Self-supply – a cost-effective rural water option for the hard to reach

Sutton, Sally

doi:10.1680/jmuen.17.00016

Cited by 7 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Governments may place a duty on developers to replace lost water infrastructure, often with a vision to improve quality in resettled communities. Given that many rural communities in countries with low-income economies still drink water from open wells or unsafe rivers and ponds, reliable access to a safe water supply for every citizen is a key development goal for many countries where dams are currently being built [55], besides also being a fundamental human Fig. 1.…”

Section: Water Supply Servicesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Hydropower benefit-sharing and resettlement: A conceptual review

Schulz

Skinner

2022

Energy Research & Social Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Globally, hydropower developers are increasingly expected to share benefits with people living in projectaffected areas. Nevertheless, hydropower benefit-sharing has not found sufficiently widespread application, and the concept is not yet widely understood. The present paper aims to make the following contributions: First, we clarify the commonalities and differences between benefit-sharing, compensation and related concepts, which refer to processes in which developers transfer resources to project-affected people. We suggest that benefitsharing can be understood as a 'sustainability intervention', i.e. the focus is on making an additional and positive long-term development impact, beyond replacing or marginally improving on lost assets. Further, we propose that benefit-sharing is defined by the transfer of resources and services that are 1) substantively different from those serving as compensation for lost assets; 2) determined via participatory processes with projectaffected people and 3) delivered in the later stages of the timeline from dam planning to operation. Second, we explore some governance challenges on the pathway towards 'good' benefit-sharing, highlighting: (i) that effective participation by project-affected people requires capacity building over time, involving a gradual transfer of control over spending decisions; and (ii) that the appropriate institutional set-up for benefit-sharing may be dependent on the existing capacity of governments in the dam-hosting location. Legally mandated benefit-sharing mechanisms to raise funds may be more appropriate in the context of high existing state capacity, whereas developer-led mechanisms will be required where the existing capacity is low. In practice, a mix of multiple institutional arrangements and benefit-sharing mechanisms is possible and desirable.

show abstract

Section: Water Supply Servicesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Hydropower benefit-sharing and resettlement: A conceptual review

Schulz

Skinner

2022

Energy Research & Social Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The first point is the suggested higher sustainability of the infrastructure due to co-or full ownership (Olschewski et al, 2016(Olschewski et al, , 2017Sutton et al, 2004;Pump Aid, 2016;Maltha and Veldman, 2016;Cranfield University, Aguaconsult, IRC 2006) and simpler and more affordable technology used (Maltha and Veldman, 2016;Sutton et al, 2004). The second advantage is the supposed lower cost of service extension due to the user investments (Olschewski et al, 2017, Sutton, 2007Butterworth et al, 2014;GLOWS, 2012;Sutton, 2018).…”

Section: The International Interest In Self-supplymentioning

confidence: 99%

The emergence of collectively owned self-supply water supply systems in rural South Africa – what can we learn from the Tshakhuma case in Limpopo?

Hofstetter¹,

Koppen²,

Bolding³

2021

WSA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite the rapid extension of public service delivery since the end of Apartheid, many rural citizens in South Africa still rely on their own initiatives and infrastructure to access water. They construct, improve, operate and maintain infrastructure of different complexities, from individual wells to complex collectively owned water schemes. While most of these schemes operate without legal recognition, they provide essential services to many households. In this article we will first provide an overview of the growing international body of literature describing self-supply as an alternative pathway for public service delivery. We then take a historical perspective on the role of communities and self-supply in South Africa and describe the emergence of six collectively owned, gravity-fed, piped schemes in Tshakhuma, Limpopo Province. We describe and compare these systems using key characteristics like resource access, investment, construction, operation, maintenance and institutional governance. We further assess their performance with regard to coverage, service level, reliability, governance structure, accountability and water quality. We do so because we are convinced that lessons learned from studying such schemes as locally adapted prototypes have the potential to improve public approaches to service delivery. The described cases show the willingness of community members to engage with service delivery and their ability to provide services in cases where the state has failed. The assessment also highlights problematic aspects of self-supply related to a lack of accountability, technical expertise and the exclusion of disadvantaged community members. By describing and assessing the performance of rural self-supply schemes, we aim to recognize, study and learn from such schemes. We consequently do not conclude this article by providing answers, but by raising some pertinent, policy-relevant questions.

show abstract

“…Groundwater self-supply comprises water points-dug wells, boreholes, tubewells and/or springs-developed and financed by the end-users. It can encompass improvements to water supplies through user investment in drilling or digging a well, pumping technology, storage, water treatment, supply construction and up-grading, solar power water pumps, and rainwater infiltration beds (for groundwater rejuvenation) as part of resource management [11,29,30]. For instance, in India where no ordinary family enjoys 24/7 public supply, households are forced to access water from where it can be found and boreholes have proliferated over the past decades [31].…”

Section: Self-supply and Hrwsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Regarding Groundwater and Drinking Water Access through A Human Rights Lens: Self-Supply as A Norm

Grönwall

Danert

2020

Water

108

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Globally, some 2.5 billion people depend solely on groundwater to satisfy their daily drinking water needs. The reliance on this resource and its centrality to realize the human right to ‘safe’ drinking water has increased manifold, but this is yet to be fully acknowledged globally or by governments and political leaders at the national level. This paper analyses the interface of international human rights law, as corresponding to the obligations and responsibilities of different actors, regarding groundwater resources planning, management and protection. Drawing on the literature, we discuss the State’s duties to respect, protect and fulfil this right especially in relation to the freedom of end-users to self-supply from groundwater sources; the training and regulation of non-State service providers including drillers and private vendors; and health and safety concerns. Interpreting the State’s duty to ‘fulfil’ through direct water service provision ‘as a last resort’, this paper suggests that self-provision is the original norm for enjoying the right to water. This has significant implications for the State’s role in raising awareness concerning point source protection and aquifer recharge for water resources management and in decisions concerning water allocation. By ignoring self-provision, which is primarily from groundwater, the State is not only missing a tremendous opportunity but is jeopardizing the water security of future generations.

show abstract

Self-supply – a cost-effective rural water option for the hard to reach

Cited by 7 publications

References 2 publications

Hydropower benefit-sharing and resettlement: A conceptual review

Hydropower benefit-sharing and resettlement: A conceptual review

The emergence of collectively owned self-supply water supply systems in rural South Africa – what can we learn from the Tshakhuma case in Limpopo?

Regarding Groundwater and Drinking Water Access through A Human Rights Lens: Self-Supply as A Norm

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About