jedidia.pdf
TRANSCRIPT
-
ASSESSING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF COMMUNITY
PARTICIPATION IN WATER FACILITY MANAGEMENT: A CASE
OF ABENSU AND POKUASE COMMUNITIES, GA WEST
MUNICIPAL ASSEMBLY
OCTOBER, 2014
-
i
DECLARATION I, Jedidia Nana Kwame Fosu, hereby declare that this submission is my own work towards
the award of a masters degree in development management and that, to the best of my
knowledge, it contains neither materials previously published by another person nor material
which has been accepted for the award of any other degree, except where due
acknowledgement has been made in the text.
Jedidia Nana Kwame Fosu (MDM 214010260) . ..
Student ID Signature Date
-
ii
DEDICATION
To my beloved parents and siblings.
-
iii
ABSTRACT
The supply of potable water is vital because water is a prerequisite for survival. The Ga West
Municipality faces the problem of inadequate potable water supply hence the need to manage
the water facilities available to them. Community participation in water management is
assumed as a key element for ensuring the sustainability of community water projects. In 2007,
the government of Ghana adopted community participation and management as a strategy to
ensuring sustainable water supply. Ideally the assumption behind this development strategy
was that, by involving beneficiaries at all levels of community based projects, they will be able
to ensure transparency and accountability and have control over their long term operation
and maintenance.The thesis focuses on assessing how effective community participation has
been in ensuring the sustainability of water projects in two selected communities of the Ga
West Assembly in Ghana. It examines this through keeping track of participatory processes
including community contribution, existence and functionality of management structures like
Water and Sanitation (WATSAN) committees and caretakers, support by government and Non-
Governmental Organisations (NGOs) together with level of community organization. This was
therefore backed up by different types of data collected using household questionnaires, Key
informants Interviews among district assembly officers, Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) and
Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA). The collected data from the field was organized in
Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 16.0 and Microsoft Excel. Descriptive
statistics, frequencies and percentages were used to describe and summarize the data. Tables
and graphs were used to present the data. The finding indicates that there is low level of
community participation in implementation and management of water facilities in the study
communities. This has resulted in low sustainability in water facilities found with study area.
The study recommends that the assembly and NGOs should effectively involve the community
in all stages of water project cycles. Furthermore, there should be community education and
sensitization to sustain their active participation.
-
iv
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
First and foremost, I would like to give all praise, honour and glory to God Almighty for
guiding me and seeing me through this level. Second, I am indebted to my supervisor, Mr. Kofi
Ocran, for guiding me through the development of this research. I am thankful for his support,
scholarly advice and contributions he made to this research.
-
v
TABLE OF CONTENT
Contents Declaration ..................................................................................................................................
Dedication ................................................................................................................................... ii
Abstract ..................................................................................................................................... iii
Acknowledgement ...................................................................................................................... iv
Table of Content ......................................................................................................................... v
List of Figures .......................................................................................................................... viii
List of Tables ............................................................................................................................. ix
Glossary ...................................................................................................................................... x
CHAPTER ONE .........................................................................................................................1
INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................1
1.1 Introduction ......................................................................................................................1
1.2 Background to the study ....................................................................................................1
1.3 Problem Statement ............................................................................................................2
1.4 Objectives of the Study ......................................................................................................4
1.4.1 General Objective .......................................................................................................4
1.4.2 Specific Objectives ......................................................................................................4
1.5 Research Questions ...........................................................................................................4
1.6 Significance of the Study....................................................................................................5
1.7 Justification of the Study ...................................................................................................5
1.8 Scope of study ....................................................................................................................6
1.9 Organization of Thesis .......................................................................................................6
CHAPTER TWO ........................................................................................................................8
LITERATURE REVIEW ...........................................................................................................8
2.1 Introduction ......................................................................................................................8
2.2 Theoretical Framework .....................................................................................................8
2.3 Water Supply in Ghana ................................................................................................... 10
2.4. Effectiveness ................................................................................................................... 12
2.5 Community Participation in Water Management ............................................................ 13
2.6 Level of Community Participation ................................................................................... 17
-
vi
2.7 Factors that affect Community Participation .................................................................. 21
2.8 Community Management of Water Supply Systems ........................................................ 23
CHAPTER THREE .................................................................................................................. 30
RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY ...................................................................... 30
3.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................... 30
3.2 Study Area....................................................................................................................... 30
3.3 Research Design .............................................................................................................. 32
3.4 Population of the Study ................................................................................................... 34
