Sustainability Planning and Monitoring

Box 25 What is associated LOOKING with BACK low TO or high SEE FORWARD sustainability?Externally decided interventions – recipe for low sustainability?None sa-at, Champasak districtNone sa-at is a village located about 60 kilometers from Champasak district of Champasak province. It has a populationof 882 people with 173 households. The original source of water in the village was a large natural swamp. Until the early1990s the village had four boreholes using Tara hand pumps that were provided by UNICEF. The four boreholes had beenworking quite well and were providing enough water for drinking and cooking purposes to the whole village.In 1998, None sa-at was selected by an NGO as a focus village for an integrated rural development project. Assistancefrom the NGO provided, amongst other things, a rural piped water distribution system from a new borehole fitted with anelectric pump. The scheme was constructed and supervised by the NGO project staff. Community members had very littleinvolvement in the construction of the system, even though they had contributed labor and local materials.The system was run by two male villagers, who had been designated by the project to look after the operation, maintenance,and financing, which included billing and collection. The money collected was to cover minor repairs and part of it wasused for remunerating the two workers. Collections went smoothly for the first year after construction. From the secondyear onward, however, there have been many defaulters, and as a result, fees collected did not cover the costs for repairsand remuneration. The community emphasized that the service provided did not fulfill their expectations, e.g., very oftenwater was not available due to technical design problems of pump operation, or faults in the distribution system.In April, 2001, the distribution pipes were broken up by a road construction company. Eight months later (December, 2001),the pipes had still not been repaired. No one knows who is responsible for getting the system repaired. Due to the lack ofclarity about ownership of the facilities, and division of roles and responsibilities between village volunteers, the community,and Nam Saat, the villagers have returned to using water from the old Tara hand pumps and the traditional swamp.During field visits by the study team, villagers said that that they are expecting the NGO project to come back and fix thewater system.Community voice and choice makes a difference - Morphu, Pathumphone districtMorphu is a village located in Pathumphone district,Comparison between Morphu and None sa-atChampasak province. It has a total population of 1000on the level of sustainibility of water supply schemespeople in 174 households. In the early 1990s, Morphu400received seventeen boreholes with Tara hand pumps from350an external support agency. By the late 1990s, the wealth300Effective Managementof the villagers had increased, and they proposed to250Effective Financingconstruct a new piped water scheme with household200Effective Functioningconnections.System Quality150In 2000, the villagers in collaboration with a private 100company constructed a new piped water system with an 50electrical pump. The private company had set the initial0None sa-at Morpucontribution for each household at KIP 700,000 (approx. ScoreCommunityUS$80) plus household connection fees. A privatecompany constructed the system, while the community supervised the works. The company covered 30 percent of the capitalcosts and will reclaim this investment through user fees.After construction, the scheme was leased to the same private company to manage the system for five years. The companyhas set the user fees and hires villagers who were trained to become responsible for billing and repairs. The company is fullyresponsible for operation and maintenance of the scheme.There have been no complaints about the services provided by the company, and there are no defaulters on the payment ofbills.As per the contract signed by villagers and the company, the villagers have the option to manage the system by themselvesafter five years of lease. However, there is a possibility that the private company could extend its management contractdepending upon the community’s satisfaction with its performance during the five years’ lease.136