Over the duration of this blog, we’ve really built up a keen
understanding of the immense potential groundwater has for agriculture across
Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). For many academics, it appears to be the future, and
a way to carve a path towards economic development, food security and
development.
However, as Villholth (2013)
observes, whilst generally regional and international policies are increasingly
beginning to favour small-scale groundwater irrigation in the region, this is
not mirrored by national policy and institutions. Currently, groundwater
irrigation has no clear management body across numerous countries, instead
being managed between agricultural bodies and what Villholth refers to as WASH
sectors; those of water, sanitation and hygiene. This is evident especially in
countries such as Ethiopia, which, although having significant plans to boost
groundwater development, has clearly insufficient institutional capacity
wherein roles and responsibilities regarding the facilitation of this boost are
entirely unclear. It is necessary then, Villholth (2013) argues, for the state
to become both a facilitator and regulator of groundwater irrigation, rather
than remaining a passive entity.
This is a sentiment shared by Tuinhof et al. (2001) in their working paper for the World Bank. They
insist that SSA’s new development agenda will require a much greater focus on
strategic assessment and investment planning regarding the use and
proliferation of groundwater resources, in order to not only promote a
sustainable model of irrigation but also support urban water-supply development
and rural livelihoods. The authors suggest that this “New Agenda” for
development will require significant strengthening, evolution and reform of
current institutional frameworks of groundwater governance.
Foster et al.(2012) also argue in this vein, stating that a delicate balance will be needed
between the promotion and creation of an enabling framework of groundwater
development, abstraction and pollution regulation to avoid over extraction and
contamination of resources and the integration of groundwater monitoring and
assessment, development and recharge assessment with the management of
land-use.
Groundwater has a huge part to play in the future of the SSA region, and hence needs an effective, efficient and equitable method of governance |
Only adding to the challenges of creating suitable and
effective groundwater legislation is that the institutional framework into
which it needs to be inserted is currently in a state of flux. Tuinhof et al. (2001) observe that a general
trend of decentralisation currently exists regarding water management, which
stems from attempts to address “upstream-downstream” issues and create more
focused management for stakeholders. Whilst such changes arguably create
opportunities for groundwater management, they also offer a huge complication;
for example, in 2001, Tuinhof et al.
had observed 60 such decentralised management schemes, however very few had a
significant operational capacity or included groundwater legislation in their
operational framework.
There are calls then for an integration of groundwater
management and promotion into national policy. There is widespread agreement
amongst academics such as Villholth (2013), Tuinhof et al. (2001) and Foster etal. (2012) that this is essential for groundwater to begin making an
effective contribution to economic development, food security and urban and
rural livelihoods. There are also calls for the development of cross-sector
dialogue between different government institutions and levels, as to
accommodate the particular needs of groundwater within different river basins
and management authorities whilst still maintaining a national focus. Tuinhof et al (2001) and Foster et al. (2012) present succinct arguments
for the direction, limitations and prerequisites that this national governance
features, and this is what we will be exploring throughout the rest of the
blog.
Needs for
Governance
Tuinhof et al.(2001) states that it is generally agreed the primary function of any
government should be to act as “custodian” or “trustee” if you will over renewable
resources on behalf of the citizens they represent. Legislation, then,
concerning groundwater, should be flexible, enforceable and most importantly
enabling. Tuinhof et al. present in
their working paper six key recommendations for governments when deciding on
legislation, which we will explore below.
Catchment and Aquifer
Resource Planning and Allocation
This involves the establishment of appropriate and suitable
boundaries for resource management, whether by basin or by region. It also
involves effective translation of nationwide plans for groundwater to sensible
regional scales to create a unified vision for groundwater and surface water
resources.
Land-use zoning for
Conservation and Protection of Groundwater
This would involve allowing for the creation of “special
control areas” that are either critical to the resource in terms of recharge or
storage or perhaps particularly vulnerable to pollution and hence
contamination.
Monitoring of
Groundwater and the Provision of Information
Another suggested role of government is to provide essential
monitoring and periodic evaluation of groundwater status in a way that
facilitates the open exchange of data and provided information for both
individuals and cooperatives
The Facilitation of
Stakeholder Participation and Engagement
This includes actively encouraging the involvement both
users and potential polluters of groundwater (alongside other interest groups)
to ensure that development of the resource can be optimally beneficial for the
majority involved
The Administration of
the Use of Groundwater
Governments and legislative bodies should have the authority
to allocate and control groundwater usage, through well construction permits,
groundwater user registers, allocation of rights or permits to abstract, and
appropriate resource charging (generally targeted at commercial or large-scale
users). They should also have the power to issue and enforce sanctions against
those who do not comply with regulations, in order to deter misuse.
Licensing of the
Discharge of Wastewater and Landfill Disposal
Governments should be able to limit and control practices
that may cause pollution through effective licensing, and be able to apply
sanctions to those who break these regulations
Limitations and
Prerequisites to Groundwater Governance
However, these recommendations are idealistic, and are more
often an unachievable target than a reality for many governments in Sub-Saharan
Africa. The large majority of government institutions and bodies are currently
plagued by a severe lack of capable and aptly trained staff to carry out
duties, and this goes doubly so for activities concerning groundwater, which
currently hold relatively little attention in the political world. There is
also the issue of budgets; setting up new groundwater institutions and
legislation will present itself as a rather expensive process, and many
government agencies simply lack the capital to undergo processes of mass
monitoring and policing of usage. There is also the current issue of
groundwater not receiving that much institutional attention; the nature of the
resource as somewhat hidden and out of sight in this regard does it no
favours (Tuinhof et al. 2001).
Often, the establishment of an effective private-sector groundwater provider can help provide services that governemnts simply do not have the resources themselves to offer |
Foster et al.(2012) hence set out a series of prerequisites; things that need to happen
before governments can go about establishing effective and efficient
groundwater legislation and government bodies. They call first for the building
of professional capacity through providing widespread training and the more
effective deployment of currently trained personnel. Alongside this, they
stress the necessity for the stimulation of private-sector participation (a
concept mentioned in an earlier blog), so that high quality contracting
services can be provided alongside professional consultancy. This will provide
platforms for the provision of construction, maintenance and siting services,
as well as set the ball rolling on surveying, monitoring and evaluation. They
also call for government agencies to have the capabilities and authority to
ensure that the work commissioned to the private sector is to a high quality.
Conclusions
Whilst there is still a lot of work to be done before
effective groundwater institutions that promote, protect and monitor
groundwater sources are set up, both papers by Tuinhof et al. (2001) and Foster et al. (2012) present strong
recommendations for governments.
Probably the strongest points of these frameworks are that
they understand and facilitate the fact that groundwater at heart is a local
resource; both papers call for local engagement with stakeholders (both
recipients and potential polluters), however also realise the importance for a
national-scale effort to manage groundwater. Both then also suggest a more “top-down”
approach, that ensures that there is significant authority ensuring sustainable
and equitable use of groundwater, and using the resource to its full potential
in order to bring about empowerment, economic development and greater security
on a national scale. The only thing left to do, is for countries to begin
implementing suggestions, and taking the first steps towards a future where
groundwater plays a significant role in livelihoods all across the country.