3.5 Sampling Method ............................................................................................................ 34
3.6 Data Collection ................................................................................................................ 35
3.6.1 Secondary data .......................................................................................................... 35
3.4.2 Primary Data ............................................................................................................ 36
3.7 Data Analysis ................................................................................................................... 36
3.8 Ethnical Consideration .................................................................................................... 37
3.9 Limitation of Study .......................................................................................................... 38
CHAPTER FOUR .................................................................................................................... 39
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ................................................................................................. 39
4.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................... 39
4.2. Socio-Demographic and other Characteristics of the Community .................................. 39
4.2.1 Being a Resident ........................................................................................................ 39
4.2.2 Years of being a Resident .......................................................................................... 40
4.2.3 Sex and Age of the Respondents ................................................................................ 41
4.2.4 Marital Status of Household Respondents ................................................................. 42
4.2.5 Occupation of Household Respondents ..................................................................... 43
4.2.6 Level of Education .................................................................................................... 43
4.3 Sources of Community Water Supply .............................................................................. 44
4.4 Factors that affect Community Participation in the Sustainable Management of Water
Facilities ................................................................................................................................ 46
4.4.1 Lack of support from the Government and NGO ...................................................... 47
4.4.2 Lack of incentives for WATSAN Committee Members ............................................. 48
4.4.3 Time Constraints ....................................................................................................... 48
4.4.4 Illiteracy .................................................................................................................... 49
-
vii
4.4.5 Lack of General Information .................................................................................... 49
4.4.6 Age ............................................................................................................................ 50
4.5 Community Participation in the Sustainable Management of Facilities ........................... 51
4.5.1 Contribution to Operation and Maintenance ............................................................ 52
4.6 Sustainable Management Skills ....................................................................................... 53
4.6.1 Management Committee ........................................................................................... 53
4.6.2 Management of Facility Sites .................................................................................... 54
4.6.3 Gender in Water and Sanitation (WATSAN) Committee .......................................... 55
4.6.4 Performance of WATSAN ......................................................................................... 56
4.6.5 Community Satisfaction with Facilities Management ................................................ 57
4.6.6 Capacity Building for WATSAN Committee ............................................................. 57
4.7 Assessment of Levels of Community Participation .......................................................... 58
CHAPTER FIVE ...................................................................................................................... 60
SUMMARY OF MAJOR FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS .............. 60
5.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................... 60
5.2 Findings of the Study ....................................................................................................... 60
5.3 Recommendation ............................................................................................................. 63
5.4 Conclusion ....................................................................................................................... 64
REFERENCES ......................................................................................................................... 65
APPENDICE ............................................................................................................................ 75
APPENDIX-1: SURVEY INSTRUMENT ............................................................................. 75
QUESTIONNAIRE ............................................................................................................... 75
APPENDIX-2: STRUCTURED INTERVIEW GUIDE FOR KEY INFORMANTS
INTERVIEWS & FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSIONS ............................................................. 80
APPENDIX- 3: PICTURES OF INTERVIEWS AND FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSIONS ...... 82
-
viii
LIST OF FIGURES
Figures Page
Figure 1: Level of Education . . . . . . . 44
Figure 2: Water sources reported in study communities . . . 45
Figure 3: An interview with the District Water and Sanitation Officer (DWSO) 82
Figure 4: A Focus Group Discussion at Abensu . . . . 82
Figure 5: A well- maintained mechanised borehole at Abensu . . 83
Figure 6: A well- protected mechanised water pumping station at Abensu . 83
-
ix
LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
Table 4.1 Being a resident . . . . . . . 40
Table 4.2 Years of being a resident . . . . . . 40
Table 4.3 Sex of Respondents . . . . . . . 41
Table 4.4 Age Structure . . . . . . . 42
Table 4.5 Marital Status of Household Respondents . . . . 42
Table 4.6 Occupation: of Household Respondents . . . . 43
Table 4.7: Constraints to Community Participation . . . . 46
Table 4.8: Specific Constraints to Community Participation . . . 47
Table 4.9: Households Participation in Water Facilities Provision . . 51
Table 4.10: Gender Composition in WATSAN . . . . 56
-
x
GLOSSARY
LIST OF ACRONYMS
BHs Boreholes
COM Community Ownership and Management
CP Community Participation
CWS Community Water Supply
CWSA Community Water and Sanitation Agency
DA District Assembly
DWST District Water and Sanitation Team
FGD Focus Group Discussion
GWA Gender and Water Alliance
GWCL Ghana Water Company Limited
GWDA Ga West District Assembly
HDWs Hand Dug Wells
IRC International Water and Sanitation Centre
MDGs Millennium Development Goals
NGOs Non-Governmental Organizations
O&M Operation and Maintenance
PRA Participatory Rural Appraisal
SPs Small Town Pipes
SPSS Statistical Package for Social Sciences
UNDP United Nations Development Program
UNICEF United Nations Children Emergency Fund
UWS Urban Water Supply
-
xi
WASH Water, Sanitation and Hygiene
WATSAN Water and Sanitation
WB World Bank
WHO World Health Organisation
WSDB Water and Sanitation Development Boards
WSS Water Supply and Sanitation
-
1
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Introduction
This chapter provides an introduction and background information to the study. It sets out the
problem statement and the objectives. The chapter also specifies the research question,
discusses the significance, justification and limitations of the study and concludes with an
outline for the whole thesis.
