuring the sustainability of the water supply systems.

Private Operator in Mbayani and Soche had reported 74% and 100% of the kiosks water availability
at the time of the study respectively. The Water Committees in Ndirande Malabada had water in
72% of the kiosk.

This shows that water availability at a kiosk that was not disconnected, depends on the service
provider, the Blantyre Water Board. Some areas are more affected by unavailability of water than
others. The results show that the kiosks surveyed were all functional and not disconnected. The
daily water demand for Blantyre is estimated at 90,000m 3/day against a daily production capacity of
78,000 cubic metres/day (Blantyre Water Board, 2013). The daily shortfall of 12,000 cubic metres
means that Blantyre Water Board operates a water supply rationing programme to supply all the
areas. As a result areas at the downstream of distribution are more water stressed than those at the
beginning of the system. Bangwe WUA operates in the region that is severely affected by water
shortages at kiosks as it is at the end of the Blantyre Water Board distribution system.

79
Table 5.5: Water point Sustainability Metrics for all DWSMSs

Percentage of water points scoring a Yes (1) for each metric per
DWSMS

Water point Sustainability Metric Namiyango Mudi Michiru Nkolokoti Soche Sanjika Ndirande Malabada Mbayani
WUA WUA WUA WUA WUA WUA Matope Commitees Pricate
WUA Operator

1 Has Improved Water Point 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100
2 # of Users Meets Standards 56 78 94 90 41 100 73 74 66
3 Majority of Community Members Have Access to the Improved System 38 73 88 95 46 83 81 84 100
4 There Is Enough Drinking Water Every Day Of The Year 23 20 43 76 21 22 26 38 6
5 The System Was Down For 1 Day or Less In The Last 30 Days 50 83 69 88 90 83 56 24 66
6 There Are No Current Problems With The Water Point 40 78 37 79 70 23 60 28 55
7 Quantity Of Water Available Meets Standards 25 78 78 49 54 85 68 72 74
8 Water Was Available On The Day Of The Visit 25 78 78 49 54 85 76 72 74
9 A Tariff Or User Fee Is Collected For Water 88 93 100 100 100 97 98 92 100
10 There Is A Positive Balance Listed In The Financial Records 88 90 86 98 93 75 77 2 51
11 Spare Parts are Available In or Near the Community 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 98 100
12 There Is Someone Responsible For Water Point Management, Operations And Maintenance 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 2 100
13 The System Has Been Expanded To Incorporate New Users 27 75 92 51 51 88 85 34 94

80
5.4.4 Water Supply Quantity at the water point
Although the availability of water at kiosks was high, the kiosks reported that the quantities were
not always enough for the consumers. In Figure 6, only 57% of the kiosks under the WUA
management reported to have enough drinking water that meets standards, while 72% of the kiosks
in Water Committees, and 74% of the kiosks in Private Operator reported enough drinking water
that meets government standards.

This is a service component that is beyond the control of the DWSMSs because they depend on
Blantyre Water Board to supply water for onward sale to water users. The low availability levels
across all DWMSs are a threat to their sustainability. DWSMSs need to supply water to water users
so that not only do the users continue to enjoy the health benefits of the services, but also the
DWSMs collect enough revenue for their continued operation, in tandem with observations by
Brikke (2000); Abrams (2000); Harvey (2006); Carter et al. (1999) and Black (1985) that there is
need for water systems to provide the intended benefits to users for sustainability to be achieved and
that there has to be sufficient financing for O&M costs to ensure sustainability of water supply
systems. In the Blantyre scenario, if water is not available for sale, the DWSMSs won’t collect
enough revenue to pay for 0&M costs and the service may collapse.

5.4.5Water supply quality

The Quality of the water is managed by the utility, the Blantyre Water Board. They have a strict
regime of water testing and quality control at the production station. Therefore it was deemed that
the quality of water meets standards of the Malawi Government.

With respect to the water user satisfaction, water users are very satisfied with the quality of water as
supplied by DWSMSs (RSI= 0.94-0.98). It is important for sustainability of the DWSMSs that
water users are satisfied with the quality of water they supply, especially as compared to other
sources that users can access e.g. boreholes, shallow wells and streams. If users perceive the water
supplied by DWSMSs as of poor quality, (even if it is deemed safe by laboratory tests), they may
revert to those other sources, even if they are prone to be unsafe. As Evans (1992) implies, the water
users in poor communities are prepared to pay more for quality drinking water and abandon cheaper
substandard services. Therefore, while the users may be not satisfied with the tariff (RSI=0.30-
0.38), price alone may not discourage water users away from quality water supplied by DWSMSs.
81
5.4.6 Appropriate technology for water supply and Availability of Spare Parts
Water kiosks are easy to operate, for only they involve the opening and closing of taps. Therefore
all the water kiosks are deemed to have appropriate technology easy to operate, maintain and
replace when worn out. Spares for the maintenance of kiosks are available locally in the townships
and in Blantyre markets. All the kiosks, regardless of the management structure reported availability
of spare parts near their locality.

This is an important sustainability element as it facilitates quick repairs and maintenance of the
water supply infrastructure. This is in agreement with Brikke and Bredero (2003); Brikke (2000);
Abrams (2000) who indicate that spares for maintaining broken down or dysfunctional technologies
should be readily available in the localities where the technologies are being used in order to reduce
downtime of broken down water supply systems and to increase the life of water supply equipment.

5.4.7 Expansion of water supply to new users

Expansion to new users indicates that the water point is able to cater for increased population and
that the water point capacity is not strained as a result of increased number of users. It is therefore
deemed to be sustainable if a water point can withstand the pressure from increased users. All
kiosks in Blantyre are supplied from a Blantyre Water Board network.
The results show that all DWSMSs have somehow expanded their systems to meet the demand from
new users albeit with varying degree of success. Sixty one percent of the water points under the
WUAs reported that they have expanded to incorporate new users. Ninety four percent of the kiosks
under the Private Operator reported that they have expanded to incorporate new users, and only
34% of the Water Committees reported to expanded to incorporate new users.

Expansion is twofold: first is the expansion on the number of users at a water point due to
population increase and new settlers; and secondly is the expansion by building more water points.

