|
|
| |
Role of DRA in Rural Water Supply & Sanitation Policy in Sri LankaSri Lanka has a notably long history of piped water supplies dating from early developments in the 1870s, primarily for elites plus the military, hospitals and railways etc. The basic approach i.e. top-down, expert-driven, using the best available technology and benefiting only a privileged few persisted from the 1870s up until independence. Policy development in Sri Lanka since has reflected global trends i.e. focusing primarily on capital investment during the 1960s, introduction of appropriate technologies in the 1970s and then focusing on the poor and 'water for all' during the 1980s. The 1990s was a period of innovation, which led to the development of DRA, but progress was slow due to a combination of economic recession, increasing population, and lack of user participation. The basic principles of DRA were established in 1992 at the International Conference on Water and Environment in Dublin, Ireland. These 'Dublin Principles' formed the basis of subsequent policy reform in Sri Lanka.The National Policy on Rural Water Supply and Sanitation dates from 2001. Important characteristics include recognising the value of water, and adopting a people-centred, demand responsive approach. The basic principles of RWSS reflect the principles of DRA and can be summarised as follows.
The World Bank Community Water Supply & Sanitation Project (CWSSP) first piloted DRA in Sri Lanka (1991) and other major donor-funded projects (notably ADB) followed suit. DRA is generally regarded as a success story in the Sri Lankan context but a number of important lessons have been identified. DRA has led to an increased sense of ownership and communities have generally been able to afford O&M costs, but a great deal depends on beneficiary awareness and empowerment and transparent systems for fund management. Good progress is being made in these areas, particularly through the use of PRA as a planning tool, and the challenge of ensuring decision-making processes reflect the needs of all and not just dominant groups or elites is well recognised. Nevertheless a number of so-called 'marginalised' groups (3-5%) have been identified who for various reasons have not yet benefited. NWSDB is keen to develop a strategy for reaching these groups but is wary of promoting dependence on subsidies and is looking at possible means of integration with interventions in other sectors. Further major challenges surround the changing role of government in the context of DRA from provider to facilitator and regulator. Important issues surround the new roles and responsibilities of different agencies and their capacity for effective service provision. Institutional strengthening is likely to be required at a number of different levels before government responsibilities can be fully transferred. A specific current concern is how to create an enabling environment for increased private sector participation. The potential of the private sector in Sri Lanka, especially in urban areas, remains to be seen. A key overall lesson from experience to-date is that the DRA planning process takes considerable time and cannot be hurried. Realising the full potential of DRA requires long-term commitment to 'process' issues. |
| Last updated 6 April 2004 |