Accessibility and Utilization Patterns of Water Points in Selected Communities of Enugu State

ACCESSIBILITY AND UTILIZATION PATTERNS OF WATER POINTS IN SELECTED COMMUNITIES OF ENUGU STATE BY NJOKU, COLLINS CHIBUZO PG/M. Sc/07/47135 INSTITUTE FOR DEVELOPMENT STUDIES UNIVERSITY OF NIGERIA ENUGU CAMPUS ENUGU STATE FEBRUARY, 2010 TITLE PAGE ACCESSIBILITY AND UTILIZATION PATTERNS WATER POINTS IN SELECTED COMMUNITIES OF ENUGU STATE BY NJOKU, COLLINS CHIBUZO PG/M. Sc/07/47135 A PROJECT SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE AWARD OF MASTER OF SCIENCE (M. Sc. DEGREE IN DEVELOPMENT STUDIES, INSTITUTE FOR DEVELOPMENT STUDIES, UNIVERSITY OF NIGERIA, ENUGU CAMPUS ENUGU STATE SUPERVISOR: UMOH, B. D. FEBRUARY, 2010 APPROVAL PAGE The study embodied in this project report undertaken by NJOKU, COLLINS CHIBUZO, PG/M. Sc/07/47135 under the supervision of Mr. Umoh B. D. in the Institute for Development Studies (IDS), University of Nigeria, Enugu Campus has been approved as having met part of the requirements of the award of the degree of Master of Science in Development Studies in the University of Nigeria. ……………………………….. …………………. Umoh, B. DDate Supervisor ……………………………….. ……………………. Prof. Ibeanu, Okechukwu (Ph. D)Date Director ……………………………….. ……………………. Prof. Ndolo, Ikechukwu (Ph. D)Date External Examiner CERTIFICATION This is to certify that the study embodied in this project undertaken and written by NJOKU, COLLINS CHIBUZO (Registration No. PG/M. Sc. /07/47135) and submitted to the Institute for Development Studies (IDS) University of Nigeria, Enugu Campus is original and has not been submitted for the award of any Degree or Diploma either in this University or any other institution. ……………………….. ………………….. Njoku, Collins ChibuzoDate PG/M. Sc. /07/47135 DEDICATION Dedicated to all those who truly believe and strive for the sustainable development of Nigeria and the African Continent through good governance and a 3600 responsible and responsive leadership. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS All glory and adoration, to Almighty God (He who truly is), for the vision and provision, to undergo the course of studies leading to the award of a Masters Degree. My first and biggest debt of gratitude is to my supervisor, B. D.

Umoh, who beneath the facade of a slim build is a huge man of academic skills and steel, with an uncanny rich sense of social capital that makes him much more than a supervisor. He is a teacher, mentor, motivator, father, guardian brother, and a friend. His thorough reading of my manuscripts and penetrating comments that came within days (not weeks) and encouragement gave me profound inspiration. Always demanding more, needling and cajoling, and a stickler for excellence, he challenged me to produce my best. I am thankful to Professor Ikechukwu E. Nwosu, (Ph.

D), who together with the few staff in the Institute pioneered the establishment of the postgraduate academic programme in the Institute for Development Studies (IDS) in which I am a privileged pioneer student and graduate. I wish to acknowledge the contribution of other professors, lecturers, and staff of the Institute for Development Studies (IDS), for a rich tapestry of knowledge and experience, and for providing a conducive climate for intellectual effervescence, self discovery, and self expression, geared towards solving the problems and challenges of man.

Worthy of special mention is the new director of Institute for Development Studies (IDS), Professor Ibeanu, Okechukwu (Ph. D) for value-added academic leadership and development administration; a fine gentleman whose mantra is knowledge for an authentic African development within the nuances of globalization. At the IDS, I had the opportunity to interact with my colleagues of different persuasions, who made my leadership of the class a rainbow, kaleidoscopic experience that will surely impact positively on my future development leadership offerings and service delivery to Nigeria and the Diaspora.

I wish to particularly thank Solomon Akpanufot for providing the example and inspiration for good leadership, my deputy, the delightful Akwugo, Frank Amagwu, Iyiata Akubiro, the Ekeobas, Okey Chukwuemeka, Paul Okeleke, Onyimba Eze (Mazi), the Ezeasors, Ugonne, Martha, Ominimini and Ecomog who gleefully “warred” against me, for all their support, advice, constructive criticisms, biting sarcasms, invidious innuendos and malignant actions, which in a dialectical fashion, produced a synthesis of unqualified success in class leadership, culminating in my being the founding president of the Institute or Development Studies Students Association (IDSSA). I enjoyed great support and encouragement from my family and fellow kinsmen at University of Nigeria Enugu Campus and Enugu Metropolis. I wish to specially thank and honour my parents Chief and Lolo Nathan O. Njoku for believing in me, Edith, Innocent, Kenneth and Chioma, for being dearest siblings. To Engineer and Mrs. Godwin Chibuzo Uzoho and Dr. Gideon Ahamefula Emerole for being there for me, I say a big thank you. I am grateful to Engineer Eze of Enugu State Water Board, Mr. Clement Chigbo of WaterAid, Mr.

John Ewoh of Enugu South Local Government Council, and Mr. Nicholas of National Population Commission. Enugu, Mrs. Olachi Ronnie of Enugu DFID, Mrs. Josephine Onah of SJGP unit of DFID Enugu and my research assistants for providing the raw data and other support for this dissertation. My thanks also go to Amaka who typed the manuscript and Stella who did the finishing maneuvers; you will forever remain “sweeties”. To Greg Izuwa of Federal Ministry of Health Abuja, and Frank Ibeawuchi Amagwu, South East Zonal Head, First City Monument Bank Enugu, you are friends that stick closer than a brother.

By acknowledging some people by name, I mean to thank others, too, who are anonymous yet contributed in their own special way. However, all faults and fallacies, if any, in the research, are, of course, my responsibility. Njoku, Collins Chibuzo December, 2009 ABSTRACT This study examined the accessibility and utilization patterns of water points in selected communities in Enugu State, Nigeria. Using the survey method and the stratified sampling technique, a total of 400 respondents were selected for study.

Simple percentages, charts, cone, pyramid, tables and the chi-square were used to analyze the data. The following findings were made: rural and urban residents buy water; distances to water points are farther in rural areas than urban areas; the urban areas have better access to improved water points than the rural areas; women and children bear disproportionate burden of fetching water and water has impact on the socio-economic activities of households. The major factors that influence the frequency and quantity of water use are location, distance, time, income, cost, household size, season and gender.

