This AfDB project is responsible for rehabilitating 250 BH in the district of Machinga. This is huge! But it sounds straight forward, right? Select 250 broken boreholes, and fix them.
At first, I thought it would be straight forward too. So why is it turning out to be so complicated? There are a few things that I’ve experienced during this phase of the project.
1) Defining “rehabilitation”
An ideal “rehabilitation” involves repairing concrete structures (base, washing block for clothes, etc.), changing large parts of the pump, and blowing out the borehole to remove sediment. A borehole that needs all three of these things is an A+ candidate.
But what happens when a borehole needs only a new washing block and a few spare parts? Is that considered a rehabilitation? Or how about a borehole that simply needs a few pump rods and nothing else? During my analysis of the 250 boreholes surveyed, it was found that this is the case for about 25% of boreholes.
Why is this a concern? Rehabilitating these boreholes means that other boreholes that are in greater need will not get rehabilitated. This is a reason for concern.
2) Assessing a borehole’s problem accurately with limited capacity and knowledge
The assessments of these boreholes was done by field workers. While these men have had training around these types of boreholes, they are very inexperienced, and many only have a high school education. Also, a conversation today with someone in the district informed me that some of these field workers are in the job because of connections they have with relatives in the government.
I have seen first hand that several of these field workers cannot make a proper assessment of what is wrong with a borehole. I know many of them have good intentions, but this is really a job that should be given to someone with technical expertise.
3) The quality of assessment is based on financial inputs
Field workers conduct their work based on a system of allowances. These are ‘stipends’ given to workers based on the quantity (and not necessarily quality) of work they conduct. What I found through my experience is that some assessments were completed based on geographic convenience in order to obtain these allowances. What this means is that field workers would select boreholes that were closest to them, in order to get the job finished quickly. This can greatly affect the equitable and efficient distribution of these repairs.
4) What about community based management (CBM)?
Community based management is the idea that communities should be responsible for the maintenance and well-being of their water point. This includes the financing of spare parts that need to be replaced in the pump.
Going back to my first point. If you replace a few spare parts in a borehole, you can certainly call it rehabilitated in a report, but what message does this send to a community? Does it say that communities should wait for another rehabilitation the next time their water point breaks down. Malawi has experienced a dependency syndrome when it comes to water point maintenance, and needs support to break free from this mentality.
The resolution of this field exercise left me with a thousand questions, a good amount of happiness, and some worries.
The world of water development is complicated. Community financing of spare parts, spare parts networks, equity of water point distribution, capacity at the district government level, communication between projects and communities – they’re all connected with no easy answers.
The bottom line is that 250 boreholes will be rehabilitated. The final report will say this, and it will speak the truth. The reality is that the practice is a far far more complicated than the declaration.
Take care, and much love.
Kevin
All you must do is to select from the abdominal exercise macines the one that suits you finest. In case you can not come across the time to function out in a gym, and you've decided not to forgo your exercise regime, the wisest alternative would be to acquire the ideal equipment you can conveniently use at home.
ReplyDelete