The effect of urbanization on community-managed water supply: case study of Buea, Cameroon

Abstract

Community-based projects play an important role in developing countries' efforts to meet the Millennium Development Goal of halving the population without access to improved water sources. Often associated with rural communities, they are increasingly being implemented in urban areas, where rural community-based management practices may be unsuitable. This research examines a small community-managed water supply scheme in Buea, a rapidly growing urban area in Cameroon. Stakeholder interviews and household questionnaires were used to better understand the implications of urbanisation on community-managed water supply projects. The urban context adds management and planning pressures because of larger, more diverse, populations and rapid population growth. Urban community-managed schemes require an institutional framework to encourage participation, which is at an increased risk of failure due to the urban context. Finally, urban community-managed schemes need to be implemented in an institutional context where they have legitimacy in the urban water supply framework, thereby allowing them to have access to the institutional and technical support they require to function sustainably. The consequence of failure is a return to "unimproved" water sources.

Community water governance for urban water security in the Global South: Status, lessons, and prospects

“…Most areas with poor access tended to be poor, peri‐urban or informal areas where poor urban planning and exclusion from piped systems increased water‐supply costs, and water tariffs were historically high (Adams & Zulu, 2015; Adegun, 2015; N. Ahmed & Sohail, 2003; Al'Afghani et al, 2019). Where piped water is available, several studies pointed to unreliable supply due to high demand and low water pressure (Allen et al, 2017; Dill, 2010; Sally et al, 2014; Velzeboer et al, 2018). Other access‐based challenges that inspired community involvement were high rates of “lost” or nonrevenue water (Kifanyi, Shayo, & Ndambuki, 2013; Nganyanyuka, Martinez, Wesselink, Lungo, & Georgiadou, 2014).…”

“…Other access‐based challenges that inspired community involvement were high rates of “lost” or nonrevenue water (Kifanyi, Shayo, & Ndambuki, 2013; Nganyanyuka, Martinez, Wesselink, Lungo, & Georgiadou, 2014). Others cited community exclusion from city water services due to terrain, location, or land tenure issues (N. Ahmed & Sohail, 2003; Baud & Nainan, 2008; Sally et al, 2014).…”

“…Depending on the institutional arranges, configurations of community roles included collecting water user fees and managing revenue, maintaining water points and other facilities, providing labor to infrastructure enhancements including new water points, and setting or negotiating with utilities on water pricing, seeking external funding. Some communities also made occasional financial contributions to sustain the water system (Sally et al, 2014). Although rare, some community organizations also played activist roles.…”

“…The complexity of community‐based partnerships ranged from one other partner (47.6% of cases reviewed) to three or more (five cases). At the high end, the Cochabamba, Bolivia (Marston, 2014) and in a community water scheme in Cameroon (Sally et al, 2014) were four‐way partnerships. A five‐way CWG partnership in Dhaka included communities, an NGO that helped to negotiate with a public water utility, a city corporation representing the state government, and international donors providing capital for new water projects (Akbar et al, 2007).…”

“…The poorest residents sometimes got the worst service (Andreasen & Møller‐Jensen, 2016) and some could not afford the community‐supplied water at all (Dill, 2010). Some communities inherited weak infrastructure, or the water scheme was too small to meet water demand (Sally et al, 2014). In Kisumu, Kenya, supply interruptions worsened with overloading as the number of water kiosks increased despite insufficient water‐treatment facilities (Adams & Boateng, 2018; Nzengya, 2015; Velzeboer et al, 2018).…”