In terms of association between household size and frequency of water use, income groups and frequency of water use, and age groups and frequency of water use, a chi – square value of 331. 603 (d. f. 4), 40. 402(d. f. 5) and 90. 734(d. f. 4) P>000 respectively, were obtained. Thus the null hypotheses were rejected. The policy recommendations include mainstreaming of women and children in water policies towards the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), bridging the water gap between the urban and rural areas, a blue revolution that will prioritize the water sector and putting the people at the center of development.

TABLE OF CONTENTS Title Pagei Approval Page ii Certification iii Dedication iv Acknowledgements v Abstract vii Table of Contents viii List of Tables xi List of Figures xiii CHAPTER ONE – INTRODUCTION 1. 1 Background of the Study 1 1. 2 Statement of the Study4 1. 3 Objectives of the Study 5 1. 4 Significance of the Study 5 1. 5 Scope of the Study 6 1. 6 Limitations of the Study 6 1. 7 Research Questions 6 1. 8 Hypotheses7 1. 9 Study Area7 1. 10 Acronyms 11 References CHAPTER TWO – LITERATURE REVIEW 2. 1 Introduction 16 2. 2 Universal Concerns for Water 16 2. 3 Public Water Supply 18 2. Water Demand 22 2. 5 Water Availability and Use 23 2. 6 Water Accessibility 27 2. 7 Water Resources Management29 2. 8 Interface and Dimensions of Water and Sanitation 31 2. 9 The Human Development Costs of Water 33 2. 10 The Sustainable Benefits of Water 35 2. 11 Water Storage, Stress and Scarcity 38 2. 12 Water Pollution and Contamination 42 2. 13 Safe Water and Improved Water Drinking Sources 47 2. 14 The Policy Framework for Water49 2. 15 Water and Attainment of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs)51 2. 16 Water and Climate Change 53 2. 17 Water as a Source of Conflict 54 2. 8 An Overview of Rural and Urban Areas in Nigeria 56 2. 19 Theoretical Framework 61 2. 20 Empirical Studies 67 References CHAPTER THREE – RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY 3. 1 Introduction 82 3. 2 Research Design 82 3. 3 Types of Data82 3. 4 Sources of Data82 3. 5 Instruments for Data Collection 83 3. 6 Validity and Reliability of the Study Instrument 83 3. 7 Pre-Test 83 3. 8 Questionnaire Administration 84 3. 9 The Population of the Study 84 3. 10 Sample Size Determination 85 3. 11 Identification of Respondent(s)86 3. 12 Unit of Analysis 87 3. 13 Data Analysis 87 References CHAPTER FOUR – DATA PRESENTATION . 1 Introduction 90 4. 2 Questionnaire Return Rate 90 4. 3 Socio-Demographic Characteristics of Respondents 91 4. 4 Income Groups and Sex95 4. 5 Size of Household (Location)95 4. 6 Number of Years Lived in Area/Community 97 4. 7 Available Water Sources 97 4. 8 Impact of Access to Water on Socio-Economic Activities of Households104 4. 9 Stakeholders Involvement and Promotion of Access to Water by Households 105 4. 10 Test of Hypotheses 106 CHAPTER FIVE – DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS AND IMPLICATIONS FOR DEVELOPMENT 5. 1 Introduction 107 5. 2 Sources of Water 107 5. 3 Household Access and Quantity of Water Used 108 . 4 Impact of Access to Water on Socio-Economic Activities of Households110 5. 5 Stakeholders Involvement and Promotion of Access to Water by Households111 5. 6 Implications for Sustainable Development 112 References CHAPTER SIX – SUMMARY OF MAJOR FINDINGS, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS 6. 1 Introduction 118 6. 2 Summary of Major Findings 118 6. 3 Conclusion 119 6. 4 Recommendations 119 6. 5 Suggested Area for Further Research119 Bibliography Appendices LIST OF TABLES Table 3. 1: Population of Study 85 Table 3. 2: Sample Size Distribution 86 Table 4. 1: Returned Questionnaires90 Table 4. : Distribution of Respondents By Gender 91 Table 4. 3: Distribution of Respondents By Age Group and Location 92 Table 4. 4: Distribution of Respondents By Marital Status93 Table 4. 5: Distribution of Respondents According to Occupation 93 Table 4. 6: Distribution of Respondents According to Income Groups based On Location 94 Table 4. 7: Distribution of Respondents According to Income Groups Sex 95 Table 4. 8: Distribution of Respondents According to Size of Household and Location 96 Table 4. 9: Distribution of Respondents by Size of Household and Sex 96 Table 4. 10: Distribution of Respondents According to Number of Years

Lived in Community 97 Table 4. 11: Water Sources in the Communities 98 Table 4. 12: Distribution of Respondents Based on Quantity of Water used Daily by Household and Location98 Table 4. 13: Distribution of Respondents Based on Quantity of Water used Daily by Household and Sex99 Table 4. 14: Distribution of Respondents Nearest Source of Water Supply99 Table 4. 15: Distribution of Respondents According to Time Spent in Fetching Water100 Table 4. 16: Distribution of Respondents According to Period of Fetching Water100 Table 4. 17: Distribution of Respondents Based on Number of Times to Fetch Water101

Table 4. 18: Distribution of Respondents Based on Factors Determining Frequency of Fetching Water101 Table 4. 19: Distribution of Respondents Based on Burden of Fetching Water 102 Table 4. 20: Distribution of Respondents Based on Sources of Water102 Table 4. 21: Distribution of Respondents Based on Monthly Cost of Buying Water by Location 103 Table 4. 22: Distribution of Respondents Based on Monthly Cost of Buying Water by Sex103 Table 4. 23: Distribution of Respondents Based on Difficulties in Getting Water 104 Table 4. 24: Impact of Access to Water on Socio-Economic Activities of Households105

Table 4. 25: Stakeholders Promotion of Access to Water by Households105 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. 1: Map of Enugu State Delineating the Study Area10 Figure 4. 1: A Bar Chart Showing Urban and Rural Respondents90 Figure 4. 2: A Bar Chart Showing the Distribution of Respondents by Gender Based on Location 91 Figure 4. 3: A Pyramid Showing Distribution of Respondents According to Age Groups Based on Location 93 Figure 4. 4: A Horizontal Bar Chart Showing Distribution of Respondents According to Income Groups Based on Location 94 Figure 4. 5: A Horizontal Bar Chart Showing Distribution of Respondents

According to Income Groups Based on Gender 95 Figure 4. 6: A Cone Showing Distribution of Respondents According to Size of Household Based on Location96 CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION 1. 1BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY Among the most basic requirements for body nourishment and life is water. Most human settlements have been predicated on the availability, accessibility and utilization of water. Water is the matrix of life. Without water, life becomes a lie. “Water is the driving force of all nature. It is essential for the workings of our ecological systems. It is essential for our health and the health of our communities.