Private Operators are entities that are driven by profit -making and therefore have the incentive to
both expand the network by building more water points and accommodating new users at existing
water points.

82
WUAs manage a region covering several water points. It is therefore in their interest to expand
services to cover more water users so as to broaden their revenue base. It is also in the interest of the
water users, who are their members, to have the level of water supply service improved by WUAs
extending supply to minimise walking distances for fetching water.

On the other hand, water committees, by their nature of establishment, cannot extend to other areas.
Their jurisdiction ends at the water point that they manage. They can only expand by
accommodating new users at that particular point, hence.

5.5 Community and Social Issues

5.5.1 Tariff affordability to most users
The tariff for the WUAs is set in consultation with the Blantyre Water Board and is uniform across
all the WUAs. At the time of the study the end user tariff was MK10.00 (USD0.02) per 20 litre
bucket. The Private Operator in Mbayani end user tariff is also regulated by the Blantyre Water
Board. The determination of the end user tariff follows a well laid structure. In the areas that are
managed by the water committees, in Ndirande Malabada, the user tariff varies as they are set by
each committee. The tariff varied from MK12 to MK20 (USD 0.025 to USD 0.04) per 20 litre
container.

The tariffs are higher in the Committees areas than in the WUAs and the Private Operator areas of
operations. The tariff in areas under the WUAs and Private Operators are regulated by Blantyre
Water Board and are uniform across the areas while those areas under the Water Committees are at
the mercy of the committees themselves.

However, the satisfaction survey showed that across all the management models, water users are
very dissatisfied with the tariff (RSI= 0.3- 0.38). This may mean that the users do not appreciate the
value of the service as delivered by the different DWSMSs and they perceive water as a product to
sell at a lower tariff that is currently the case, after all water is a common good, so they may argue.
It may also imply that the water users are not engaged enough by the DWSMSs in the management
of the water supply service. Low satisfaction rates with the tariff may also imply that water users
perceive that the DWSMSs are not transparent and accountable enough with the use of funds. They
may view the DWSMSs as making money and reaping where they did not sow as the infrastructure
was put in place by the utility, Blantyre Water Board. As Tayong and Paubom (2002) argue,

83
transparency and accountability can contribute significantly to water users to pay for water because
the users will know their payment will contribute to O&M that ensures the water continues to flow
at the water point. This is also noted by Nayang (1994) who conclude that water user participation,
including sensitization and engagement, is a single most important factor in community project
effectiveness. The water users, since they know that the actual infrastructure belongs to
government, may feel it their fundamental right to know what is going on DWSMSs selling water
and pocketing the funds.

5.5.2 Water Users satisfaction with quality and quantity

The results from the study(Figure 5 above) show that the quantity of the water meets standards at
72% of the kiosks under the Committees, 74% under the Private Operators and an average of 56%
kiosks under the WUAs (maximum 85% reported in Sanjika WUA; minimum 25% reported in
Bangwe WUA). Although the average score on water quantity meeting government standards for all
the WUAs is lower than other forms of DWSMSs, results in Table 5.5 indicate that Five WUAs
scored higher than the Committees and Private Operators with respect to water points selling water
at quantities that meet standards (76% -85%), except for two WUAS, Bangwe WUA (25%) and
Soche WUA (54%). This reflects on the fact that WUAs manage 18 of the 21 low income areas and
that by virtue of the vast regions they operate in, water supply services by Blantyre water Board
vary tremendously across the 18 low income areas. As mentioned earlier, the daily shortfall in
production of 12,000m3 means that Blantyre Water Board operates a water supply rationing
programme to supply all the areas. As a result areas at the downstream of distribution are more
water stressed than those at the beginning of the system. Bangwe and Soche WUAs operate in the
region that is severely affected by water shortages at kiosks as it is at the end of the Blantyre Water
Board distribution system as it is at the high end of the distribution network.

The quantity of the water at the kiosks varies from time to time and from location to location as it is
determined by the water distribution regimes at Blantyre Water Board. On the demand side of the
study, satisfaction with the quantity of water was not collected. However, it can be inferred from
results on user satisfaction with the following: time it takes to be served (RSI = 0.79-0.80 across all
DWSMSs); water seller availability (RSI=0.79-0.80 across all DWSMSs; closing time ( RSI =0.79-
0.81 across all DWSMSs; and opening time (RSI = 0.77-0.80 across all DWSMSs). The results
indicate that water users are satisfied with water quantity at the kiosks and that there are no marked
differences in satisfaction levels across all DWSMSs.
84
Although the water availability at the water points is low as mentioned earlier in section 4.4.2.2,
when water is available, water users have indicated satisfaction with the quantities of water at the
water point. This is an indication that the constraint is the water supply by the service provider, the
Blantyre Water Board as opposed to network capacity to supply. It is therefore assumed that should
Blantyre Water Board produce water enough to satisfy demand; satisfaction levels with availability
will improve across all DWSMSs.

The quality of the water is uniform across all the kiosks as it is produced centrally at Blantyre Water
Board treatment works. Blantyre Water Board is by policy, only allowed to supply water which
meets national standards for drinking water quality. It is therefore safe to assume that across all
management models, there is no marked difference in the quality of the water, as supplied by
Blantyre Water Board.. Generally, users are very satisfied with the quality of water across all the
management models (RSI =0.94-0.98).

5.5.3 Universal access to water

WUA areas have a deliberate system that ensures everyone has access to water for drinking,
including the vulnerable and those that cannot afford. For households that gave up their land for the
kiosk structure, WUAs allow 80 litres of free water every day. For households that are too poor,
especially the elderly, the WUAs allow the same amount of water every day. However, the same
cannot be said of areas under the Committees and the Private Operator. Private Operators and Water
Committees are driven by sales and profits more than by social obligations within the areas they
operate.

5.6 Gender
There are no guidelines available for gender representation at the top for the Private Operator and
the Committees. All the DWMSs have high proportions of women in their workforce.

Table 5.6presents the frequencies and percentages of the staff managing DWSMSs desegregated by
gender.

