The process of working with the public and private sectors is neither straightforward nor natural for most organisations in the NGO sector. In many recent policy discussions, assumptions have been made about the capacity and willingness of NGOs to participate in and lend their support to pro-poor initiatives. Many are not able or willing to do so. The mandates and attitudes of many NGOs are so far removed from the private sector that they will shy away from entering such arrangements, while others have acknowledged that the poor will benefit from the role such partnerships can perform. And, as in the private sector, many NGOs have only limited capacities.
The challenge for capable NGOs and for other partners seeking NGO support is to address and resolve the conflicts associated with:
• divergent ideologies, project objectives, methods and work practices;
• mistrust and scepticism built up prior to partnership approaches;
• conflict resolution between communities and private operators;
• funding mechanisms and availability;
• publishing and disseminating partnership experiences;
• profit margins and transparency;
• relegating interaction with NGOs to middle management, and marginalising them from decision-making processes;
• understanding the timeframe needed for institutional and social development;
• the concern for long-term impacts and effectiveness compared with short-term efficiency; and
• internal conflicts over reputation, credibility and compromise.
In order to promote NGO involvement, municipalities formulating partnerships need to identify incentives that will attract potential NGO partners. NGOs need to be reassured that they will be given equal priority and status so that their voices will be heard (see discussion in Chapter 8 highlighting the implications of contracts and structured relationships). They need to see that mechanisms are in place to ensure that partnerships are community-friendly and exhibit a social commitment (e.g., financial commitment to monitoring and evaluation, policy debate, dissemination of best practice), and that the partnership reveals a commitment to capacity building and sustainability. As such, many will argue that key process and content agreements (such as community participation) should be acknowledged at an early stage.
Box 6.15 Community Mobilisation and Management | |
One of the notable characteristics of the EU-funded programme established to improve water supply to the outlying areas of Lima, was the role the community adopted. The empowerment process led to it becoming the consumer and the client of the water tanker delivery service (see Box 6.8), and to more generally take responsibility for the management, operation and maintenance of its own water supply system. Following some successful pilot work undertaken independently by the NGO Ecociudad in the early 1990s, a potable water supply project (the APPJ project) was developed with assistance from the EU with a budget of US$15 million. The primary objectives of the programme were: to establish a sustainable and reliable water supply for the marginal urban settlements of Lima, through the physical construction of reservoirs and the installation of local distribution networks through the settlements; the integration of water tanker supply system in a large number of areas; and to participate fully as key stakeholders through the mobilisation of the community, able to take on a management role upon completion. Civil society is both the beneficiary and the organiser/supply manager of the process. With technical and capacity building support from local NGOs, communities first assist in the construction of the reservoir and network by providing unskilled labour for digging trenches and the construction of standpipes. They then form water committees called COVAAPs in each sector in which a reservoir is built. The COVAAP (Vigilance Committee for Drinking Water) is ultimately responsible for the management of the water supply system. It must be formed by the end of the construction phase to take on the responsibility for management, operation and maintenance. The COVAAPs act as community-based water suppliers. Those requiring water to be transported to their reservoirs purchase water from the tanker drivers (at a price capped by the municipality) and this water is sold via the distribution network to each household. There are a number of distinctive models for these 'water committees' depending on their access to water and the decision- making process of the community, but where there is no other source, they have a private-civil society contract with the water tankers. They all act as profit-making enterprises, but one sub-contracts to the private sector, and the other conducts the distribution process itself. In the private COVAAP model, as seen in Huaycan (with a 3400-metre network, 40 communal standpipes and 50m3 reservoir), the operation of the infrastructure and services is contracted to an association of water tanker drivers for a one-year period. It pays a monthly fee of US$58 to the local water committee and undertakes to provide an agreed service to the inhabitants of the area. Water is sold to the households, by the container, via a water attendant employed by the contractor. The COVAAP agrees the tariff at which water is sold for the duration of the contract. This water supply system is provided at a tariff that is 20% cheaper than other community models. In the community COVAAP model, water tankers are contracted by the COVAAP to supply the water to the reservoirs. COVAAP then takes responsibility for the administration of the system, the maintenance of the system (both the standpoints and the reservoir), and for selling the water from the standpoints to the consumers in its area. The COVAAP is comprised of representatives of the local committees, central authorities, the community promoters and the public works committee promoted by the NGO, and a community representative. Because this model gives the community control over the supply process, it is the most commonly adopted model. A second community COVAAP model obtains the water directly from the SEDEPAL network. The NGOs play a critical role in capacity building and facilitating communities, as well as a primary service provider role. This includes, for instance: • executing the construction works; • promoting the organisation and participation of the local communities in performing their roles; • providing training on the administration and management of the water system; • facilitating and managing the labour provided by the community for the construction process; • organising local capacity building to mobilise communities; and • organising health promotion activities with the communities. Currently in its final stages, the initiative has resulted in the completion of 250 micro-projects (each serving 120 households), providing water to some 300 households and a total population of over 1.5 million. Total community contribution via a labour input is estimated at a value of US$3 million. | |
Source: Ecociudad/GHK, 2001 | |