It features prominently in one’s spiritual life. It binds us together through shared waterways and shared water sources. It shapes our relationship with nature, politics and economies” (Maathai, 2008: xxiv). Water is the beverage or drinks our body needs most, it is very vital and has no substitutes. As noted by the United Nations Development Programme-UNDP (2006:10), people need water as surely as they need oxygen: without it life would not exist. But water gives life in a far broader sense. People need clean water and sanitation to sustain their health and maintain their dignity.

Beyond the household, water also sustains ecological systems and provides an input into the production systems that maintain livelihoods. Water is a source of human interdependence. Within any country water is a shared resource serving multiple constituencies, from the environment to agriculture, industry and households. But water is also the ultimate fugitive resource. It crosses national frontiers, linking users across borders in a system of hydrological interdependence (UNDP, 2006:32). Water has therefore become a strategic and critical public good, sometimes, causing conflicts among peoples, communities and nations.

For a long time water has also been an issue in international politics and a source of inter-state conflicts (Glatzi 2001 in Stroh, 2003:95). The British Department for International Development-DFID (2001:15) adds that throughout human history water resources have been a source of conflict. As demand for water rises, the potential for conflicts may increase. But as accessibility and utilization of water points is improved, the rhythm of development is enhanced and this reflects in the quality of life of the people and promotes peace and human security (DFID, 2001). Ultimately, human development is about the realization of potential.

It is about what people can do and what they can become – their capabilities – and about the freedom they have to exercise real choices in their lives. Water pervades all aspects of human development. When people are denied access to water as a productive resource their choices and freedoms are constrained by ill health, poverty and vulnerability. Water gives life to everything, including human development and human freedom (UNDP, 2006:10). In spite of the overarching importance of water to both human and sustainable development, many communities lack access to safe potable water.

The seventh Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) is to reduce to half by 2015, the proportion of people without sustainable access to safe drinking water and basic sanitation. African leaders have declared their commitment to achieving universal access to clean water, through their development blueprint, the New Partnership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD) (Dovi, 2007). According to Nigeria MDGs Progress Report (2006:53) data on the proportion of total population with access to safe drinking water are conflicting. Evidence from the National Bureau of statistics (NBS, 2006), shows that states with least access include Enugu.

Access to sanitation still remains very low (38%) even though there is National Water and Sanitation Policy. The 2002 Core Welfare Indicators Questionnaire (CWIQ) study showed that 40% of all households in Enugu State and about half of rural households were more than half an hour from the nearest source of drinking water (NBS, 2002). Only 25% of all households and 15% of rural households had access to safe water defined as pipe-borne water. In rural areas, most of those who do not have access rely on sources such as unprotected wells, rivers or ponds.

In urban areas, about a third of households have to buy their water from vendors (Enugu SEEDS, 2004:27, 33). Others rely on private and public boreholes, most of these water points are contaminated with dire consequences for life and human dignity. UNDP (2006:5) maintains that throughout history human progress has depended on access to clean water and on the ability of societies to harness the potential of water as a productive resource. Water for life in the household and water for livelihoods through production is two of the foundations for human development.

Yet for a large section of humanity and the Nigerian society these foundations are not in place. Based on estimates by United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) only 48% of Nigerians have access to improved water sources (UNDP, 2008). Over 1 billion people around the world lack access to a safe water supply and over 2. 4 billion lack adequate sanitation (DFID, 2001:13) and millions of urban residents were counted as having access if they shared a single faucet with over 1000 residents at a considerable distance from their homes (Todaro and Smith, 2009:508).

Enhancing environmental health remains particularly challenging for sub-Saharan Africa. Around 45 percent of sub-Saharan Africa’s population do not use improved drinking water sources, and more than 60 percent remain without access to improved sanitation facilities as of 2004, the most recent year for which firm estimates are available (UNICEF, 2008: 9-10). The unfortunate water shortage in Nigeria finds expression in Samuel Coleridge’s “Rhyme of the Ancient Mariner”: “water everywhere, but none to drink”. There is an overdose of natural water in Nigeria, but citizens’ daily groan under the weight of lack of safe domestic water.

This ugly scenario has compelled many residents of the megalopolis particularly those in the low income bracket that cannot afford to sink a borehole, to resort to fetching water for domestic purposes from shallow wells or from streams sometimes 3 hour walking distance away (Eneh, 2008:6). UNDP (2006:16) argues that the crisis in water and sanitation is above all a crisis for the poor. Almost two in three people lacking access to clean water survive on less than $2 a day, with one in three living on less than $1 a day.

The perverse principle that applies across much of the developing world is that the poorest people not only get access to less water, and to less clean water, but they also pay some of the world’s highest prices. While basic needs vary, the minimum threshold is about 20 litres a day. Most of the 1. 1 billion people categorized as lacking access to clean water use about 5 litres a day – one tenth of the average daily amount used in rich countries to flush toilets (UNDP, 2006:14). This is induced and enhanced by corruption in the water sector, which has been described as a destructive partnership (Plummer, 2007).

The Global Corruption Report 2008 argues that the crisis of water is a crisis of water governance with corruption as one root cause. Corruption in the water sector is widespread and makes water undrinkable, inaccessible and unaffordable. Nowhere are the global water crises and the havoc that corruption inflicts on the sector more shockingly on display than in Africa where a rich and powerful elite oversee a rich region inhabited by an impoverished and disempowered population (Transparency International, 2008, Maathai, 2008).

And yet, despite the imperatives of water for citizens’ livelihoods and a country’s growth, water governance has not been prioritized. Institutional dysfunction, poor financial management and low accountability mean that many governments are not able to respond to the crisis, and weak capacity and limited awareness leave citizens and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) in many countries unable to demand change (Plummer and Cross, 2007). The fulfillment of poor people’s water related needs is fundamental to the elimination of poverty (DFID, 2001:22).

Expanding access to water and sanitation is a moral and ethical imperative rooted in the cultural and religious traditions of communities around the world. Dignity, equity, compassion and solidarity are values shared all over the world. Expanding water supply and sanitation services to poor households would largely contribute to promoting them. The Right to Water, recently proclaimed by the United Nations, (General Comment No 15, 2002), is said to be “indispensable for leading a life in human dignity” and “a prerequisite for the realization of other rights. (WWC, 2008). 1. 2 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM It is obvious that the human body can do without food and clothing for weeks, but it cannot be sustained that long without water. Besides, other activities of man – agriculture, food processing and preparation, as well as many aspects of manufacturing – require water. The required water can be sourced from rain, surface or underground sources. These facts make most governments to take seriously the issue of provision of potable water to its subjects. In spite of the efforts of the government of Enugu State, individuals, rganizations and donor agencies aimed at making water accessible to residents of Enugu State, the state is yet to achieve universal access in water supply. The problem of lack of access to water by residents of Enugu State is unfortunately accentuated by the geology and geography of the state. For Enugu State, the overall policy target is to make safe water available, affordable and accessible to all the citizens of the state, for industrial and domestic purposes, with a view to achieving a sustainable environment.