85
Table 5.6: Staff members managing DWSMSs desegregated by gender

STAFF MEMBERS IN THE DWSMS s

%ge
Total women
1 Mitsidi - Sanjika WUA 94 96
2 Nkolokoti- Kachere WUA 97 88
3 Misesa WUA 92 88
4 Namiyango-Chingumula WUA 42 90
5 Bangwe WUA 36 83
6 Michiru WUA 100 94
7 Ndirande Matope WUA 64 86
8 Mudi WUA 60 83
9 Ndirande Malabada Committees 96 88
10 Mbayani Private Operator 42 88

The study shows that the majority of those managing water supply at the kiosks in Blantyre are
women (average 89% at the time of the study) at all the kiosks, irrespective of the management
model.

The importance of involving both women and men in management of water resources has been
recognized at the global level, starting from the 1977 United Nations Water Conference in Mar del
Plata, the International Drinking Water and Sanitation Decade (1981-90) and the International
Conference on Water and Environment in Dublin (1992), which explicitly recognizes the central
role of women in the provision, management and safeguarding of water resources.

Gender in water supply should be tackled in terms of the functional goals of a water supply system
as well as in terms of development goals of the system. In this case projects do not only improve
local conditions and practices, but also, by the way they work with the people, they strengthen the
latter’s capabilities to bring about and preserve these changes, improve their living conditions and
stimulate the undertaking of new development activities in their homes and communities (IRC,

86
1995). Women and men have their own patterns and interests in the selection and use of water
sources.
There is an important difference between participation and influence. Blair (2000) points that, it is
relatively easy to increase the numbers and variety of people in an administrative system but much
more difficult to increase the extent to which they influence decision making. This is collaborated
by Goetz (1998); Goetz and Hassim (2003); MDPESA (2003) who note that although sometimes
quota systems are introduced to deliberately guarantee the increase the number of women in
decision making positions in institutions, evidence suggests that most women representatives have
yet to have substantial influence over local decision making because they lack the authority and
self-confidence to participate on an equal basis with men. The impacts can be particularly evident in
deprived social groups such as women, ethnic minorities and the poor. On a more positive note
there is evidence to suggest that despite the shortcomings the extent of participation has been
increasing due to guaranteed quotas as well as deliberate institutional initiatives to include the
disadvantaged and vulnerable groups in decision making (Robinson, 2007)

5.7 Environment
Environmental Issues at a communal water point relate to the management of overflow water from
the containers at filling stage and the water that is used to clean the containers before they are filled
with water at a kiosk. The ideal situation is to direct the overflow water via proper drainage systems
that do not result in ponding nor cause erosion of top soil to form gullies. There have been no
marked risks to the environment as a result of communal water supply in Blantyre City.

5.8 Comparisons of Sustainability within the Individual DWSMSS

Although, in general, WUAs and the Private Operators are showing signs of more sustainability
than the Water Committees, there is a general variation of the level of sustainability within the
WUAs. The results show that among the WUAs, the kiosks sustainability score ranges from 22.8%
in Namiyango WUA% to 85.7% in Nkolokoti WUA (Table 5.2).

This study (Table 5.7) has shown that there is a significant correlation between sustainability and
the following metrics: universal access to users (r=0.93), system expansion (r=0.85), timely
maintenance (r=0.77) and tariff collection (r=0.72). This is in agreement with Abrams (2000);
Carter et al (1999); DFID (1998); Carter and Rwamwanja (2006); and Evans (1992)

87
There is also general between the level of sustainability and water availability (Pearson’s r=0.63)
and whether the quantity of water available meets national standards (r=0.63). In Sanjika WUA for
example, water availability score is at 75%while in Namiyango, the water availability all year round
score is at 25% (Table 5.5). The more the water is available, the higher the score on whether the
quantity meets standards and the more the profitability of the water-selling business.

88
Table 5.7: Correlation significance of different metrics to sustainability

Sustainability Metric Significance of Correlation to

Sustainability
The System Has Been Pearson Correlation .852**
Expanded To Incorporate Sig. (2-tailed) 0.002
New Users

There Is Someone Pearson Correlation 0.61

Responsible For Water Point Sig. (2-tailed) 0.061
Management, Operations And
Maintenance

Spare Parts are Available In Pearson Correlation 0.61

or Near the Community Sig. (2-tailed) 0.061

There Is A Positive Balance Pearson Correlation 0.496

Listed In The Financial Sig. (2-tailed) 0.144
Records

A Tariff Or User Fee Is Pearson Correlation .723*

Collected For Water Sig. (2-tailed) 0.018

Water Was Available On The Pearson Correlation 0.628

Day Of The Visit Sig. (2-tailed) 0.052

Quantity Of Water Available Pearson Correlation 0.631

Meets Standards Sig. (2-tailed) 0.05

There Are No Current Pearson Correlation 0.482

Problems With The Water Sig. (2-tailed) 0.158
Point

The System Was Down For 1 Pearson Correlation .766**

Day or Less In The Last 30 Sig. (2-tailed) 0.01
Days

There Is Enough Drinking Pearson Correlation 0.371

Water Every Day Of The Sig. (2-tailed) 0.292
Year

Majority of Community Pearson Correlation .926**

Members Have Access to the Sig. (2-tailed) 0
Improved System N 10

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).

89
The major factors that the Private Operators and WUAs have scored higher than the Committees are
as follows:

1. That a tariff is always charged on water collected

2. That there is a positive balance on the financial records
3. That there is someone responsible for maintenance
4. That the system has been expanded to meet demand from new users
5. The number of users meets standards
6. That the system was down for only 1 day or less when it was broken down

The above factors are related to management of the system as opposed to whether the water
quantity is enough or not. Hence it can be inferred that while all the management systems are
subjected to varying degrees of water availability and shortages within the system, the management
structure and institutionalization of the management structure itself is also an important factor on
whether the water supply system is sustainable or not.. If the tariff is always charged for water
collected and there is positive balance in the WUA records then the WUAs are financially capable
of paying for water bills and that they can pay for personnel that manage water points including
water seller and their maintenance teams. If the maintenance regimes are institionalised, it means
faults and breakdowns are repaired in time and system breakdown is less.

