Conclusiones y recomendaciones

Children contaminated the open wells and ponds most, by directly stepping into the water when filling their jerry cans, or through throwing foreign objects or substances in the water. During observations at the pond in Kibuye village, two children were seen stepping in the water, one with a deep wound on his leg, and another girl who had jiggers. Children also threw substances such as rubbish, gravel, stones and sticks into the water sources. Some children also enjoyed playing in the water in the open ponds. Children, especially those aged five and below contributed to the unsanitary conditions around the water points. Some 2-3 year olds that often accompanied their older siblings to the water points (often with smaller jerry cans of 3-5L) defecated around the pumps and open water sources, and their faeces were easily washed into the ponds by run-off, together with debris from uphill households, some of which had no sanitary facilities as indicated in Chapter Four, Section 4.10. Whereas observations did not capture any children defecating, human faecal material was seen on two occasions along two separate paths - near the open well in Makondo village and shallow well in Misaana village. Some women living in the trading centres in these same villages said that the sight of faeces at these water points was unpleasant. They added that they were then forced not to fetch water, send their children to collect the water, or buy water from vendors.

As already discussed, run-off was another form of contamination of water sources in Makondo Parish. Run-off was common during the rainy seasons, and carried many substances, including soil, animal dung and faecal material into the water in the low-lying open water sources. This was the main reason why communal de-silting was done at specific periods of the year for some open water sources (and the protected spring) in villages such as Misaana and Makondo so as to prepare the water points for the dry seasons. There was also the washing of jerry cans, bicycles and sometimes motor cycles at the water points. Jerry cans were mainly washed by children and women, while bicycles and motorcycles were washed by their main users and owners in the households - boys and a few men. Many times bicycles and motorcycles were washed using detergents such as soap, which contaminated the open ponds and the gutters around the pumps and the protected spring. Washing of jerry cans was observed at almost all the water points during the PO sessions, but bicycles and motor cycles were mostly detected at “improved” water points such as the protected spring and the bore-hole in Kibuye village.

Thus, contamination of open water sources is a serious issue because most of the households in the Parish rely on them more than on the “improved” water sources, as noted in Chapter Five, Sub-section 5.2.1. It pauses a huge health risk to the lives of the rural men, women, boys and girls in the area as it causes water-borne diseases such as diarrhoea, which may in turn increase household expenditure and poverty. In fact, 12.3 percent of the survey respondents confirmed that female children in their households had suffered from diarrhoea within the period of one year before they were interviewed, and another 11.1 percent said that male children had suffered from the same disease.

The contamination of open water sources in Makondo Parish is comparable with discoveries made in other parts of rural Africa, such as Ethiopia (Ebato and van Koppen 2005), where, on a positive note, communities considered water from open sources such as rivers as unsuitable for drinking even after filtration because livestock drank water directly from them and women washed their clothes from there. Women’s washing of clothes from “unimproved” water sources was rarely reported in Makondo; instead, it was the washing of jerry cans, bicycles, and motorcycles. Children’s throwing of materials in the water and defecating around water sources, both open/traditional and “improved” also caused concern and influenced access to some water points in the study area.

6.9 Conclusion

This Chapter has illustrated that water collection, as noted by theorists such as Roy and Ben (2004), Coles and Wallace (2005) and Walby (1990) is socially constructed and gendered through a patriarchal order, and that it occurs under a disciplinary regime. We have seen that ‘free labour’ for water as described by Franks and Cleaver (2007) is provided by women and children, and that the real burden of collecting water in the rural developing world falls on these groups. Women and children further experience numerous difficulties in collecting water from both “improved” and “unimproved” water sources, which complicate the benefits they derive from water. I have also demonstrated through this case study that understanding the gender dimensions of water collection requires moving beyond the development model that focuses on water technology, overall time and linear distance travelled by women, men and children. The

process of collecting water itself; the diversity of water sources used; time spent queuing, drawing and transporting water; modes of transporting water and nature and weight of containers used; health complications related to carrying water; and trips made daily to the water sources are key factors in understanding the social troubles that children and women as the less privileged groups undergo when collecting water. These factors are crucial in determining gender roles and responsibilities, the actual drudgery of water collection and overall access to water at household and village levels in rural developing communities.

