African Water Development Report 2006 - United Nations Economic ...

African Water Development Report 2006For countries with decentralized institutionalframeworks as referred to in table 15.2, recentexperience shows that water management tendsto be most efficient if regional agencies operatewithin the limits of water basins and are maderesponsible for regional water planning and forthe administration of both water resources andwater services. There are three broad categoriesof administrative agencies in water basins andthe classification is based on their terms of referenceand functions, as follows:(a) Those with only planning and coordinationauthority;(b) Those with coordination and finance responsibilities;and(c) Those with powers to draw up developmentplans execute them and operate the systemswithin the basin.River basin management in Africa seems to bebased on specific sectoral focuses, as in the caseof the Volta River Authority in Ghana, dominatedby hydropower generation, and the AwashBasin Authority in Ethiopia, with predominanceof irrigation (Andah, 2002c). It is important toemphasize that in Africa, the presence and powersof purely regional water agencies, if they exist,are very limited as water resources are oftenunder national control and use. However, thereare a wide variety of functions for regional institutionswhich makes it necessary to consider thefollowing recommendations:1. The national water institution should havethe necessary authority to guide, integrateand coordinate efficiently all water resourcesactivities at the regional and basin levels,bringing together all sectoral interests inwater management.2. The institutional relationship between regionalor water basin agencies and the nationalauthority must be well defined. Inorder to facilitate gradual integration ofwater management into the managementof the environment, a close link must be establishedbetween water resources managementand general regional planning.The characteristics and jurisdiction of the waterbasin agencies and their responsibilities to waterusers must be defined in a legal and administra-Box 15.8Legal Basis for IWRM in ZimbabweThe Water Act of 1998 which replaced the 1976 legislation was drafted after a long process of stakeholder involvement. Severalconsultative workshops at the local, provincial and national levels were conducted to capture the views of stakeholders. Thedrafting of the 1998 Water Act was guided by the following principles which incorporate the Dublin Principles and those of theAfrica Water Vision:1. Ownership of all surface and ground water is vested in the State.2. Stakeholders have to be involved in decision-making during water resources planning and management.3 Water resources planning and management have to be undertaken on a catchment or river basin level, and not using politicalor administrative units. Surface water and groundwater were regarded as part of a single hydrological system/cycle, and thereshould not be a distinction in the management of water irrespective of the state in which it water occurs.4. Water resources planning and management has to be environmentally sustainable, and the environment is a legitimate userof water.5. There has to be equity in terms of access to water by all water users.6. Water prices have to be based on the user pays and polluter pays principle, and water prices have to socially acceptable tothe different water users.7. Water is an economic value in all its competing uses and should be recognized as an economic good.By adopting the Dublin Principles, and those of the Africa Water Vision in reforming the legislation, Zimbabwe can be consideredas having achieved one of the targets of creating a legal and institutional framework aimed at achieving equitable distributionof water.352