Decentralisation and rural water service delivery in Vanuatu

Love, Mark and Molitambe, Heather and Kotra, Krishna K. and Shrestha, Sachita and Souter, Regina (2024) Decentralisation and rural water service delivery in Vanuatu. [Professional and Technical Reports]

Text - Published Version Download (3MB)

Abstract

This research examines the strengths, challenges and opportunities associated with rural water service delivery in Vanuatu, with a specific focus on decentralisation.
Globally, there has been a slow but steady shift away from the community water management (CWM) model towards various
alternative models – sometimes referred to as community water management plus (CWM+) (e.g., Baumann, 2006; Hutchings et al. 2015) – marked by increasing decentralisation, professionalisation, and a diversification in service delivery models, including various forms of private sector involvement (see Lockwood and Smits, 2011). However, there is little to no information of what this might look like in the Pacific Island’s region. This research explores the unique socio-cultural, economic, political and geographical particulars of Fiji within the context of these wider global shifts and debates in the rural water and water, sanitation
and hygiene (WASH) space. Due to demographic, geographic, environmental and socio-economic particulars unique to the Pacific Island Countries (PIC), the professionalisation of rural water service delivery at scale is unlikely in the near term, meaning that the community water management model will remain the dominant water service delivery approach for the foreseeable future. However, as Hutchings et al., (2017), among others argue, the balance of responsibility must eventually shift away from the expectation that rural
communities can independently be successful “public service mangers” (Hutchings et al., 2017). Over the last decade, decentralisation has been intensifying in PICs such as Solomon Islands, Fiji, and Vanuatu, with substantial policy changes advancing (on paper at least) decentralisation aspirations, including in rural water service delivery. In several respects, Vanuatu has progressed further than some its neighbours in adopting elements of CWM+ approach (see below), but like many complex, low-resource states, struggles with limited financial and human resources. Moreover, there remains, in practice, a systemic absence of post-construction follow-up monitoring and support for rural community water managers. There is an acute shortage of capacity and private sector actors at the rural level in most contexts. Lessons from Africa, Asia and Latin
America demonstrate the value of institutionalised post-construction support and applying a selection of diverse service delivery approaches (e.g., government, private sector, CSOs). However, the unique character of the region questions the direct transferability of lessons from elsewhere to the Pacific Islands. Evidence from around the world suggests that decentralisation efforts vary widely, from “big bang” decentralisation (Hofman and Kaiser, 2004) through to gradual, well-resourced “wholesale planned decentralisation”, “phased”, “partial” and “inadequately resourced” examples (Lockwood and Smits, 2011: 65-8). Under-funded decentralisation agendas and human resource gaps are common, and there remains debate about the net benefits that have derived from decentralisation in developing country contexts (see Faguet and Poschi, 2015). Regardless, decentralisation unfolds over an extended period, taking decades not years. As Lockwood and Smits (2011) emphasise, the effective decentralisation of rural service delivery necessitates not only empowering but also resourcing lower levels of government. Based on the analysis from this research, Vanuatu’s decentralized rural water sector exhibits a mix of “partial,” “phased,” and “inadequately resourced” characteristics. This research employed a mixed-methods approach, including literature reviews, stakeholder interviews, and participatory workshops, with interviews conducted across national, provincial, and village levels. Adapting and extending on the various extant WASH “building blocks” frameworks (e.g., Huston and Moriarty, 2018) and other key literature (Lockwood and Smits, 2011; World Bank, 2017), this research utilises six critical “elements” or “building blocks” deemed essential to progressing decentralisation in the rural water sector in the PIC context:
• Policies, legal and regulatory frameworks
• Budgeting, finance, and (material) resources
• Information and knowledge sharing
• Monitoring, evaluation, and learning
• Harmonisation and coordination
• Human resources and capacity development.

Item Type:	Professional and Technical Reports
Uncontrolled Keywords:	Decentralization, Rural Water, WASH, Vanuatu
Subjects:	Q Science > Q Science (General) T Technology > TD Environmental technology. Sanitary engineering
Divisions:	School of Agriculture, Geography, Environment, Ocean and Natural Sciences (SAGEONS)
Depositing User:	Krishna Kotra
Date Deposited:	28 Apr 2025 03:09
Last Modified:	28 Apr 2025 03:09
URI:	https://repository.usp.ac.fj/id/eprint/14868

Actions (login required)

View Item