1.2 Background to the study
Water is a vital resource for human survival as it is central to all types of livelihoods (Specter,
2005). Though water resources are in abundance, it is unevenly distributed on earth resulting
in water scarcity in some parts of the earth. Limited access to clean and safe water associated
with poor water supply, hygiene and sanitation at household level widens the poverty gap,
gender inequalities and the prevalence of water borne diseases (GWA, 2006). This limited
access contributes to 3.7% of the total global disease burden and 2.2 million deaths each year
with women and children in the developing countries being the most affected (WHO/UNICEF,
2008). Although the Millennium Development Goals (MDG) 7 seeks to halve by 2015 the
proportion of people without access to safe drinking water and sanitation (UNDP, 2006), it is
anticipated that Sub-Saharan Africa will only reach the MDGs water target by 2040 (Sutton,
2008). Nevertheless some 400 million of the people living in Sub Saharan Africa will be left
without access to safe water with a majority of them being women and children living in rural
households (Sutton, 2008).
-
2
In Ghana, access to safe water remains one of the critical problems confronting the country
especially rural communities. Information gathered from the Community Water and Sanitation
Authority (CWSA) of Ghana indicates that at the end of 2008, only 48 percent of Ghanas rural
population was adequately supplied with clean water (Kokutse, 2009).
An increase in water pollution and mismanagement is also aggravating the imbalance between
supply and demand (Kaliba, 2002). The efficient management of the available water resources
is critical for sustainable development. Water is a collective asset and in most instances, it
needs to be managed at the community level. Participatory development is the most important
approach towards enabling communities to help themselves and sustain efforts in development
work especially in the case of water supply.
In this regard, communities are no longer only seen as recipients of development programmes;
rather, they have become critical stakeholders that have an important role to play in the
management of programmes and projects in their areas (Daniels, 2002).
1.3 Problem Statement
Several decades of development funding (e.g. from World Bank in Africa) has revealed the
failures of top-down approaches to development (Cernea et al, 1997 cited in Maraga, 2010).
Not only does the provision of public goods remain low in developing nations, most projects
suffer from lack of sustainability. A possible reason for these failures is attributed to the lack
of local participation. Since the 1980, the new development slogan has been "participatory or
-
3
community-led development" and there has been a rush to jump on the participatory wagon
(Khwaja, 2004).
Ghana has experienced many failures relating to rural water supply projects (Fielmua, 2011).
These failures are often attributed to the traditional role delegated to the communities in that
they had always been on the receiving end and had, therefore, become onlookers of their own
development. This approach, with its long history in Ghana, makes it difficult for rural
communities to accept the concept of community participation particularly with respect to
ownership and hence responsibility for the system (Laryea, 1994, as cited in Barimah, 2011).
Considering the performance of Ghana towards the realization of the Millennium Development
Goals, especially those related to water and sanitation, a strategy that seeks to infuse general
participation of communities in the management of water and sanitation services and facilities
was introduced (CWAS, 2007).
The fundamental question, therefore, arises as to whether community participation in the water
supply projects has led to sustainability of these projects. Bunch (1995) postulates that the
major question in many development programmes and projects is not whether to increase
participation but how to achieve effective participation. It is against this background that this
study seeks to research into the effectiveness of community participation in sustainable
management of water facilities.
-
4
1.4 Objectives of the Study
1.4.1 General Objective
The key objective of the study is to assess the effectiveness of community participation in the
sustainable management of water facilities within the Abensu and Pokuase Communities in Ga
West Municipality of Ghana.
1.4.2 Specific Objectives
In order to achieve the above general objective, the study seeks to address the following
specific objectives:
1. To identify major key factors that affect community participation in the sustainable
management of water supply facilities;
2. To examine the various roles played by the community in the sustainable management
of facilities;
3. To find out the level of participation of community members in sustaining water
delivery services.
1.5 Research Questions
The research questions backing these objectives are:
1. What are the key factors affecting community participation in the management of water
supply services?
2. What are the roles played by the community in the sustainable management of
facilities?
-
5
3. What is the level of participation of community members in sustaining water delivery
services?
1.6 Significance of the Study
Community participation is crucial for undertaking projects that are geared towards improving
their welfare. Community participation and management approach which has been adopted
by the Ghanaian Government is geared towards achieving the millennium development goals.
The findings of the study would therefore help in identifying obstacles faced by the Municipal
Assemblies in bringing development to their area. The study will contribute to references and
encourage other researchers to carry out research on same or similar topics. The study might
provide the other researchers with areas of references for their works as well as new concepts
that can be used as a direction for new studies. This research will contribute to the increasing
body of knowledge about the factors leading to the success or failure of community
participation in the sustainable management of water supply facilities.