In addition, there has been a deliberate decision by Blantyre Water Board to extend services to areas
that are up to date in terms of payment of water bills and the areas under the WUAs have benefited
as a result. The expansion means that the number of people being served by each WUA meets the
national standard of 120 households per kiosk (Blantyre Water Board, 2009).

Water availability in the system is an external factor to the DWMSs as that factor depends on the
effectiveness and ability of Blantyre Water Board to meet the demand of the DWMs. Therefore the
following sustainability factors are hugely dependent on the effectiveness of the Blantyre Water
Board in meeting the demands of the DWMSs.

This means that even if the DWMSs meet their obligations manage the finances and to pay water
bills in time, maintain the water supply system, water supply from Blantyre Water Board is still a
determinant of their overall sustainability.

90
The study shows that the WUAs and the Private Operators scored high in the financial and
management sustainability metrics as compared to the Committees, but that there is no marked
difference in the scores pertaining to water quantity and availability as supplied by Blantyre Water
Board.

91
 CHAPTER 6: CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

6.1 Introduction
This chapter discusses the conclusion and recommendations from the review of the relevant
literature, the review of the legal, policy and administrative documents that guide water supply in
Malawi, and the results of the analysis of the water point sustainability data and customer
satisfaction data.

This study was conducted to study the sustainability of three forms of delegated water supply
management systems currently existing in Blantyre peri urban and low income areas ie. The Private
Operators, the Water User Associations and the Water point Committees. This research sought to
answer the following research question: How sustainable are delegated water supply management
systems for Blantyre’s Low Income and Peri Urban Areas. Answers to this research question will
help to understand the current levels of sustainability of the delegated water supply management
systems and any external and internal factors that are likely to affect their sustainability in future. It
should be emphasized that, since the study was conducted at a point in time, the results indicate the
likelihood of sustainability rather than absolute sustainability, which would require a longitudinal
study over a period of time.

6.2 Research Conclusions

The study shows that the WUAs and the Private Operator are likely to be more sustainable than the
water committees. The results indicate that water points managed under the Private Operator model
are more sustainable than water points under the WUAs and the Committees. The water points
under the committees have showed very low sustainability potential. Overall, sixty six percent
(66%) of water points managed by WUAs were classified as likely to be sustainable compared to
86% managed by Private Operators and 22% managed by the water point Committees.

In summary, it has been observed that there are adequate policy, legal and administrative
arrangements in the water sector in general, and Blantyre City in particular, to guide the
implementation and operationisation of the delegated management models in peri urban cities of
Malawi. Water users, community groups and private individuals can form legal institutions that can
enter into legal contracts with water utilities to manage water supply services in peri urban areas.
92
The policies and legislative instruments i.e. the National Water Policy (2005), the National
Sanitation Policy (2008), National Irrigation Policy (2000), National Environmental Policy (2004),
Water Resources Act (1969), Waterworks Act (1995) and Environmental Management Act (1996);
and supported by the Gender Policy (2000), Decentralization Policy (1998) and Local Government
Act (1998) also provide for the promotion of appropriate management models for water supply
systems and developing suitable management arrangements for improved water supply systems.
Furthermore, there is policy provision to promote women’s participation in community water
management programmes and to empower both women and men to sustainably manage their own
water points.

However, there seems to be weak regulatory mechanisms, as in most cases, the utilities as the water
supply service provides also act as regulators themselves in a process known as self-regulation.
Thus, the tariffs and pricing mechanisms are still regulated by the utilities, thereby removing an
element of competition in the service delivery models that can result in a more efficient service and
more affordable tariffs to the end user.

In addition, there is lack of clear strategies and national strategic implantation plans to achieve the
aspirations of the policies of achieving universal access to safe water in a sustainable manner.

The policies and legislative instruments fall short in guiding the sector of the licensing
arrangements of delegated water supply management systems. This can be one of the functions of
the independent regulatory authority. Currently, delegated water supply management systems enter
into consumer (not supply) contracts with water boards.

While policy and legislation provides for consideration of gender based approaches to water service
delivery and women participation in user groups, financing policy implementation has been a
challenge. It is therefore recommended that enough financing in consideration of gender is
considered at both sector planning level and project implementation stages.

The study also shows that the main factors affecting sustainability of water committees which
operate in Ndirande Malabada are that broken down water points are not maintained quickly and
therefore have a higher downtime; increased downtime due to disconnection due to non-payment of

93
water bills; there is no structured organisation responsible for maintenance and that while tariffs are
collected, there were no indication of positive balances in the financial record books. Operation and
Maintenance is closely linked to other sustainability factors like social, financial and institutional
arrangements (DFID, 1998). Carter et al. (1999); Harvey (2006); Carter and Rwamwanja, (2006);
WELL (1998); Evans (1992) have argued that for a water supply system to be sustainable, financing
O&M costs is important to ensure that water points are functional, water is flowing and water users
continue to enjoy the health benefits of a system as originally designed. Absence of or inadequate
O&M will lead to system breaking down and collapsing

One of the contributing factors to the difference in sustainability is tariff collection and the eventual
use and management of funds collected including transparency and accountability of the
management systems. The results show that Private Operators and WUAs collect tariff almost every
water point (96%) and that at the time of the study, they reported a positive balance at 100% of the
kiosks. The Committees, however, reported that they collect tariffs from 92% of the kiosks they
operate. However an inspection of their books reported only 2% of the kiosks to have a positive
balance at the time of the study. In addition the tariffs are higher in the Committees areas than in the
WUAs and the Private Operator areas of operations. The tariff in areas under the WUAs and Private
Operators are regulated by Blantyre Water Board and are uniform across the areas while those areas
under the Water Committees are at the mercy of the committees themselves.