Specifically, the State Government purposes to increase percentage of the population with access to safe water to 90% by 2009 and also eliminate in 2009, the incidence of diseases related to poor water especially cholera (Enugu SEEDS, 2004:54). Chime (2007:6) accentuates this in his 4-point Agenda which is a blue print for good governance, consolidation and economic growth in Enugu State. The first thrust of the 4-point agenda is provision and rehabilitation of physical infrastructure in form of roads, housing, water, housing, and electricity.

It is against this background that the study investigates the types of water points available, the utilization patterns, nature of utilization and the cost of the utilization of these water points. 1. 3 OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY The specific objectives of the study include: i. To identify water sources in the rural and urban communities. ii. To determine households access and use of the water sources iii. To determine the impact of access and use of water on the socio-economic activities of households. iv. To determine stakeholders involvement and promotion of access to water sources by households. 1. SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY This study is significant in various ways: 1. To provide valuable insights to existing gap between demand and supply based on an assessment of the level of availability, accessibility and utilization patterns of water points in the selected communities and what can be done to promote it. 2. In view of the variability in quantity and quality of surface and underground water available, output of this study will serve as valuable inputs to planning for the effective management of the available water points to ensure households wellbeing, economic growth and environmental sustainability. . It will reinforce the need for potable safe water in every community, urban and rural. This is because clean water and basic sanction are among the most powerful drivers for human development. They extend opportunity, enhance dignity and help create a virtuous cycle of improving health and rising wealth (UNDP, 2006:13). They are also basic human needs and fundamental human rights to be provided and enforced. 4. It could also influence and motivate the various stakeholders to prioritize provision of safe potable water in their programs and projects. 5.

The study is also significant as it will serve to establish the amount of work that needs to be done by the Enugu State Government to achieve the MDGs target objective: clean water and sanitation would reduce child mortality, improve maternal health, support progress in education and liberate people from the illness that keep them in poverty and hunger, ensure environmental sustainability and promote a global partnership for development, improve agriculture and food security thereby eliminating hunger. 6. This study will also serve as a benchmark for further research. 1. 5SCOPE OF THE STUDY

This study is limited to availability and utilization of water points. Other issues like age of water points, quality of water are not addressed. 1. 6LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY This study was constrained by the fact that availability and utilization of water points varies across seasons, whereas this study was carried out in the dry season which may have influenced findings. 1. 7RESEARCH QUESTIONS i. Are there water sources in the selected communities? ii. Where are they located? iii. Who fetches water from these points? iv. When do they go? v. How often do they go? vi. What determines when they go? vii. What determines the frequency of use? iii. What factors are associated with accessibility and utilization of water points in the selected communities? ix. What is the impact of fetching water on the socio-economic activities of households? x. How can individuals, communities, governments, NGOs, donor agencies and the international community promote access and use of water points? 1. 8HYPOTHESES H0:There is no significant difference between age groups and frequency of fetching water. H0:There is no significant difference between income groups and frequency of fetching water H0There is no significant difference between household size (HHS) and frequency of fetching water. . 9STUDY AREA 1. 9. 1Geography The present Enugu State, the Coal City State, was created on August 27, 1991, out of the former Anambra State by the military government of General Ibrahim Babangida as a State for the Wawa people. The State lies on low table land surrounded by streams, rivers and a number of wavering hills collectively known as Udi hills. The State is bordered in the South by Abia State, in the north by Kogi and Benue States, in the east by Ebonyi State and in the west by Anambra State.

Lying partly within the semi-tropical rain forest belt of the south, the State spreads towards the north through a land area of approximately 7,161sq km. its physical features change gradually from tropical rain forest to open wood-land and then to Savannah. Apart from a chain of low hills, running through Abakaliki, Ebonyi State in the east to Nsukka in the north-west, and southwards through Enugu and Agwu, the rest of the state is made up of low land separated by numerous streams and rivulets, the major ones of which are the Adada River and the Oji River. Enugu State, 2008:12, http://www. enugu. gov. ng/, Enugu State, 2008:5, Enugu Centenary Committee, 2009: 2-3). Enugu State has 17 local government areas (LGAs). An additional 39 were created in 2003, but have not yet been given constitutional recognition and so remain development centres. About 59% of the population lives in the rural areas. The 3 LGAs of Enugu municipality together account for 22% of the population, and Nsukka, a rapidly growing university town, a further 10% of the population.

The other LGAs are mainly rural, while Enugu City, the capital of Enugu State and Nsukka are its major towns (Enugu State website, http://www. enugu. goving/; Enugu State, 2004:14). 1. 9. 2Geology Groundwater potentials of Enugu State is known to be very impressive except for Enugu Metropolis due to its unique hydro-geological configuration (Offodile, 1992 in Orakwe, 2008). The Awgu Shale Group, Santonian in age, comprises mainly about 800m of bluish grey shales with occasional intercalations of fine grained sandstones with some limestones (Aneke, 2007 in Orakwe, 2008). This Awgu Shale Group is overlain by Nkporo Shale.

Much of Enugu, especially to the East is underlain by the Enugu Shale formation, which is generally non-aquiferous even though the laterite overlying it is exploited by means of hand-dug wells and other shallow wells with hand or motorized pumps (Orakwe, 2008:10). West of its exposures, is the coal bearing Mamu Formation, which has some aquiferous sandstone units as well as largely non-aquiferous coal seams (five of them) and shale units. Water issuing from the Mamu formation especially in the coal mining areas tends to have low PH, and high sulphate, manganese and aluminum contents (Ofodile, 1992 in Orakwe, 2008:10).

This formation is highly fractured aiding its permeability (Orakwe, 2008:10). However, further west, overlying the Manu Formation and outcropping to the West of the Manu Formation exposures, is the Ajali Sandstone (Maastrichtian). It is dominantly of thick sequences of largely unconfined cross-bedded sandstone that are highly aquiferous or water yielding. Confined artesian to sub-artesian conditions occur in areas towards Oji River and Mgbagbu Owa. The Ajali Sandstone lithology favours high infiltration, the relief favours increased runoff and high temperatures favour increased evapotranspiration (Orakwe, 2008:10). 1. 9. State of /Public Management of Water Infrastructure The drinking water supply situation in Enugu is critical: water production facilities are in a poor state and leakage is high. Main facilities were (partly) rehabilitated under the National Water Rehabilitation Programme. The service level is characterized by low numbers of service connections and frequent interruptions in supply. Water tankers, private wells and rainwater harvesting are frequently used alternatives (FGN, 2004:8). The system of Enugu Metropolis consists of Ajali waterworks, Iva Springs, reservoirs and a distribution network of about 80km, covering 60% of the urban area.