1.7 Justification of the Study
The water sector is among the social service projects which have been on top of Ghanas
political agenda and receives huge financial support from donor countries and international
financial institutions (Kasiaka, 2004).
Many studies have been conducted on community participation approach in water projects
(Tani, 2009; Williams, 2008; Mba and Keankye, 2007; Schouten, 2006; Gomez, 2002).
However, few studies have been conducted on how community management affects the
-
6
sustainability of water supply services. This study, therefore, explores the linkage between
community participation and water schemes sustainability. The involvement of key
stakeholders like the community, private sector and charity organizations are of paramount
importance in developing water projects. After several years of the adoption of community
participation approach in Ghana, it is relevant to research and find out whether community
participatory management approach leads to water project sustainability.
1.8 Scope of study
The study confined itself in Greater Accra, in which communities in the Ga West Municipality
were reasonably selected as a case study. This was because the Ga West Municipality has
adopted the community participation approach in the management of water projects compared
with other districts in the region, hence it was a potential area for getting adequate and relevant
information related to the study. Furthermore, the focus has been narrowed to Pokuase Zonal
council focusing on mechanised and non-mechanised borehole facilities. Water supply is a
broad concept. The study, therefore, looked at how sustainable a water supply project could be
if the community participates at the pre and the post project stages.
1.9 Organization of Thesis
The thesis is structured into five chapters. Chapter one (1) presents relevant background to the
study and includes the problem statement, justification of the study, the study objectives,
research questions, scope of study , limitation of study and organization of the study,
Chapter Two (2) presents a review of relevant literature to analyse community participation
and the possible factors that are likely to influence community participation in water facility
-
7
management, as applied to Ghana National Strategy for Community Participation in Water
Sanitation and Hygiene (WASH).
Chapter three (3) discusses the study area, site selection and offers an outline of the different
methodologies employed in this research. This includes the design of study: methods used in
collecting the data with a justification for each method used; method of analysis; and constraint
and problems associated with it.
Chapter Four (4) illustrates the presentation and discussion of the findings of the study.
Chapter Five (5) concludes and draws policy implications/recommendations for effective
involvement of primary stakeholders in water supply facility management.
-
8
CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Introduction
This chapter discusses the relevant literature in relation to this study. The chapter starts with
an overview of the water supply sector in Ghana. The chapter further identifies and discusses
theories that inform participation and management that will be adopted for the analyses. It
further provides the concept that guided the assessment of the effectiveness of community
participation in the management of water facility.
2.2 Theoretical Framework
A review of literature on community participation reveals that there is no universally valid
theory of participation (Singh, 2005). This section draws on the work of Meizen-Dick et al.
(2004). During the last few decades an increasing amount of literature on collective action and
natural resources has emerged. Most of these researches tried to examine the role of collective
action in the management of natural resources (Olson 1965; Wade 1990; Ostrom 1990).
Collective action is dened as the action taken by a group (either directly or on its behalf
through an organization) in pursuit of members perceived shared interests (Marshall, 1998).
According to Meizen-Dick et al (2004), collective action is about collective decision-making,
setting rules of conduct for a group and designing management rules, implementing decisions
and monitoring adherence to rules. Collective action involves costs, both in time and money.
These definitions imply that collective action requires the involvement of a group of people
with a shared interest in some kind of common action and work in pursuit of that shared
interest.
-
9
Any group that attempts to obtain a public good must have the resources to cover these costs.
It must also have mechanisms in place to extract payment from its members. Members can
contribute in various ways to achieve the shared goal: Money, labour; or in kind contributions.
The action can take place directly by members of a group, or on their behalf by a representative
or even an employee. The coordination can take place through a formal organisation, an
informal organisation, or, in some cases, through spontaneous action. The theories of collective
action suggest that individuals under certain institutional arrangements and shared norms are
capable of organising and sustaining cooperation that advances the common interest of the
group in which they belong (Ostrom, 1990).
Community participation is influenced by theories underpinning collective action such as the
rational choice theory, which accepts that people will calculate the likely costs and benefits of
any action before deciding on what to do. The anticipated outcome will influence the decision
to participate or not. There are different outcomes that are expected from alternative courses
of action and people will evaluate and choose that which is best for them (Heikkila and Gerlak,
2005; Rowley & Moldoveanu, 2003; Scott, 2000). Community Participation can also be
informed by the theory of group action. This is said to be inspired by common interest (Olson,
1971) and social identity theory (Rowley and Moldoveanu, 2003).
Water is traditionally taken as a common good and of common interest. Since water is a
collective asset, it needs to be managed at the community level. Today, collective action is a
reputable model for managing rural water supply because of an acceptance from multiple
stakeholders within rural development circles. This reinforces the notion that stakeholders have
-
10
interests, and they are likely to mobilise to protect or enhance those interests if there is a sense
of urgency attached to their interests (Rowley and Moldoveanu, 2003).
