Comunicación ascendente

Having looked at the definitions and adopted a definition of sustainability for the current research it is important to review what other researchers have done in rural water sustainability most specifically for boreholes.

Water projects utilize three forms of capital (Carter, 2005). The role of the rural water project is to: (1) utilize water (natural capital) for healthful purposes (2) build water supply facilities (infrastructure capital) which pipe the water to convenient locations or through a system for use; and (3) operate and maintain the facilities through skilful management of human and financial capital. Each form of capital must endure in order to achieve sustainability. The first form of capital largely depends on the source of water which can be an underground source or aquifer or a surface source like stream etc. (Harvey and Reed, 2004). Managing and protecting the source is key to keep the water flowing. The water shed or catchment needs to be protected, aquifers need to be recharged and the quality of water needs to be protected from contamination. Climate change can pose a threat to water resources in terms of rainfall which is a major source of recharge in most aquifers in Malawi as such it is paramount that issues of climate change be incorporated in rural water supply projects (Malawi Government, 2008a). In other words efficient conservation and utilization of water is critical for sustainability.

The second form of capital is the infrastructure itself and it comprises the type of technology preferred for example borehole, gravity fed piped water system, shallow well etc. According to Brikke & Bredero (2013) the type of technology adopted should take into consideration spare parts availability. The design of the actual infrastructure depends on a number of things; if it is a borehole then it includes the lithological structure, yield which all has a bearing on positions of installation of riser pipes and screens. The technical engineering

56

expertise on design of these water supply infrastructures is important in order to have a lasting facility that is capable to operate for its design life time without premature failure. Whilst fully recognising the importance of the first two forms of capital for sustainability of rural water supplies vis-a-vis source of water and infrastructure, the third forms of capital are human and financial. The role of operational and maintenance through skilful management of human and financial capital is overwhelmingly mentioned in rural water supply sustainability studies as the most important element essential for sustainability (Carter & Rwamwanja, 2006). The willingness to efficiently manage a water facility and the skills to properly manage the facility rests on human capital and availability of funds which is financial capital.

Some decades ago, Sara and Katz (1998) explained sustainability in terms of three dimensional components namely technical, institutional and social.

Technical Dimension

Sara and Katz (1998) explained that technical issues relate to the design and construction of a rural water system and are the most obvious technical determinants of water system sustainability. Poor construction quality or the use of low-grade materials may lead to failure of the water system before the end of its design life (Busoga Trust, 2004). Similarly, design flaws with shallow wells, boreholes or other technologies, and over estimates of the water sources or aquifers may cause a system to fail from the outset.

Institutional Dimension

Even well-constructed water system needs proper institutional arrangements to keep it functioning over time (Abebaw et al., 2010). Almost every system require some sort of preventive maintenance; Hand-pumps may require greasing of moving parts; gravity systems may require sediments to be removed from storage tanks or repairs for leaky taps and cracked pipes, in addition, work is required to keep the water source free from contamination. This all requires some kind of an institutional arrangement that would be responsible for management of the water supply system (Carter et al., 1996). In most cases, the rural water systems are shared by a number of families, providing these inputs requires a community management structure, such as a water committee, to oversee operation and maintenance and collect money to cover costs of these services. An empowered and motivated community management structure is hence vital for sustainability.

57

Social Dimension

Sustainability of a rural water system is also presented by Mukherjee et al., (2002) to depend on the willingness of users to provide the necessary time, money and labour to keep the system functioning. This willingness may be affected by socio-economic factors such as income level, ethnic homogeneity, or the willingness of villagers to work together (Chambers, 1994). More commonly, however, the willingness will depend on how satisfied is the community with the service, usually compared to the previous water source in a community (Musonda, 2004). When communities perceive a significant improvement in water services, they are usually more willing to pay for operation and maintenance. According to Sara & Katz (1998) willingness-to-pay is also affected by community perceptions of ownership or sense of entitlement to free services from the government. Carter (2005) agrees with Sara & Katz (1998) from a user motivation perspective they say motivation is a critical social aspect of rural water supply sustainability.

Sara & Katz (1998) just as supported by Doe & Khan, (2004) identified system design and construction quality as the most influential technical factor for sustainability. They also identified water committee, operation and maintenance of the system and money collection as vital institutional determinants of system sustainability. Socio-economic factors like income level, willingness of the users to allocate time, availability of adequate fund and labour are mentioned by both these researchers to be also essential in order to keep the system functioning.

Other researchers have described a sustainable rural water supply project as a system comprising of five dimensions namely institutional, social, technical, environmental and financial or economic (WELL, 1998).

Harvey & Reed (2004) identified eight sustainability factors. These are policy context, institutional arrangements, technology, natural environment, community and social aspects, financing and cost recovery, maintenance, training and capacity building.

Giné & Pérez-Foguet (2008) added a managerial dimension to the other sustainability factors; they also claim that institutional, social, technical, environmental, financial and managerial factors are interrelated as presented in Figure 1 below:

58

Source: Giné & Pérez-Foguet (2008)

Other researchers like Carter (2005), Sara and Katz (1998) viewed sustainability from the factors that affect it whilst other researchers like Giné & Pérez-Foguet, 2008, Harvey & Reed (2004) classified the factors into categories as presented in figure 1 above. Just as factors are known to interact with each other the categories of factors that affect sustainability interact with each other too. It is therefore important to understand at this stage that just classifying factors into categories does nothing other than simplifying how sustainability can be viewed. The most important thing is to establish how these factors came into being to affect sustainability there by managing them from the root cause point of view.