Facilitating the development of an institutional model in mzingwane catchment council
This presentation is the property of its rightful owner.
Sponsored Links
1 / 27

Facilitating the development of an institutional model in Mzingwane Catchment Council PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 49 Views
  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

Facilitating the development of an institutional model in Mzingwane Catchment Council. Some Lessons Emmanuel Manzungu Department of Soil Science and Agricultural Engineering, University of Zimbabwe. THREE CRITICAL QUESTIONS:. 1. Who are the water users?

Download Presentation

Facilitating the development of an institutional model in Mzingwane Catchment Council

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript


Facilitating the development of an institutional model in mzingwane catchment council

Facilitating the development of an institutional model in Mzingwane Catchment Council

Some Lessons

Emmanuel Manzungu

Department of Soil Science and Agricultural Engineering,

University of Zimbabwe


Three critical questions

THREE CRITICAL QUESTIONS:

1. Who are the water users?

2. How can the water users best be represented?

3. How to deal with representation at different scales:

a) local

b) sub-catchment council

c) catchment council

d) basin


Context scale and boundaries hydrological boundaries

CONTEXT –SCALE AND BOUNDARIESHydrological boundaries

  • Country divided into catchment and sub-catchment areas

  • Presided over by catchment and sub-catchment councils

  • Boundaries determined by technicians


Context scale and boundaries hydrological boundaries1

CONTEXT –SCALE AND BOUNDARIESHydrological boundaries

  • Mzingwane catchment (Limpopo basin in Zimbabwe) divided into 4 sub-catchment council areas

    -Shashe

    -Upper Mzingwane

    -Lower Mzingwane &

    -Mwenezi


Context scale and boundaries hydrological boundaries2

CONTEXT –SCALE AND BOUNDARIESHydrological boundaries

Notable Deficiencies:

  • 1) General lack of awareness of the new institutions

  • 2) Gap between grassroots water users, e.g. smallholder irrigation schemes, primary users and the sub-catchment council

  • 3) Poor link between catchment council and basin institution


Context scale and boundaries socio political administrative boundaries

CONTEXT –SCALE AND BOUNDARIESSocio-politicaladministrativeboundaries

  • Socio-political administrative boundaries (local; government) are an important reality

  • Are a mixture of traditional, elected and appointed (executive) institutions

  • Reflect both national and local dynamics and sometimes even regional dynamics

  • Local government system is heavily layered

  • Any institutional model has to take account of this


Facilitating the development of an institutional model in mzingwane catchment council

Executive

Elected

Jurisdiction

Traditional

Ministry

Parliament

Nation

Chiefs Council

Provincial Governor

Provincial Council

Province

P A Chiefs

District Administrator

Rural Development Council

District

Chief (s) /Headman/men

?

WADCO

Ward

Headman /Kraalheads

?

VIDCO

Village

Kraalheads

?

?

Traditional village

Kraalhead


The process of model development a bottom up approach

THEPROCESS OF MODEL DEVELOPMENTA bottom up approach

  • Decision to start at the grassroots level

  • Mzingwane Catchment Council and ZINWA chose Shashe sub-catchment as the pilot

  • Three wards representing

    -Irrigation scheme that uses water from ZINWA dam

    -Irrigation scheme using water ‘illegally’

    -Irrigation scheme using ZINWA-operated pumps (sand abstraction)


Model development in three wards

Model development in three wards


Answering question 1 who are the water users stakeholders

ANSWERING QUESTION 1Who are the water users/stakeholders?

  • We avoided pre-identification of stakeholders

  • We allowed local people to identify who the stakeholders were

  • We adopted the least resistance approach –start with less controversial issues

    • Started with WATER USES and not WATER USERS, in case there was a squabble between some users

    • Avoided asking first what were the water problems

    • From water uses people were asked to list water users


Answering question 1 who are the water users stakeholders1

ANSWERING QUESTION 1Who are the water users/stakeholders?

  • Local people admitted forgetting number, location and status of boreholes!

  • Even the preliminary session could not sort out the problem –PRA blues!!!

  • Men tend to know less about boreholes!!!!


Answering question 1 who are the water users stakeholders2

ANSWERING QUESTION 1Who are the water users/stakeholders?

  • Student-assisted map of water resources at ward level

  • Important for information and local solidarity


Answering question 1 who are the water users

ANSWERING QUESTION 1Who are the water users?

The exercise in THREE wards in Shashe produced the following categories of water users:

Makwe: Primary users (domestic, brickmakers, livestock owners), Irrigators,miners (large scale and panners)

Hwabayi: Primary users (domestic, brickmakers, builders, businesses, livestock owners), irrigators

Guyu: Primary users (domestic, gardeners, livestock owners, schools, businesses, Police, Army) irrigators


Answering question 1 who are the stakeholders

ANSWERING QUESTION 1Who are the stakeholders?

Categories of stakeholders across the wards

Primary water users

Irrigators

Miners

Others

Rainfed farmers were mentioned but considered not to warrant a separate group

In what way are these different from the existing categories as captured by the top down approach?