2.3 Water Supply in Ghana
In Ghana, water supply is classified based on the approach of service delivery. These are Urban
Water Supply (UWS) and Community Water Supply (CWS). Ghana Water Company Limited
(GWCL) is the public agency responsible for water supply delivery in the urban areas. The rest
of the water systems, which are rural and small towns water systems fall under CWS. The
government agency responsible for facilitating community water supply in the rural and small
towns is the Community Water and Sanitation Agency (CWSA). In the urban areas, majority
of the inhabitants relying on pipe borne water from standpipes, vendors and neighbours.
Community water supply refers to water supply to rural and small towns, which are owned and
managed by the communities. Small towns water supply in Ghana refers to water supply
delivery using piped networks to communities with population between 2,000 and 50,000
under Community Ownership and Management (COM) arrangement (Nyarko, 2007). Under
the COM, the communities elect their representatives to form the Water and Sanitation
Development Boards (WSDB) who are responsible for the management of the water system.
Rural water supply, on the other hand refers to the use of point sources, such as hand dug wells
or boreholes fitted with hand pumps.
The World Health Organization and UNICEFs Joint Monitoring programme for Water Supply
and Sanitation (2001) has estimated that about 62% of Ghanas rural population has access to
improved water services. Since 1995, the Ghanaian Community Water and Sanitation agency
-
11
(CWSA) has been responsible for the coordination and facilitation of activities in the sector
(Edig, et al. 2002). CWSAs national strategy promotes a demand-driven planning approach
that emphasizes participatory project design and implementation. The rural water supply
projects are expected to include consultation with communities about relevant technology and
management choices and the participation of women is valued and encouraged. Once the
projects are built, district assemblies hold the water systems in trust for the communities.
However, communities are encouraged to establish water and sanitation (WATSAN)
committees to manage the systems. Project implementation is expected to include initial
training in these committees and special training on repair and maintenance to two village-
based caretakers who are generally members of the WATSAN committee. Once boreholes
and hand pumps are installed, communities are expected to be responsible for borehole
maintenance and repairs. The WATSAN committees and caretakers have access to a well-
developed, multi- faceted system of post-construction support. A central actor in the post-
construction support system is the District Water and Sanitation Team (DWST), consisting of
an engineer, a hygiene expert and a community mobilizer seconded to the district government.
DWST members are not supposed to do hand pump repairs themselves, rather to help the
village WATSAN committees obtain the support and training they need to run and repair the
systems, to help resolve any management and water use conflicts that arise, and to plan new
capital projects. The DWSTs visit WATSAN committees on request and assist communities
in finding spare parts if asked to do so. They also visit some communities on their own initiative
to check on conditions and organise training sessions on topics they consider to be relevant.
-
12
However, the financial resources available to the DWSTs to carry out these functions are
limited and vary across districts.
How much attention a village receives from a DWST is dependent on both how pro-active the
village is in requesting assistance and on the resources and priorities of the district-level team.
Another important resource for WATSAN committees is the area mechanics living in the
district. These are private individuals originally trained during the project implementation
process to do routine maintenance or repair work on boreholes at the request of communities.
Area mechanics are frequently called upon to obtain the spare parts needed by the community
and then to install these parts. Communities must pay for the services of the area mechanics
from revenues collected from village households or money obtained in some other way. The
DWSTs may help WATSAN committees link up with an area mechanic when major repairs
are needed. The work of the DWSTs is also largely demand-driven assistance (responses to
community requests), though some villages also receive unrequested support.
2.4. Effectiveness
The concept effectiveness, according to Elton (2009), means producing a decided or desired
effect after implementing something. Effectiveness, according to Svoboda (2003), measures
(a) the extent to which the major goals stated in the mission are achieved,
(b) the extent to which key stakeholders (donors and other groups with major stake) are
satisfied with results, and
(c) the extent to which the organisation is able to attract resources to continue its activities.
-
13
Effectiveness has often been used to assess the overall performance of service delivery by
an organisation. Effectiveness is the extent to which a system achieves its programme and
policy objective (Dollery et al, 2002). It encompasses a number of different desired aspects
of service linked to programme outcome objectives. These are: i) appropriateness -
matching service to clients needs; ii) accessibility aspects like affordability,
representation amongst priority groups and physical accessibility; and iii) quality the
process of meeting required standards or incidence of service failures (Dollery et al, 2002).
Narayan (1993) has considered effectiveness as the optimal, hygienic and consistent use of
water supply facilities to maximise benefits and minimize the negative consequences over
a period of time.
In recent years, a number of attempts have been made to develop tools to assess the
effectiveness of community participation. Burns and Taylor (2000) provide tools and appraisal
exercises for measuring: a) the history and patterns of participation; b) the quality of
participation strategies adopted by partners and partnerships; c) the capacity within partner
organisations to support community participation; d) the capacity within communities to
participate effectively; and e) the impact of participation and its outcomes.