However, the satisfaction survey showed that across all the management models, water users are
very dissatisfied with the tariff (RSI= 0.3- 0.38). This may mean that the users do not appreciate the
value of the service as delivered by the different DWSMSs and they perceive water as a product to
sell at a lower tariff that is currently the case, after all water is a common good, so they may argue.
It may also imply that the water users are not engaged enough by the DWSMSs in the management
of the water supply service. Low satisfaction rates with the tariff may also imply that water users
perceive that the DWSMSs ae not transparent and accountable enough with the use of funds. They
may view the DWSMSs as making money and reaping where they did not sow as the infrastructure
was put in place by the utility, Blantyre Water Board. As Tayong and Paubom (2002) argue,
transparency and accountability can contribute significantly to water users to pay for water because
the users will know their payment will contribute to O&M that ensures the water continues to flow
at the water point. This is also noted by Nayang (1994) who conclude that water user participation,
including sensitization and engagement, is a single most important factor in community project
94
effectiveness. The water users, since they know that the actual infrastructure belongs to
government, may feel it their fundamental right to know what is going on DWSMSs selling water
and pocketing the funds.

The results indicate that there is no marked difference in satisfaction between the water users across
all management models. In addition, there is also no marked difference in satisfaction between male
and female respondents. In particular all respondents in all the management models are very
dissatisfied with the governance issues of the DWSMs (RSI = 0.02- 0.18) and are dissatisfied with
the tariff (RSI= 0.3- 0.38). Respondents across all the models are highly satisfied with the water
quality (RSI=0.94-0.98). In general, apart from the tariff charged on water at the kiosks and water
supply governance, respondents are satisfied with all the management models (RSI = 0.68 -0.98).
This implies that the perception of water users of the different DWSMSs is the same, and users have
failed to differentiate the advantages of one over the other.

The study has shown that another constraint to sustainability of DWSMSs is water supply
availability. The sustainability of the DWSMSs is dependent on the water supply from Blantyre
Water Board. Irrespective of their institutional and administrative organization, if they cannot be
supplied with enough water to sell and cover their operational costs, their sustainability will be
threatened. Therefore Blantyre Water Board needs to increase its capacity to supply the DWMSs.
The results show that there is a direct relationship between water availability and sustainability of
the DWSMSs. This shows that water availability at a kiosk that was not disconnected, depends on
the service provider, the Blantyre Water Board. Some areas are more affected by unavailability of
water than others. The daily water demand for Blantyre is estimated at 90,000m 3/day against a daily
production capacity of 78,000 m3/day The daily shortfall of 12,000 m3per day means that Blantyre
Water Board operates a water supply rationing programme to supply all the areas. As a result areas
at the downstream of distribution are more water stressed than those at the beginning of the system.
Bangwe WUA operates in the region that is severely affected by water shortages at kiosks as it is at
the end of the Blantyre Water Board distribution system.

It can be inferred from the results that while all the management systems are subjected to varying
degrees of water availability and shortages within the system, the management structure and
institutionalization of the management structure itself becomes a major determinant on whether the
water supply system is sustainable or not. If the tariff is always charged for water collected and
95
there is positive balance in the WUA records then the WUAs are financially capable of paying for
water bills and that they can pay for the personnel that manage water points including water seller
and their maintenance teams. If the maintenance regimes are institutionalised, it means faults and
breakdowns are repaired in time and system breakdown is less.

The results show that all DWSMSs have somehow expanded their systems to meet the demand from
new users albeit with varying degree of success. Sixty one percent (61%) of the water points under
the WUAs reported that they have expanded to incorporate new users.. Ninety four per cent (94%)
of the kiosks under the Private Operator reported that they have expanded to incorporate new users.
Only 34% of the Water Committees reported to expanded to incorporate new users. Expansion is
twofold: first is the expansion on the number of users at a water point due to population increase
and new settlers; and secondly is the expansion by building more water points. Private Operators
are entities that are driven by profit -making and therefore have the incentive to both expand the
network by building more water points and accommodating new users at existing water points.
WUAs manage a region covering several water points. It is therefore in their interest to expand
services to cover more water users so as to broaden their revenue base. It is also in the interest of the
water users, who are their members, to have the level of water supply service improved by WUAs
extending supply to minimise walking distances for fetching water. On the other hand, water
committees, by their nature of establishment, cannot extend to other areas. Their jurisdiction ends at
the water point that they manage. They can only expand by accommodating new users at that
particular point, hence.

The study shows that the majority of those managing water supply at the kiosks in Blantyre are
women (average 89% at the time of the study) at all the kiosks, irrespective of the management
model. The importance of involving both women and men in management of water resources has
been recognized at the global level, starting from the 1977 United Nations Water Conference in Mar
del Plata, the International Drinking Water and Sanitation Decade (1981-90) and the International
Conference on Water and Environment in Dublin (1992), which explicitly recognizes the central
role of women in the provision, management and safeguarding of water resources.
Water User Associations and the Private Operator model need to be encouraged in order to improve
water supply delivery to low income areas as they have shown to be sustainable. In future, Blantyre
Water Board should consider delegating management of the entire network in the low income areas,

96
including household connections, to the WUAs or the Private Operators. This would minimize
BWBs operational costs and improve overall service delivery.

97
 REFERENCES
Abrams L., Palmer I., & Hart T. (2000). Sustainability management guidelines, prepared for the
Department of Water Affairs and Forestry, South Africa. Retrieved from
http://africanwater.org/sustainability.htm

Abrams L, (1998). Understanding sustainability of local water services. Retrieved from

http://www.africanwater.org/sustainability.htm

Ademiluyi , I.A., & Odugbesan, J.A. (2008). Sustainability and Impact of community water supply
and sanitation programs in Nigeria: An overview. African Journal of Agricultural Research,
3(12), 811-817.

Ahmed, N., & Sohail M. (2003). Alternate water supply arrangements in peri-urban localities:
Awami (people's) tanks in Orangi township, Karachi. Environment and Urbanization, 15(2), 33-
42.

Allen A., Dávila J.D., & Hofmann P. (2006). The peri-urban water poor: citizens or consumers?
Environment and Urbanization 2006 18: 333 doi: 10.1177/0956247806069608, Retrieved from
http://eau.sagepub.com/content/18/2/333

Azfar, O., Kahkonen, S., Lanyi, A., Meagher, P., &Rutherford, D. (2004). .Decentralization,
governance and public services: The impact of institutional arrangements: A review of
literature. University of Maryland, MA, USA: IRIS center.