Present population of Enugu is 620,000. This will increase to 1. 24 million after 25 years. Present population of Nsukka is 96,000. This will increase to 195,000 in 2028. The main source of water for Enugu Metropolis is the Ajali treatment plant with a design capacity of 77,000m3 per day. The plant was rehabilitated in 1999. At present the average production per day is 21,500m3. The Iva Springs system with a design capacity of 4,500m3, produces an additional 2,500m3 per day. The crash programme borehole field, with a design capacity of 11,250m3, is not producing (FGN, 2004:8).

Parts of the network are very old (constructed in 1924) and leakage is substantial, even with low pressure. Erosion is threatening parts of the system, especially Ajali treatment and storage reservoirs. Nsukka gets water from boreholes of which 50% are non-functional for various reasons. Although the distribution network seems to be reasonable, leakage is estimated at 60%. Many customers receive no water from their connection (FGN, 2004:8). The Enugu State Water Corporation (ENSWC) operates under responsibility of the Ministry of Public Utilities. The Enugu State Rural Water and

Sanitation Authority come under the Enugu State Ministry of Public Utilities. This authority is responsible for the water supply in the rural area. The Federal Ministry of Water Resources (FMWR) coordinates the National Urban Water Sector Reform Project, which Enugu State is a beneficiary (FGN, 2004: 8). FIGURE 1. 1: MAP OF ENUGU STATE DELINEATING THE STUDY AREA 1. 10ACRONYMS ADPAgricultural Development Programme CSOsCivil Society Organizations DCsDeveloped Countries DFIDDepartment for International Development DFRRIDirectorate of Food, Roads and Rural Infrastructure ENSGEnugu State Government

ENSWCEnugu State Water Corporation EPAEnvironmental Protection Agency FBOsFaith-based Organizations FGNFederal Government of Nigeria FMWRFederal Ministry of Water Resources FRNFederal Republic of Nigeria GDPGross Domestic Product JMPJoint Monitoring Programme LDCsLess Developed Countries LGAsLocal Government Areas MDGsMillennium Development Goals MNCsMulti-National Companies NAFDACNational Agency for Food and Drug Administration and Control NBSNational Bureau of Statistics NEPADNew Partnership for African Development NGOsNon-governmental Organizations NPCNational Planning Commission

NPCNational Population Commission NSDWQNational Standard for Drinking Water Quality NUWRSPNational Urban Water Reform Sector Project PAIPopulation Action International PPPPublic-Private Partnership PPPPPeople-Public-Private Partnership RBDARiver Basin Development Authority REDDReducing Environmental Degradation and Deforestation RWSESARural Water Supply and Environmental Sanitation Agency RWSSRural Water and Sanitation Programme RWSSPRural Water Supply and Sanitation Programme SONStandard Organization of Nigeria STWSSYSmall Town Water Supply and Sanitation Programme SWAsState Water Agencies

SEEDSState Economic Empowerment and Development Strategy NEEDSNational Economic Empowerment and Development Strategy TITransparency International UNDPUnited Nation Development Programme UNICEFUnited Nations Children Fund WWCWorld Water Council Water PointsWater Sources WCEDWorld Commission on Environment and Development WHOWorld Health Organization WRMWater Resources Management WRMSWater Resources Management Strategy REFERENCES African Development Bank-ADB (2007), Gender, Poverty and Environmental Indicators on African Countries, Tunis: Statistics Department, ADB. Chime, S. I. 2007), “PDP EBEANO 2007: 4-point Agenda, A Blueprint for Consolidation and Rapid Growth”, Enugu: Sullivan Chime Campaign Office. Department for International Development – DFID (2001), Addressing the Water Crisis, London: Stairway Communications. Department for International Development –DFID (2007), Governance, Development and Democratic Politics: DFID’s Work in Building more Effective States, London: DFID. Dovi, E. (2007), “Bringing Water to Africa’s Poor”, African Renewal, Vol. 21, No. 3, October. Eneh, O. C. (2008), “Reducing Urban Poverty in Nigeria” Unpublished Paper.

Enugu Centenary Committee (2009), “The First 100 Years”, Enugu: Press Block Government House. Enugu State (2004), State Economic Empowerment and Development Strategy, Enugu: Ministry of Human Development and Poverty Reduction. Enugu State (2007), Programme of Swearing in Ceremony of Governor Sullivan, Enugu: Government Press. Enugu State (2009) “Restoration Movement”, NUJ Press Centre, Independence Layout, Enugu. Enugu State of Nigeria (2004), State Economic and Development Strategy, Enugu: Ministry of Human Development and Poverty Reduction. Enugu State Website Retrieved 1/24/2009 from http://www. nugu. gov. ng/ Federal Government of Nigeria (2004), National Economic Empowerment and Development Strategy, Abuja: National Planning Commission. Federal Government of Nigeria-FGN {2006), Nigeria Millennium Development Goals 2006 Report, Abuja; National Planning Commission. Gleik, P. H. (2000), “Coping with the Global Fresh Water Dilemma: The State, Market Force and Global Governance in Chasek, P. S. (ed). The Global Environment in the Twenty – First Century: Prospects for International Cooperation, New York: United Nations University’ Press. Homer, Dixon, T.

F (1994), “Environmental Scarcities and Violent Conflict: “Evidence from Cases”, International Security 19(1):5-40. Maathai, W. (2008), “Foreword, Water in the Community: Why Integrity Matters”, Global Corruption Report 2008; Corruption in the Water Sector, New York: Transparency International, Water Integrity Network. National Bureau of Statistics – NBS (2002), Nigeria Care Welfare Indicators Questionnaire Surveys, Abuja: National Bureau of Statistics. Orakwe, L. C. (2008), “Comparative Prediction of Ground Water Potentials and Sustainability: A Case Study of Enugu State,” Unpublished Ph.

D Thesis. Plummer, J. (2008), “Water and Corruption: a Destructive Partnership”, Global Corruption Report 2008: Corruption in the Water Sector, New York: Cambridge University Press, Transparency International, Water Integrity Network. Plummer, J. and Cross, P. (2007), “Tackling Corruption in the Water and Sanitation Sector in Africa: Starting the Dialogue,” in Campos, E. and Pradhan, S. (eds), The Many Faces of Corruption, Washington, D. C. : World Bank Soubbotina, T. P. (2004), Beyond Economic Growth: An Introduction to Sustainable Development, Washington D. C. : The World Bank. Stroh, K. 2003), “Water: An Advocate for Reason: Win-Win solutions for the Nike Basin”, International Politics and Society, Bonn: Dietz Todaro, M. P. and Smith, S. C. (2009), Economic Development, Essex: Pearson Education Limited. Transparency International (2008), Global Corruption Report 2008: Corruption in the Water Sector, New York: Cambridge University Press, Transparency International, Water Integrity Network. United Nations – UN (2007), Africa and the Millennium Development Goals, New York: UN Department of Public Information. United Nations Children Fund – UNICEF (2008), The State of Africa’s Children 2008.