2.5 Community Participation in Water Management
According to Meyer and Theron (2000) there is no universally accepted definition of
community participation. Participation is an approach through which beneficiaries and other
stakeholders are able to influence project planning, decision-making, implementation and
monitoring phases. On the other hand, participation considered as a prerequisite for project
-
14
ownership, successful implementation and sustainability of the projects in question.
Participation does not mean acceptance of all ideas from diverse groups. In participation, there
is a need to combine indigenous and intellectual knowledge. However, care must be taken so
that intellectual knowledge does not influence that of the indigenous (Kasiaka, 2004).
Participation demonstrates the positive recognition of a common good by the people whose
achievement is found to be impossible with individual efforts but with the collective efforts of
all (Mejos, 2007).
Different definitions have been given to community participation. Wagner (1959) defines
community participation as an active process shared by beneficiaries that influence the
direction and execution of development projects rather than receive share of project benefits
or involvement of people in project to solve their own problem. Community Participation
means that community plays an active role in its own affairs by sharing and exercising political
and economic power. It might include any of the following: prioritization and vocalization of
community needs; selection of appropriate facilities, technologies and locations; financial
contribution to capital costs; provision of labor for construction of systems and facilities;
management of operation and maintenance; setting and collection of water tariffs; or Physical
maintenance and repair activities.
On the other hand Singh (2005), states that community participation means a process by which
individuals, families or communities assume responsibility for local problems and develop a
capacity to contribute to their own community development. Community participation is also
defined as an active process whereby beneficiaries influence the direction and execution of
-
15
development projects rather than merely receive a share of a projects benefits. Community
participation is frequently identified by scholars and practitioners as central to success in
delivering physical infrastructure services (e.g., World Bank, 2004).
Participation is all about enabling communities to help themselves by utilizing their own skills
and resources. Communities will be committed to their projects and feel a sense of ownership
for them. Butterworth et al (2009) argues that community participation is vital at all phases of
water projects. It is essentially crucial at the beginning during the planning and decision
making process. The introduction of water supply to a community is usually through village
leaders or elders; they then call the whole community together in a large meeting. The most
important aspect of community participation at the implementation stage is to develop the
sense of ownership to the implemented activity for long-term sustainability, to reduce costs, to
provide training and empowerment. It is also a means of exploiting the free labor of
beneficiaries (Endashaw, 2011). Peter and Bob (2004) pointed out that communities select a
water supply technology, of which they become owners, are involved in its implementation
and responsible for managing the operation and maintenance of their chosen technology (they
may or may not actually conduct maintenance themselves).
The involvement of local people from the beginning ensures that projects are more responsive
to community needs, resources and abilities. Therefore, communities will be determined to
maintain it by putting time, effort and savings into schemes (Emmanuel, 1995). At the same
time participation at all stages of project and conceiving their rationale from the perspective
and culture of poor will bring them much closer to peoples reality and reduce the risk (Brett,
-
16
2005). Collective action will be a function of individuals incentives to contribute to the
maintenance and abide by the rules and regulations, the capacity of the community as a whole
to cooperate and to manage the incentives, and the overall policy environment in which the
institutions must operate (McCarthy et al, 2002). Agarwal (2001) has distinguished different
forms of participation in community-based management of natural resources. It could vary
from mere membership in the beneficiary group to active involvement in terms of influence in
decision-making and interactive participation which empowered the beneficiaries.
According to Uphoff (1999), four basic ubiquitous activities of organization (decision- making,
resource mobilisation and management, communication, and conflict resolution) were
essential for mutually beneficial collective action. Without the above four activities,
community participation becomes more difficult and less likely. According to Tegegne (2009)
a motivated community is the one that needs the service more and, therefore, considers the
scheme as its own property. As a result, water supply schemes constructed by community
motivation are likely to be sustainable. Effective Operation (O) and Maintenance (M) are
essential for sustainability. Community level O and M is one of the ways through which
sustainability can be achieved. In cases of scarce government resources, the money collected
from cost recovery can be used for capacity building such as sanitation, education and village
level maintenance training which can play great role in sustaining the services.
The objectives of community participation therefore, are empowerment, beneficiary capacity
building, increasing project effectiveness, improving project efficiency and project cost
sharing. Effective community participation is all about enabling communities to help
-
17
themselves by utilizing their own skills and resources. It is a means of improving local
welfares, training people in local administration and expanding government control through
local self-help activities (World Bank, 2004).
2.6 Level of Community Participation
To examine the level of community participation in the water supply, it is vital to establish the
different types of participation as dened by scholars (Gomez and Nakat, 2002).
The type of participation determines the role played by all stakeholders, especially the
community members who are the beneficiaries of the project. Furthermore, the level of
participation establishes the degree of involvement of each stakeholder because social,
political, economic, educational, and other conditions differ from one community to another.