Bakker, K. (2008). The ambiguity of Community: Debating alternatives to private‐sector provision

of urban water supply. Water Alternatives, 1(2), 236‐252.

Bakker, K.J. (2003). .Archipelagos and Networks: Urbanisation and Water Privatisation in the
South: The Geography Journal, 169 (4), 328-342 .

Binder, D. (2008). Sustainability of Water Service Delivery in Rural Environment: Past Approaches
and Way Forward: Review of Literature.

Blair, H. (2000). Participation and Accountability at the Periphery: Democratic Local Governance
in Six Countries. World Development, 28(1), 21–39.

Blantyre Water Board (2009). Annual Report. Blantyre, Malawi. Blantyre Water Board

Brikke F., & Bredero M. (2003). Linking technology choice with operation and maintenance in the
context of community water supply and sanitation: A reference document for planners and
project staff. Geneva, Switzerland: WHO and IRC Water and Sanitation Centre.

Brikke, F. (2000). Operation and maintenance of rural water supply and sanitation systems - A
training package for managers and planners. Geneva, Switzerland: WHO

98
Brundtland, G (1987). Our Common Future. The World Commission on Environment and
Development. Oxford : Oxford University Press.
Cammack D. (2012). Peri-urban governance and the delivery of public goods in Malawi, 2009-11.
Retrieved from http://www.institutions-africa.org/filestream/20120123-appp-research-report03-
peri-urban-governance-and-the-delivery-of-public-goods-in-malawi-2009-11-by-diana-
cammack-january-2012:

Carter R. C., & Rwamwanja R. (2006). Functional sustainability in community water and
sanitation. A case study from south west Uganda. Kampala: Tearfund.

Carter, R., Tyrrel S. & Howsan, P. (1999). Impact and sustainability of community water supply
and sanitation programmes in developing countries. Journal of the Chartered Institution of
Water and Environmental Management, 13, 292-296

Ceigis R., Ramanausskiene J., & Martinkus, B. (2009). The concept of sustainable development and
its use in sustainable scenarios. Inzinerine Ekonomika- Engineering Economics 2, 28-37

Chipeta L. (2009). The water crisis in Blantyre City and Its Impact on Women: The cases of
Mbayani and Ntopwa, Malawi. Journal of International Women’s Studies, 10(4), 17-33

Chirwa E., & Junge N. (2007). Private Sector Participation in the Distribution and Management of
Water Services. A Study of Low Income Areas in Blantyre and Lilongwe. Government of
Malawi

Conway, G.R., & Barbier, E.B. (1990). After the Green Revolution: Sustainable Agriculture for
Development. London. Earthscan.

Crook, R.C.,&Manor, J. (1998). Democracy and Decentralisation in South Asia and West
Africa,Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Davis J.,& Iyer, P. (2002). Taking Sustainable Rural Water Supply Services to Scale: A Discussion
Paper. Bank Netherlands Water Partnership -Water and Sanitation Program.

Deichmann, U., & Lall, S.V. (2007). Citizen feedback and delivery of urban services.World
Development, 35(4), 649-662

Department for International Development (DFID) (1998). Guidance manual for water and
sanitation: DFID, UK.

Dungumaro, E.W., & Madulu, N. F. (2003). Public participation in integrated water resources
management: the case of Tanzania. Physics and Chemistry of the Earth, 28, 1009–1014.

Enshanssi A., Mohamed S., &Abushabani S. (2009). Factors affecting the performance of projects
in the Gaza Strip, Journal of Civil Engineering and Management, 15(3), 269 – 280.
Enshassi A., Mayer P.E., Muhammed S., & El-Masri, F. (2007). Perception of Construction
Managers towards safety in Palestine. The International Journal of Construction Management,
7, 41-51

99
Evans, P. (1992). Paying the Piper:An interview of community financing of water and sanitation.
Delft: IRC International Water and Sanitation Centre

Fabiano, K. (1993). Piped Supplies for Small Communities Malawi, paper presented at the
Workshop on Gender and the Development, Management and Utilisation of Water –Lessons
Learned and Strategies for the Future. Retrieved from www.unesco.org/most/africa13

Francis, P., & James, R. (2003). Balancing Rural Poverty Reduction and Citizen Participation:
Contradictions in Uganda’s Decentralization Program, World Development, 31(2), 325–338.

Goetz, A.M. (1998). Fiddling with Democracy: Translating Women’s Participation in Politics in
Uganda and South Africa into Gender Equity in Development Practice in G. White & M.
Robinson (eds.), Democratic Development State, Oxford University Press, Oxford

Goetz, A.M., & Hassim, S. (eds.) (2003)..No Shortcuts to Power: African Women in Politics and
Policy Making. London: Zed Books.

Harvey, P. A.,& Reed, R. A. (2004). Rural water supply in Africa: Building blocks for hand pump
sustainability. , Loughborough University, UK: WEDC.

Harvey, P. A., & Reed, R. A. (2006). Community-managed water supplies in Africa: sustainable or
dispensable? Community Development Journal, 42(3), 365-378. Retrieved from
http://eau.sagepub.com/content/15/2/33

Harwood, R.R. (1990). A history of sustainable agriculture. In C.A. Edwards, R. Lal, P. Madden,
R.H. Miller and G. House(Eds), Sustainable Agricultural Systems (page nos.). Ankeny, IA: Soil
and Water Conservation Society,

Heinen, J.T. (1994). Emerging, diverging and converging paradigns on sustainable development.
International Journal of Sustainable Development &World Ecology,1(1), 22-33

Holdgate, M.W.(1993). The sustainable use of tropical coastal resources – akey conservation issue,
A Journal of the Human Environment, 22(7), 481-482.

Homburg, C., & Bruhn, M. (1998). Kundenbindungsmanagement - Eine EinfuK hrung in die
theoretischen and praktischen Problemstellungen. In Emerah, A.A., Oyedele, S.O., & David
J.O. (2013).Determinants of Customer Satisfaction in the Nigerian Telecommunications
Industry: An Empirical Evidence. International Journal of Management and Strategy (IJMS).
4(6). 2013

IRC International Water and Sanitation Centre, website: Retrieved from

http://www.irc.nl/page/7584.