Retrieved from www. unicef. org 12/8/2009. United Nations Development Programme – UNDP (2006), Human Development Report 2006 Summary: Beyond Scarcity Power, Poverty and the Global Water Crisis, New York: UNDP. United Nations Development Programme – UNDP (2006), Human Development Report Retrieved from http://hdrstats:undp. org/indicators/8:html4/12/2008. United Nations Development Programme – UNDP (2008), Human Development Report 2007/2008 Summary: Fighting Climate Change, Human Solidarity in a Divided World, New York: United Nations Development Programme. Wolf, A. T. and Hammer, J. H. 2000), “Trends in Trans Boundary Water Disputes and Dispute Resolution” in Lowi, M. R. and Shaw, B. R. (ed), Environment and Security, Discourse and Practice, New York: St Martins Press. World Water Council (2008), Water and Sanitation Retrieved 10102008 from http://www. worldwatercouncil. org/index. php? id=1&L=0 CHAPTER TWO LITERATURE REVIEW 2. 1INTRODUCTION This chapter focuses on the documented efforts that have been made by other scholars towards solving the problem relating to accessibility and utilization patterns of water points by house holds in countries and in rural and urban communities.

This chapter, specifically reviews literature related to water such as universal concerns for water, water availability and use, public water supply, water demand, water pollution, water and sanitation, water and millennium development goals (MDGs), water and climate change, policy framework on water, management of water resources, water and health, water stress and scarcity, water and conflict, overview of urban and rural areas, empirical studies and theoretical framework 2. 2UNIVERSAL CONCERNS FOR WATER

In 1977, the World Water Conference in Mardel Plata, Argentina designated the 1980s as the International Drinking Water Supply and Sanitation Decade (DFID, 2001). This declaration gave the water sector an international boost. Its creation gave water supply and sanitation a higher profile among politicians and decision-makers around the world. While the universal coverage targets set for the Decade concentrated people’s minds, DFID (2001: 29) notes that the targets were over-ambitious.

During the Decade, many agencies and governments overhauled their supply – led approaches to water and sanitation, which focused almost exclusively on the construction of new infrastructure. They introduced more appropriate technologies and started to integrate hygiene promotion, sanitation and water supply (DFID, 2001:29). The New Delhi Conference in 1990 highlighted the lessons of the Decade and the changing working methods of governments, civil society and the private sector.

Building on these conclusions, and on other lessons learned in water resources management, a new framework for developing water resources and sanitation was articulated at the International Conference on Water and the Environment in Dublin in 1992. This recognized that to increase services required involving a wider set of stakeholders, with governments increasingly standing back from providing services to create environments that would facilitate public-private partnership in service provision (DFID, 2001:29).

As a result of the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro, (Brazil), also in 1992, the emphasis on water supply and basic sanitation for public health widened to recognize that the management and use of water is part of broader environmental protection and sustainable development. This was complemented by global concern over water scarcity and water pollution. The Earth summit endorsed the need for action to improve water supply and sanitation, emphasizing the particular challenge of ensuring sustainable water supply for cities.

It also called for integrated management of water resources, protection of water quality and management of water for food production (DFID, 2001:29). Since the Dublin and Rio conferences, most governments and agencies have started to implement these principles. Lessons have also been learnt. Put people at the centre are one of the most important lessons learned in international development during the last 25 years, and apply strongly in relation to water.

Putting people at the centre involves recognizing their right to enjoy healthier and more productive lives through access to safe water supply and sanitation and to water for agriculture, and also their right to participate in decision-making. People belong to communities and the wider civil society, so governments and other agencies need to engage with the institutions of civil society (DFID, 2001:30). ‘Putting the users at the centre of water services leads to the second important lesson: the need to respond to demand.

Historically, water supply and sanitation and irrigation programmes were water supply driven, centrally planned according to set standards and available resources. It is now recognized at least in the case of water supply and sanitation, that programmes have more chance of succeeding if their costs and service levels are tailored to local conditions and the user’s demands. As a result, community choice of service level has become a central feature of demand – responsive approaches (DFID, 2001:31).

Historically, water has been viewed primarily as a social good. While this is a valid view, it has often led to water services being provided free by governments to the people, with no acknowledgement of the cost associated with the provision of that service and the increasing scarcity of water. We have now learned from world wide experience that water services provided freely, or at very low cost, are not respected or conserved.

These concerns, together with concerns over efficiency of allocation and over water’s ecological importance, led the international community to recommend that water be recognized as an economic good- in other words, as a finite and often scarce resource, with a value in its own right (DFID, 2001:31). 2. 3PUBLIC WATER SUPPLY The International Drinking Water Supply and Sanitation Decade (IDWSSD) programme which took effect from 1980 under the United Nations (UN) eclaration had a target of providing potable water and sanitation to the entire population of the world regardless of their place of abode by the year 1990, the implementation of IDWSSD programme via several approaches in Nigeria raised the population that have access to potable water from 30 percent in urban areas (before 1980) to 50 percent and from less than 10 percent in rural areas to about 30 percent. One of the problems of the implementation was lack of coordination which led to duplication of efforts and consequent provision of more water to a few people to the detriment of others (Oladunni, 1996:17).

Water supply in Nigeria is classified under two distinctive sub-sections viz: urban water supply which includes the schemes serving a population exceeding 5000 people (urban and semi – urban) and rural water supply. Urban water supply had received more attention in the past as a result of the focus of the activities of the State Water Agencies (SWAs) who are the agencies responsible for potable water supply at the state level. This concentration on the urban areas by the SWAs was probably due to the dominance of vocal elite groups and government establishments residing in the urban centres.

Hence, to date, the 30 SWAs and the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) pay more attention to urban and semi-urban water supply. However, for improved performance, the SWAs which operate under different names and systems i. e. Water Boards, Water Corporations or Public Utilities Board (embracing water and electricity) have now been reconstituted as separate water authorities under the National Water Supply Rehabilitation Fund Programme assisted by the World Bank (Oladunni, 1996:19).