Answering question 1 who are the stakeholders1

ANSWERING QUESTION 1Who are the stakeholders?

  • Rural District Councils.

  • Communal Farmers.

  • Resettlement Farmers.

  • Small scale commercial farmers.

  • Large scale commercial farmers.

  • Indigenous commercial farmers.

  • Urban authorities.

  • Large scale mines.

  • Small scale mines.

  • Industry and any other stakeholder group the SCC may identify

    THIS LIST OF STAKEHOLDERS WAS CONSIDERED TO BE OUT OF DATE


Answering question 2 how best to represent stakeholders

ANSWERING QUESTION 2How best to represent stakeholders?

Options

Current system as spelt out by statutory instrument – not known and unsuitable

Existing water points committees –rejected as ineffective

Traditional leaders - not welcome unless elected

Ward political councillors - not wanted

Dedicated water institution above water points committees

Representation by villages or ward?


Answering question 2 how best to represent stakeholders1

ANSWERING QUESTION 2How best to represent stakeholders?

‘Village’ was too small/unsuitable

Ward - most appropriate as it is the most common social organising principle

Therefore form a Ward Water Users Association (WWA).

WWA can be seen an extension of activities of what happens at a ward e.g. food distribution, elections, etc & hence is not a new institution


Answering question 2 constituting a ward water users committee

ANSWERING QUESTION 2Constituting a Ward Water Users Committee

Effective Ward Water Users Committee means

a) Deciding on composition of the committee:

Base on agreed categories of stakeholders

Recall the following:

Primary users, irrigators, miners, others

Therefore at minimum have 3 members per ward according to main stakeholder groups


Answering question 3 representation at subcatchment council level

ANSWERING QUESTION 3Representation at subcatchment council level

Committee can incorporate other stakeholders e.g. traditional leaders, ward councillor, local NGOs etc with no voting rights.

i) Subcatchment council accommodates 15 members and yet there are 72 wards in Shashe subcatchment (216 ward representatives is unworkable)

ii) Solution is to base representation on district (Shashe has 4 districts –let each of the 3 stakeholder group be represented = 12 ward representatives in subcatchment council

iii) Ward representatives in a district are an electoral college (or body of people who elect representatives from among themselves)


Answering question 3 representation at subcatchment council level1

ANSWERING QUESTION 3Representation at subcatchment council level

Remaining three slots can be occupied by other interests e.g. commercial farmers, large scale miners, town councils, tourist operator

The process did not go beyond the subcatchment level partly because

* everyone was tired.

* It was not unclear whether local people would want to engage


Answering question 3 representation extrapolation to other subcatchments

ANSWERING QUESTION 3Representation –Extrapolation to other subcatchments

  • Upper Mzingwane has 51 wards and 3 districts

  • Lower Mzingwane has 39 wards and 3 districts

  • Mwenezi has 54 wards and 4 districts

  • This means that ward representation will not be a problem – there is no subcatchment bigger than the Shashe.


Answering question 3 representation at catchment council

ANSWERING QUESTION 3Representation at catchment council

The meeting of subcatchment and catchment councilors convened in Bulawayo resolved the following:

-it endorsed the formation of Ward Water Users Associations

-agreed with the election procedures at ward and district level

-Current practice of four subcatchment council going to sit at the catchment council should be maintained.


Answering question 3 representation at the basin level

ANSWERING QUESTION 3Representation at the basin level

  • Direct representation at basin level institution e.g. LBPTC/LIMCOM) through the Chairman of Mzingwane Catchment Council (is this possible because countries can bring in advisors?) was strongly recommended

  • Insisted on transparency and accountability e.g. government representatives should consult and provide feedback of what happens at the basin

  • Basin forum that includes users from all four riparian countries?


New organogram

New organogram


Conclusions conceptual issues

Conclusions Conceptual issues

  • In developing a model

  • Start with local water needs –not revenue collection or water resource management

  • Find common ground

  • Rely on most appropriate existing institutions and seek to strengthen them -a new broom does not always sweep clean!

  • Socio-political boundaries should not be ignored –seek to create complementarities with hydrologically-based institutions

  • Do not assume the traditional level is best –the ward with no traditional heritage emerged as the best platform


Conclusions conceptual issues1

Conclusions Conceptual issues

  • Avoid over -aggregation where relevant details are lost e.g. stakeholders identified by the government

  • Avoid atomisation syndrome where local unviable institutions (for narrow purposes) are promoted

  • Model should be platform for general local water management issues

  • Model should be development platform (e.g. in Zim wards are required to produce development plans)

  • Model to deepen democracy?


Conclusions the future

Conclusions The future

  • The model was not tested

  • Therefore model needs to be carried to implementation

    • In Shashe

    • in other subcatchments in Mzingwane

    • Compared to Botswana, Mozambique and South Africa

    • Lessons learnt disseminated to other river basins


  • Login