The form and degree of peoples involvement in water supply projects also vary (Whyte,
1986). Even within each of these activities the involvement and responsibilities of communities
often vary. For example, some communities contribute only labor for the running of a project,
while others contribute financially as well (Whyte, 1986). The level of involvement of
community members in development activities depends on the approach utilised by the
implementing agency, its objectives and priorities, and the traditions and expectations of the
community involved in the project. Organisations more familiar with participatory approaches
will be more likely to share with the community the control and responsibilities of the project
than those agencies without any experience on the subject (Gomez, 2002). Another important
factor is the internal structure of the implementing agency. Organisations where decisions and
responsibilities are shared between its members will be more inclined to try new ideas and
-
18
approaches for the design and implementation of their projects than those with a traditional,
vertical, and hierarchical structure.
In the old schemes for the provision of water and sanitation services, as in the Supply Driven
Approach, participation was merely conceived as the contribution of the community in cash or
kind to the implementation of a previously designed solution to their problems. These
contributions did not give community members the opportunity to participate in the decision
making process, nor did they create a sense of ownership on the part of the beneficiaries of the
project (Whyte, 1986). Although the new participatory approaches utilised in the sector for the
provision of services do not give communities absolute control of the process, they allow
communities to play a more active and decisive role in all the phases of development projects
including planning, implementation, and monitoring and evaluation. High levels of interactive
participation do not necessarily translate into successful and sustainable projects. On the other
hand, low levels of extractive participation do not unavoidably render disappointment and
failures. There are always exceptions to the rules. Different types and levels of participation
are appropriate in different situations and at different stages of the project. What type of
participation and at what level of participation should be pursued becomes a judgment call by
the project manager.
Nekwaya (2007) pointed out that the route to effective community participation would depend
on selecting the right combination of approaches. However, this would determine whether the
community authorities actually allow the community to participate and make its own decisions.
-
19
It is also important to understand the modes of participation as these overlap with the levels of
community participation and are necessary for community participation.
Community participation connotes the involvement of people in the decision-making
processes. The general argument is that community participation may contribute inputs into
the decision-making or implementation process (Reed, 2010; Rowe and Frewer, 2004;
Soneryd, 2004; Arnstein, 1969) and sharing in the cost/benefit outcomes (Blackburn et al.,
2002). Conventional wisdom is that without community participation, there is little likelihood
of sustainability being realised. This is in part a pragmatic recognition of Governments
inability to deliver services, but in part an ideological proposition which values concepts such
as empowerment, and capacity building for their own sake.
Level of community involvement is measured of eight indicators, i.e. attendance in
meetings/conferences, not only expect incentives, active community in expressing
input/advice/ suggestions, input from government, involvement in establishing the concept
plan, openness of development actors, public involvement in approving the draft plan and
organized society in decision-making (Goldhamer in Slamet, 1993).
The seven levels of community participation as highlighted by (Theron, 2005:115) are as
follows:
1. Passive participation. Passive strategies very often involve a one-way flow of
information from the planners to the public (Kumar, 2002:25). People participate by
being told what is going to happen or has already happened. Participation relates to a
-
20
unilateral top-down approach by the authorities. The information being shared belongs
to outsiders or professionals.
2. Participation in information giving. This level does not constitute community
participation because they merely require the community to judge a finished or almost
finished product. People participate by answering questions posed in questionnaires or
telephone interviews or similar public participation strategies. The public do not have
the opportunity to influence proceedings as the findings of the research are neither
shared nor evaluated for accuracy.
3. Participation by consultation. People participate by being consulted as
consultants/professionals/planners and external officials listen to their views. The
professionals define both problems and solutions and may modify these in the light of
the peoples responses. The process does not include any share in decision-making by
the public, nor are the professionals under any obligation to take on board peoples
views.
4. Participation for material incentives. People participate by providing resources, for
example labour, in return for material rewards. This helps to reduce overall costs, and
participants in return receive a resource (Nampila, 2005:39).
5. Functional participation. People participate in a group context to meet predetermined
objectives related to the project, which may involve the development or promotion of
externally initiated social organisations. Such involvement does not tend to occur at the
early stages of project cycles or planning, but rather after major decisions have been
made. These institutions tend to be dependent on external initiators and facilitators, but
may also become self-dependent.
-
21
6. Interaction strategies. People participate in a joint analysis, the development of action
plans and capacity building. Participation is seen as right, not just the means to achieve
project goals.
7. Self-mobilisation strategies: People participate by taking initiatives independent of
external institutions to change systems. This bottom-up approach allows people to
develop contacts with external institutions for resources and the technical advice they
need, but they themselves retain control over how resources are used. Such self-
initiated, bottom-up and self-reliant mobilisation and collective actions may or may not
challenge an existing inequitable distribution of wealth and power.
