Sri Lanka: “swings and roundabouts” in water policy development

“In recent decades, policy reforms for water resource management nationally -demanded but designed by external actors – have generated intense controversy and become both a tool and a victim of national politics”, says Rajindra Ariyabandu in a new ODI working paper [1]. Ariyabandu tells the “tells the difficult story of a set of Asian Development Bank (ADB) projects in the 1990s which were designed to streamline water resource management arrangements and introduce demand management to the country. In spite of a decade of investment and effort these arrangements have never been implemented. This failure is largely attributable to a lack of understanding of the Sri Lankan context: a multi-party system with governments often held together in fragile coalitions, strong cultural values attached to water, a vocal civil society fearful of water privatisation and a politicised media willing to exploit controversies”. In 2004, the ADB suspended funding to the Comprehensive Water Resources Management (CWRM) project, which it had supported since its inception in 1992.

[1] Ariyabandu, R. (2008). Swings and roundabouts : a narrative on water policy development in Sri Lanka. (Working paper / ODI ; 296). London, UK, Overseas Development Institute. vi, 18 p. ISBN 978 0 85003 890 3. Download here

Global Water Partnership: joint donor external evaluation

The Global Water Partnership (GWP) was established in 1996 as an international network promoting an integrated approach to water resources management. The Performance Assessment Resource Centre (PARC) carried out an evaluation of the GWP for its Joint Donor Group of six European bilaterals (Denmark, UK, Netherlands, Germany, Norway and Sweden). The evaluation focuses on the 2004-2008 strategy period.

One of the main achievements of the GWP was that it has expanded from 28 Country Water Partnerships (CWPs) to 71 and from 9 Regional Technical Advisory Committees (RTACs) to 12 Regional Water Partnerships (RWPs) during this strategy period. The number of members has tripled from 600 to over 1800. There is also a greater awareness of IWRM across the network.

A major challenge is that GWP’s international policy advocacy has not kept pace with emerging issues. Whilst the central message of IWRM is still valid, the global advocacy role needs reinvigoration to remain relevant and demonstrate that GWP is abreast of topical issues that affect its members. The financial sustainability at any level of the partnership was said to be doubtful.

A key recommendation is for the GWP to re-position itself as a globally recognised advocate of IWRM that clearly articulates the relationship between IWRM and emerging global challenges. The regions should become stronger and technically support the countries. Most resources should go to the country, then regional, then HO level.

Read the full evaluation report here

Watershed development: evaluating social impacts in India

Research from Oxford University, in the UK, evaluates the social impacts of watershed development in Madhya Pradesh, India. ‘Propensity score matching‘ was used to compare the impacts from a control micro-watershed, where no interventions had taken place, and a treated micro-watershed.

The analysis focuses on changes in agricultural income and access to domestic water following several development interventions in the treated watershed. These include pond construction, tree planting and water harvesting terraces.

One of the findings was that there was a reduction in domestic water collection times for those households that had previously spent the longest time collecting water. However, despite these benefits, the majority of people were still without basic access to water.

To achieve more effective development impacts, there is a need for more rigorous and objective evaluation methods.

Read more: id21, 5 Apr 2008