Jaglin, S. (2002). The right to water versus cost recovery: participation, urban water supply and the
poor in Sub-Saharan Africa. Environment and Urbanization, 14(1), 231- 245. Retrieved from
http://eau.sagepub.com/content/14/1/231

100
Kumar, S. (2002).Methods for community participation: a complete guide for practitioners. ITDG,
London, U.K.

Lockwood H., & Smits S. (2011). Supporting Rural Water Supply: Moving towards a Service
Delivery Approach. Rugby, Warwickshire: Practical Action Publishing Ltd.

Lockwood H., Bakalian A., & Wakeman W. (n.d.). Assessing Sustainability in Rural water Supply:
The Role of Follow-Up Support to Communities: Literature Review and Desk Review of Rural
Water Supply and Sanitation Project Documents. World Bank

Malawi Government (1962). Trustees Incorporation Act. Lilongwe, Malawi: Ministry of Justice and
Constitutional Affairs. Retrieved from www.malawilii.org/mw/legislation/consolidated-act/503.

Malawi Government (1995). Water Works Act No.17. Lilongwe, Malawi: Ministry of Justice and
Constitutional Affairs. Retrieved from www.malawilii.org/legislation/act/1995/1.

Malawi Government (1996). Water Resources Act. Lilongwe, Malawi: Ministry of Justice and
Constitutional Affairs.

Malawi Government (1998). Decentralization Policy. Lilongwe, Malawi: Ministry of Local

Government

Malawi Government (1998). Local Government Act. Lilongwe, Malawi: Ministry of Justice and
Constitutional Affairs Retreived from www.malawilii.org/mw/legislation.

Malawi Government (2000). National Irrigation Policy. Lilongwe Malawi: Ministry of Irrigation and
Water Development.

Malawi Government (2000). Gender Policy. Lilongwe, Malawi: Ministry of Gender, Children,
Disability and Social Welfare.

Malawi Government (2004). The National Environmental Policy. Lilongwe, Malawi: Ministry of
Natural Resources and Environment Affairs

Malawi Government (2005). National Water Policy. Lilongwe, Malawi: Ministry of Irrigation and
Water Development.

Malawi Government (2008). National Sanitation Policy. Lilongwe, Malawi: Ministry of Irrigation
and Water Development.

Malawi Government(1996). Environmental Management Act. Lilongwe, Malawi: Ministry of

Justice and Constitutional Affairs.

Manda, Z. (2009). Water and sanitation in urban Malawi: Can the Millennium Development Goals
be met?: A study of informal settlements in three cities. London: Earthscan.

MDP-ESA (Municipal Development Partnership for Eastern and Southern Africa) (2003). Africa
Local Governance Programme: Regional Scan of Decentralisation Issues and Cross-Cutting
Themes in the Eastern and Southern African Region. Harare, Zimbabwe: MDP-ESA.

101
Ministry of Irrigation and Water Development (2009).WUA Training Manual. Lilongwe, Malawi:
Malawi Government.

Miranda, L., Hordijk, M., & Molina, R. K. T. (2011). Water Governance Key Approaches: An
Analytical Framework. Literature Review. Megacities of the Future Liwa Project.Peru-
Germany.

Mughogho, B.U.G., & Kosamu, I.B.M (2012). Water supply arrangements in developing countries:
A case study of Blantyre City, Malawi, Africa. Journal of Environmental Science and
Technology, 6(2), 94-103. Retrieved from http://www.academicjournals.org/AJEST

Narayan, D. (1994). Contribution of people's participation: evidence from 121 rural water supply
projects. Environmentally sustainable development occasional paperseries, No 1. Washington,
D.C.: World Bank

National Statistics Office (NSO) (2008). Population and Housing Census. Retrieved from
http://www.nso.malawi.net.

Odemiluyi, I.A., & Odugbesan, J.A. (2008). Sustainability and impact of community water supply
and sanitation programmes in Nigeria: An overview. African Journal of Agricultural Research
3(12), 811-817

Olowu, D. & Wunsch, J.S. (eds.) (2004)..Local Governance in Africa: The challenges of democratic
decentralization. London and Boulder: Lynne Rienner

Parker, C., & Mathews P. (2001). Customer satisfaction: contrasting academic and consumers’
interpretations. Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 19 (1), 38 - 44

Parry- Jones, S., Reed, R., & Skinner, B. H. (2001). Sustainable hand pump projects in Africa: A
literature review. Loughborough University, UK: WEDC.,

Pearce, D. (1993). Blueprint 3: measuring sustainable development. London: Earthscan.

Pretty, J. N. (1995). Participatory learning for sustainable agriculture. World Development, 23 (8),
1247-1263.

Robinson, M. (2007). Does decentralisation improve equity and efficiency of public service
delivery? IDS Bulletin, 38(1), 7-17

Rogers, P. (2002).Water Governance in Latin America and the Caribbean. Washington, D.C.: Inter-
American Development Bank (IDB) Retrieved from http://www.iadb.org

Rondinelli, D.A. (1981). Government decentralization incomparative perspective: Developing

countries. International Review of Administrative Science, 47(2), 133-145.
Rubin, A., & Babbie, E. (1993). Research Methods for Social Work. Belmont:Wadsworth

102
Sami, K. &Murray, E.C . (1998). Guidelines for evaluation of water resources for rural water
development with emphasis on groundwater. Pretoria: Water Resource Commission.

Sara J., Katz, T., (1997): Making Rural Water Supply Sustainable: Report on the impact of project
rules. UNDP, World Bank Water and Sanitation Program

Savenije, H. H. G. &Van der Zaag, P. (2008). Integrated water resources management: Concepts
and issues. Physics and Chemistry of the Earth 33, 290–297.

Schaap, W., & vanSteenbergen (2001).Ideas for Water Awareness Campaigns. Stockholm,
Sweden:The Global Water Partnership.

Smith, L.D., (2001). Reform and Decentralization of Agricultural Services: A policy framework.
FAO Agricultural Policy and Economic Development Series 7.

Solanes, M., & Jouravlev, A. (2006). Water governance for development and sustainability. ,
Santiago, Chile: United Nations..