Distance to water sources is a big problem for women and children; but the time they spend lining up at pumps and the protected spring, especially in the early morning and late evenings when these water sources are congested is more distressing. This perhaps highlights the fact that Franks and Cleaver’s ‘conventions of queuing’ are highly gendered especially at “improved” water sources. Also, drawing water from the same sources is time consuming, especially in the dry seasons, while the heavy containers carried by hand or on the head (and the associated calorific expenditure according to Geere et al. 2010) endanger the health of women and children. Women and children are also more susceptible to diseases resulting from contamination by animals and run-off (Descheemaeker et al. 2009; Esrey 1988). Also, it is because of queues at pumps and the protected spring that children engage in uncongenial fights, verbal abuse and youths and some adults also lose their property, such as bicycle covers for their jerry cans, and bicycle parts like straps and valves. The risks of verbal and physical attacks from humans and animals, many of which were uniquely revealed in the survey and participant observation sessions are also real, and are higher for children and women.

The disciplining nature of water collection has also been demonstrated by men and women’s responsibilities and access to bicycles as water fetching technologies. We have seen that due to historical cultural practices, women (assisted by children) accept the heavy responsibility of providing water in their households, and that their access to bicycles is curbed, all of which resonate with docility and self-policing as argued by Foucault. In addition, women’s sending of children to collect water and their own refusal to collect water in rare cases are counter- hegemonic acts of resistance. In short, water collection in Makondo Parish is gendered, and women’s and men’s docility or consciousness creates a normalising gaze in which children and

women shoulder the entire responsibility of undertaking this burdensome task. The next Chapter explores participation in water governance in Makondo Parish.

Chapter Seven: Disciplining Women’s Participation in Water Resource Management

7.1 Introduction

In Chapters Five and Six, we have examined the various ways through which women, men and children access water, with the latter chapter focussing on the process of water collection. We have noted that there are a number of social mechanisms and processes that influence women and children’s access to water, and that these combine with patriarchal norms to increase the burden and drudgery that these groups face in collecting water. In this Chapter, I will explore the various ways through which men and women participate in the governance of water resources at a local level, principally their representation and transformative participation in local water spaces. As noted by Franks and Cleaver, participation in water governance is ‘gender-specific’ (2007:297), and this in a way determines how the various actors or agents are involved. Drawing on Foucault, Lefebvre and Cornwall, I begin by briefly analysing the main water actors in Makondo Parish (many of whom are also stipulated in Uganda’s rural water policies discussed in Chapter Three), their roles and power with a gender lens. Based on the ideas of inclusive democracy advanced by theorists such as Chantal Mouffe and Iris Marion Young, particularly the involvement of marginalised groups in ‘all political processes’ of decision-making, I then assess the transformative potential of local water spaces in Makondo Parish. I examine representation, an under-researched area in development and water governance in particular, analysing the involvement of men and women in all the processes of safe water provision and management in Makondo Parish. I start with pre-construction and choice of water technologies, exploring men and women’s involvement in any related spaces and their preferred technologies, the siting of the technologies, and the influence of gendered or patriarchal cultural norms and practices. I go on to analyse the gender dynamics in the real establishment of the water points, showing the gendered power relations in which decisions made at the pre-construction phase may be over-turned to the detriment of women. I then look at membership in local water institutions, described by theorists such as Cleaver (2004), Singh (2008) and Cleaver and

Hamada (2010) as a key aspect of representation of the marginalised, focussing on the village- based WUCs and key ‘actor’ positions at the Sub County and District levels. I also assess what Agarwal (1997) and Cornwall (2008) call the ‘physical presence’ of men and women in water meetings, who invites individuals for meetings, who turns up, who sets the agenda, and whose voices are heard and influence over final decisions made and their implementation. In all these processes, I highlight the role of patriarchal cultural norms, gender-based stereotypes and practices and how they tend to disadvantage women and give men more power and privileges in local water spaces. Foremost, I analyse the main water actors in Makondo Parish.