The agencies responsible for the provision of Rural Water Supply are the Federal Ministry of Water Resources (FMNR), National Borehole Programme (NBP), Drought Relief Programme (DRP), ECOWAS, JICA, etc. Rural water supply had in the past been implemented haphazardly due to lack of coordinating agency. This gave rise to multiplicity of agencies both local and international (Oladunni, 1996:19). According to WaterAid (2008:1-2), the National Water Supply and Sanitation Strategy under NEEDS recognizes that water supply and sanitation are central o improvements in so many aspects of human development, health, education, urban and rural development, development of industry, and general economic development and thus are central to the government’s primary mission of poverty reduction. Therefore the NEEDS proposed that water supply and sanitation should be a primary focus of the government. The National Water Supply and Sanitation Programme proposed four sub-sectors for water supply and sanitation: urban areas, small towns, rural areas, and water resources management and sanitation.

In the urban water sub-sector, the Nigerian Government has adopted a fundamental reorientation in the concept of service provision. By separating infrastructure investment and ownership from service operation, the government expects to introduce competition with significant efficiency gains. For small towns, government policy is to decentralize ownership and management of water supply systems to attract and involve optimal community involvement and support from the private sector, including operating under contract, and regularizing the services of independent providers or franchisers.

In small towns, the focus is on community ownership coupled with local private sector contracting for operations. 2. 3. 1 Public Water Supply Sources Water is very essential to the existence of man and for the undertaking of various activities. It becomes important to identify the sources of water available to man. Broadly speaking, the sources of water come from the water cycle or hydrogen cycle, the ground water, surface water and water transmission (Uchegbu, 2002:138).

Water cycle in simple terms ranges from the introduction of water to the earth’s surface in the form of precipitation, the subsequent run off and collection in hollows to form the Ocean, Rivers etc; the infiltration and percolation into the ground; to eventual transpiration, and evaporation to the atmosphere and rainfall, and the cycle continues. Therefore through precipitation (all forms of moisture emanating from the clouds’ e. g rain, sleet, snow, hail) water is made available to the earth (Uchegbu, 2002:138).

Rain water, supplies water to families, in rural and urban areas, via the roofs, which later collect into tanks, drums, and, pots etc. This category may need treatment or purification if the roofs are dirty. Some roofs are made of asbestos. Water also emanates from bedding of rocks as spring water. Spring is a sudden burst of water from water carrying strata or underground water. The spring water may contain dissolved minerals and may need treatment (Uchegbu, 2002:141).

Groundwater is both an important direct source of water supply tapped by wells and a significant indirect source of supply since a large portion of the flow to streams is derived from sub-surface water. Surface water supplies include lakes, rivers, and oceans which are natural features of the earth’s surface. However, surface water supplies are not as reliable as groundwater since quantities often fluctuate widely during the course of the year due to seasonality and various forms of pollution.

The variation in the river flow can be so great that even a small demand cannot be met during dry seasons and storage facilities must be constructed to hold the water during wet seasons (Uchegbu, 2002:142, Chukwu, 2000:114-136). Water that collects beneath the ground is called groundwater. Worldwide, groundwater is 40 times more abundant than fresh water in streams and lakes (Zimmerman, 2008:3).

In water transmission, water can be transported from either a ground or surface supply source directly to a community or if quality considerations indicate, initially to a water treatment facility by different types of conducts including pressure conduits, tunnels, aqueducts and pipelines and gravity flow conduits, grade tunnels, grade aqueducts and pipelines. The location of the well field or river reservoir defines the length of the conduits, while the topography indicates whether the conduits are designed to carry the water in open channel flow or under pressure.

Service reservoirs are also necessary in the transmission system to help level out peak demands. In practice, intermediate reservoirs close to the city or water towers are sized to meet three design consternates: hourly fluctuation in water consumption within the service area, short-term shutdown of the supply network for servicing and backup water requirements to control fires. These distribution reservoirs are most often constructed as open or covered basins, elevated tanks, etc (Uchegbu, 2002:142). According to Nwodu (2007:342), traditional Nigerian communities have three major sources of water.

These are rain water which is mainly seasonal and relatively scarce in the northern region of the country. Surface water, which comprises spring water, streams/rivers, lakes, and ponds which are predominant in the rainforest and the coastal plain and underground water, which is tapped by means of locally dug wells and is predominantly found in the northern region and some urban cities in the Southern part of Nigeria. The profile of rural water sources has not changed significantly in contemporary times, except for the addition of boreholes and pipe borne water in relatively very few favoured communities.

In the traditional society and sense, however, these sources of water supply were to a reasonable degree, safe water. The reason being that in the traditional society, folks treated the overall environment harboring any water source as highly sacred. Water source in Igbo land precisely fall among the sacred symbols that “exist in the nature in form of living creatures whose values are recognized, understood and appreciated by the people…” (Nwodu and Fab – Ukannor, 2003:143).

It is because of the sacredness of water and its diverse domestic uses that traditional societies sanctioned man’s activities capable of contaminating available water sources. Thus, people were forbidden from washing in the stream or river, bathing at the upper area of the stream or river, spitting in the stream, river or spring water, urinating or defecating in the stream, river, and spring or well within their surroundings and desecrating or fighting in the environment harboring the rural water source (Nwodu, 2007:342).

These sanctions were made to achieve two specific objectives, which are spiritual and hygienic. The bottom-line however, is that the sanctions were designed ostensibly to protect rural water sources from man-induced contamination. Today, the situation is changing fast to the negative. With increasing population and changing social-cum-cultural values, rural water is facing myriads of problems that have made it increasingly unsafe for human and animal consumption (Nwodu, 2007:143). 2. 4WATER DEMAND

According to UNDP (2006:10), people need clean water and sanitation to sustain their health and maintain their dignity. Beyond the household water also sustain ecological systems and provides an input into the production systems that maintain livelihoods. The mismatch between increasing water demand and decline in water availability is the most critical issue. Population growth, intensive agricultural development, urbanization, industrial growth and environmental requirements are all increasing demand for water. Understanding how we meet this expanding demand is vital.

Throughout Africa and the Middle East the supply of fresh water for growing and processing food, for household and urban uses, and for industrial cooling and processing has not kept pace with population growth and economic growth. As well, additional sources of supply are becoming scarce and more expensive to develop. In these circumstances, water demand management (WDM) offers perhaps the only significant hope for major improvements in the demand of living and quality of life for people living in Africa and the Middle East ( Brooks: 1997: 203).

According to Brooks (1997:4) only recently has demand management been recognized as an essential and effective policy tool for Africa and the Middle East. Indeed, in the absence of water demand management (WDM), it will be impossible to satisfy the three goals essential to continued human use of water and disposal of our waste water: economic efficiency, social equity, and ecological sustainability. Three levels of water demand management (WDM) exist.

They range from the relatively mundane (if commonly ignored) level of the individual firm or household, through the more important level of society as a whole, to the truly radical level of questioning common notions of need and consumption (Brooks, 1997:3) The water utility, industrial firm, or household can be treated at the same time because they are all individual economic units, and, to one degree or another, all interested in savings. For any of them, water demand management (or demand side management (DSM), as it is typically known by the utility is simply a matter of cost effectiveness (Stiles, 1996 in Brooks, 1997:3).