Solanes, M. & Villarreal, F.G. (1999). The Dublin Principles for Water as reflected in a
comparative assessment of institutional and legal arrangements for Integrated Water Resource
Management. Retrieved from http//www.africanwater.org/SolanesDublin.html

Tam, C.M., Zeng, S.X., & Deng, Z.M. (2004). Identifying elements of poor construction safety
management in China. Safety Science, 42, 569-586.

Tayong, A., & Poubom, C. (2002). Convincing People to Pay for Water: Nkouondja in Cameroon. ,
Delft, The Netherlands : IRC..

UNDP (1997)..Decentralized Governance Programme: Strengthening Capacity for People-

Centered Development. Management Development and Governance Division, Bureau for
Development Policy.

Water Aid (2008). Managing Communal Water Kiosks in Malawi: Experiences in water supply
management in poor urban settlements of Lilongwe. Lilongwe, Malawi.

Water For People (2009). Baseline Report: Blantyre Peri Urban Water and Sanitation Project.

Webb, P., & Iskandarani, M.(2001). The poor pay much more for water and use much less. Water
and Sanitation Update, Netwas, Nairobi. In Harvey P.A.(2007). Cost determination and
sustainable financing for rural water supplies in sub-Saharan Africa. Water Policy 9, 373-391

WELL (1998) DFID guidance manual on water supply and sanitation programmes. Retrieved from
http://www.lboro.ac.uk/well/resources/Publications/guidancemanual/ overview.pdf

Water and Sanitation Programme (WSP), (2009). Improving Water Utility Services through
Delegated Management: Lessons from utility and small scale providers in Kisumu, Kenya.
Nairobi, Kenya. World Bank.

103
Water and Sanitation for the Urban Poor (WSUP), (2011). Business Model for Delegated
Management of Local Water Services: Experience from Naivasha, Kenya. Topical Brief #002.
London, UK. WSUP

Water and Sanitation for the Urban Poor (WSUP), (2012). Delegated Management of Water and
Sanitation Services: Experineces from Kumasi, Ghana. Topical Brief #003 London, UK. WSUP

WWF (1991).Caring for the Earth: A Strategy for Sustainable Living. London, UK. Earthscan

Yi, Y. (1990). A Critical Review of Consumer Satisfaction. in Review of Marketing. American

Marketing Association, 68-123.

104
 APPENDIX A: INTERVIEW PROTOCOL

1. Location of Waterpoint
a. Latitude
b. Longitude
c. Elevation
2. Unique Code
3. Area
4. Community Name
5. Interviewee
6. Title of Interviewee
7. Take a photo of a waterpoint
8. Is this an improved water source?
a. Yes
b. No
9. What type of the waterpoint
a. Kiosk with Piped Supply
b. Private Standpipe
10. How many people use this waterpoint

11. Do users always pay a tariff for this waterpoint

a. Yes
b. No
12. How much do they pay for the water

13. Is there anyone in the community that does not have access to an improved waterpoint?
a. Yes
b. No
c. Don’t Know
105
14. What year was the water point constructed/rehabilitated
15. Does the waterpoint provide enough water for drinking for the community everyday?
16. Has the water system been down for more than 1 day in the last 30 days (except for routine
maintenance)?
a. Yes
b. No
c. Don’t know
17. Have any major repairs/additions been completed on the water point/system in the past year?
a. Yes
b. No
c. Don’t know
18. Are there any current problems with the system that require attention?
a. Yes
b. No
c. Don’t know

19. Is the water available from the system on the day of the visit
a. Yes
b. No
20. Are there financial records/books for the waterpoint
a. Yes
b. No
c. Don’t know
21. Does the community have spare parts for the system at hand
a. Yes
b. No
c. Don’t Know
22. Who manages the water system
a. Water committees
b. Individual Owners
c. Water Board

106
 d. WUA
e. NGO/Church
f. Don’t know
g. Other
23. If there were problems with the waterpoint system that you could not handle, who would
you contact
24. Has the system/waterpoint been able to support new users since it was
constructed/rehabilitated
a. Yes
b. No
c. Don’t know

107
Water User Satisfaction survey questions

General/Demographic
1. What is the Community Name?
2. What are the GPS coordinates for this kiosk?
3. What is the ID number or Name for this kiosk?
4. Is the respondent Male or Female?
5. To what age group does the respondent belong?

Availability
6. How satisfied/happy are you with the time the kiosk opens?
7. How satisfied/happy are you with the time this kiosk closes?
8. How satisfied/happy are you with the availability of the water seller of this kiosk?
9. How satisfied/happy are you with the time it takes you to collect water?

Value for money

10. How satisfied/happy are you with the price of water at this kiosk?

Water quality
11. How satisfied/happy are you with the taste/smell/color/cleanness of water from this kiosk?

12. Open question: Do you have anything specific you would like to say about water availability,
quality or value for money?

Management
13. How satisfied/happy are you with the cleanliness of this kiosk and the area around it?
14. How satisfied/happy are you with the behavior of the water seller of this kiosk?
15. How satisfied/happy are you with the outward presentation of the water seller of this kiosk?
16. How satisfied/happy are you with how well the system is maintained and repaired when it
breaks down?

108
Governance
17. How satisfied are you with how the DWSMSS Board uses the money that it earns from selling
water?
18. How satisfied are you with the way that the DWSMSS Board shares financial information with
you and the community?
19. (The DWSMSS boards are supposed to consult with the community about what the DWSMSS
should do…) How satisfied are you with how the DWSMSS Board consults with you and the
community about what it should do?
20. (If they do consult…) How satisfied are you with how the DWSMSS Board acts on or responds
to what the community wants them to do?
21. How satisfied are you with the way women are represented on the Board?

22. Open question: Do you have anything specific you would like to say about the management or
governance of the DWSMSS?

109
3. Explaining the 0-10 scale picture:

110
If people are not familiar with rating, it may help to use the picture.

For each question ask them to point to a face that they think reflects their view.

 10 – is extremely good - perfect – nothing to improve.

 0 – is extremely bad – terrible – everything must be improved.

111