Will investment of time, money, or effort in saving water pay off in whatever terms are relevant to that economic unit? Of course, a lot of things may get in the way of making an accurate balance, particularly when water is very low-priced. Also, incentives can be misplaced from an economic perspective as when it is women who carry water but men who decide when to invest, or when buildings are charged for water but those rates are not applied to individual offices or apartments. In sum, calculation for the individual firm or household may be complex, but the principle is not (Brooks, 1997:3).

A much wider set of variables comes into play when we view water demand from the perspective of society as a whole. Concerns here arise because water, which is partially renewable and partially nonrenewable, moves around, crosses or underlies boundary lines and has enormous absorptive capacity. However, when person, community, or firm A uses water, this use affects the ability or even the possibility of person, community or firm B to use water. Therefore we need social rules to define who can use water, how much and when.

Because all human communities and livelihoods – human life itself-depend on water, equity demands that we have special rules to ensure that everyone can satisfy basic needs for drinking and sanitation. And of course the withdrawal, use and disposal of water all have environmental effects. Calculations at the level of society are more complex and less definitive than those involving individual economic units. Concepts such as externalities, common property resources, and public goods all come into play, and a large literature has grown to deal with them (Brooks, 1997:3).

Finally, there is the radical perspective that asks: what is the purpose of water use anyway? Modeled on the highly successful approach to energy analysis dubbed “soft energy paths” (Brooks, 1995), the theory of soft water paths have lessons analogous to those we learned from energy. 2. 5WATER AVAILABILITY AND USE Some 70% of the earth’s surface is water, but most of that is ocean. By volume, only 3% of all water on earth is fresh water, and most of this is largely unavailable.

About three-quarters of all freshwater is locked away in the form of ice caps and glaciers located in polar areas far removed from most human habitation, only about 1% is easily accessible surface freshwater. This is primarily the water found in lakes, rivers, and the soil at underground levels shallow enough to be tapped at an affordable cost. Only this amount is regularly renewable by rain and snowfall and thus available on a sustainable basis. In all, only one one-hundredth of one percent of the world’s total supply of water is considered easily accessible for human use (CCP, 1998:1). Globally, between 12. and 14 billion cubic meters of water (12,500 to 14,000 cubic kilometers) are considered available for human use on an annual basis. This amounts to about 9,000 cubic meters per person per year, as estimated in 1989. By the year 2025 global per capital availability of fresh water is projected to drop to 5,100 cubic meters per person as another 2 billion people join the world’s population. Even then, this amount would be enough to meet human needs if it were distributed equally among the world’s population (CCP, 1998:1). Global per capital figures on water availability give a false picture, however.

The world’s available freshwater supply is not distributed evenly around the globe, throughout the seasons, or from year to year. In some cases water is not where we want it, nor in sufficient quantities. In other cases we have too much water, in the wrong place, at the wrong time. We live under the tyranny of the water cycle observes hydrologist Malin Falkenmark, referring to the earth’s hydrological cycle (CCP, 1998:1). The earth’s hydrological cycle acts like a giant water pump that continually transfers freshwater from the oceans to the land and back again.

In this solar-driven cycle, water evaporates from the earth’s surface into the atmosphere and is returned as rain or snow – part of this precipitation evaporates back into the atmosphere. Another part flows into streams, rivers, and lakes, commencing a journey back to the sea. Still another part sinks into the soil and becomes soil moisture or groundwater. Plants incorporate soil moisture into their tissues and release it into the atmosphere in the process of evatransportation. Much of the groundwater eventually works its way back into the flow of surface waters (CCP, 1998:2).

Fresh water is a finite and precious resource that is essential for sustaining life, as are the natural systems that provide and maintain its supply. As demand increases, this resource is becoming increasingly scarce. Demand for water resources is increasing both because of population growth and because of rising demand per person due to such causes as irrigation development, industrialization, and increasing use by individuals as incomes rise. A potential crisis is looming where available resources can no longer meet needs (DFID, 2001:11).

The Stockholm Environment Institute has estimated that, allowing for predicted population growth and assuming moderate projections of development and climate change, the proportion of the world’s population living in countries of significant water stress will increase from approximately 34% in 1995 to 63% in 2025. Those living in poorer countries in Asia and Africa, with low and unreliable rainfall and high levels of utilization of the total water resource, will be most at risk of water stress impacting severely on their lives and livelihoods (DFID, 2001:12). Freshwater is also a mobile resource.

It is present as atmospheric moisture, rainfall, soil moisture, surface water (including rivers and lakes) and ground water, and there are complex relationships between these different parts of the hydrological cycle. All of these forms of water vary over place and time, both seasonally and from year to year. Their distribution is affected by climate and landscape (DFID, 2001:12) Water use, and with it the value that people give that water, also varies with place and time according to the people’s capacity to modify or capture the resource. The sustainability of the quality and quantity of water esources depends on the balance of agricultural, industrial and domestic uses against the prevailing hydrological conditions. At the same time, people are increasingly recognizing that the environment is both the fundamental provider of freshwater and a legitimate user of that water, and that the maintenance of ecosystem demands a range of seasonal water requirements (DFID, 2001:12). Users of water need dependable sources. Throughout the world reservoirs are used both to mitigate floods and to store surface water from periods of excess to periods of deficit and thereby to provide a reliable supply.

As withdrawal amounts increase, particularly in places with sporadic rainfall, so the need for storage increases. However, while dams undoubtedly have benefits, some of which accrue to poor people, they also have complex environmental consequences for poor people. Desalination has often been promoted as the supply side solution to the anticipated levels of rising demand. It is true that the cost of desalination has declined dramatically in recent years as a result of technological advances, reducing energy prices and better management.

However, although it now seems likely that desalination may well play a significant role in providing water to coastal cities and industries, it is unlikely that this technology could be used more generally to provide water to inland communities (DFID 2001:12). National boundaries and river catchments are not coincident, and many countries rely to some degree on river flows from countries upstream. Indeed, approximately 15% of all countries receive more than half the available water from upstream countries.

Consequently, access to water often depends not only on national policies, but also on international relations and agreements with other nation states (DFID, 2001:12). The absence of effective planning and management of these scarce water resources is a major impediment to the elimination of poverty. Poorer states, poorer regions of countries, and poorer communities and households have the greatest difficulty in establishing their claims to water. Few countries have specifically designed their water policies with an orientation towards poor communities.

Where legislation exists, it is not always aligned with stated water policy and the institutions required for its implementation are frequently ineffective. On the other hand, where customary institutions and traditional water laws do exist, they are frequently overlooked or ignored (DFID, 2001:12). In some countries, those responsible for managing and allocating water are vulnerable to conscious or unconscious bias to