2.7 Factors that affect Community Participation
A variety of views have emerged in assessment of the factors affecting community
participation in water facilities. Scholars such as Dorsener (2004), Pretty (1995) and Dudley
(1993) agree that a variety of social, political, cultural, behavioural, economic factors affect
communities from participating in development projects. Dorsener (2004) claims that behind
the word participation lays a wide range of processes and mechanisms, all of which are context-
specific and have a different impact on the overall performance of participation. Undoubtedly,
there are so many factors that may be seen as a hindrance to community participation.
Narayan (1995) analyzed lessons from 121 rural water-supply projects funded by different
agencies in 49 developing countries. This study identified the participation of local
communities as an important factor for project effectiveness and community empowerment.
As main problems, the study identified the reluctance of central governments to give up control
-
22
and invest in the capacity of local organisations. It also noted the lack of womens involvement.
In summary, the literature suggests that the following factors affect the success of community-
based approaches to drinking water supply:
(1) Involvement of the communities in design, construction, evaluation, operation, and
maintenance of the water projects;
(2) Household contributions to water projects in the form of cash and labor;
(3) Social capital and local leadership; and
(4) Provisions to ensure womens participation.
Analysing the performance of water systems in six countries (Benin, Bolivia, Honduras,
Indonesia, Pakistan, and Uganda), Katz and Sara (1997) found that the community-based
approach significantly increased sustainability. The authors established a strong linkage
between participation of the household members and sustainability of the projects. The most
important factors contributing to success can be summarized as information accessible to the
households, capacity building at all levels, training in operations and maintenance, control over
funds and good quality construction. The study also observed that the approach did not work
consistently well among all the communities. In some cases, the projects were supply driven
(for example, not offering communities different options). In other cases, community
representatives failed to consider the demands of disadvantaged groups. Most of the studies
on community driven water supply projects have analysed the relation between participation
and project outcomes in terms of effectiveness and sustainability. Most of these studies have
concluded that participation improves project outcome (Narayan 1995; Sara and Katz 1998;
Isham and Kahkonen, 2002; Prokopy 2005). Narayan (1995) has pointed out that the extent of
-
23
beneficiary participation was determined by the characteristics of both the beneficiaries and
the agencies. Two beneficiary characteristics she identified were demand and the degree to
which beneficiaries were organised to their role. But, she had not tested empirically the factors
affecting participation.
2.8 Community Management of Water Supply Systems
Community Management refers to the capacity of a community to control or at least strongly
influence the basic decisions over construction and management of its water supply system
(Mc Common and Yohalem 1990). WHO (1996) defined community management as a
situation where beneficiaries of water supply services have responsibility, authority and control
over the development of their services. In other words the community is able to control, or to
at least strongly influence, the development of its water and sanitation system (McCommon et
al, 1990). McGarry (1991) noted that, since the community will also have the authority and
responsibility for operation and maintenance, this will be more effective and efficient, leading
in turn to improved sustainability. It is where people are organized together to bring about an
improvement in their lives, that could not have been attained by individuals. The community
members have responsibility, authority and control over the development of the services.
Community Management (CM) has become a major subject in the design of rural water supply
and sanitation projects throughout the developing world. For rural water supply, the prominent
model is community management service model (WEDC, 2003). Community management has
achieved widespread acceptance and majority of rural water supply and sanitation projects all
over Sub-Saharan Africa are currently applying it (IRC, 2003). Community management
-
24
evolved as an NGO- or donor-driven model for time-bound pilot projects. This model may
play under the leadership of government with community institutions to scale up the rural water
supply delivery with the support from local and national government structures (Schouten &
Moriarty, 2004). Community management as a demand driven community-led approach
incorporates participatory method and decentralization strategy to successfully deliver rural
water supply services better than supply driven government-led models (Lockwood, 2004). It
is argued that CM can improve efficiency, meet the target of the project within planned budget
and enhance sustainability of rural water management (Mazango & Munjeri, 2009). The basic
assumptions of community management allow beneficiary community to own, develop,
operate and maintain their facilities or systems (Harvey & Reed, 2007). Additionally, it plays
important roles during the planning and implementation phases (WEDC, 2003).
The core values of community management are to empower and equip communities to take
control of their own development (Doe & Khan, 2004). However, community management
encounters a lot of challenges. First, it cannot work successfully due to absence of right
configuration of markets, government institutions and tradition (Kleemeier, 2000; Kleemeier,
2010). Second, the problem with the volunteer based community management of water supply
is that community-level committee and care-taker lose their interests or trained individual
moved away, community never felt ownership of the new infrastructure (Carter et al., 1999).
Third, sustainable rural water supply projects in developing countries face several threats. For
instance, dependency on community spirit becomes weaker with the modernizing influences
such as increased mobility through infrastructure development, more off land employment
access, industrialization, rural urban drift, increased wealth, materialism and individualism
-
25
which erode the traditional structures and values. Moreover, bureaucracies of government
structures in developing countries are not suitable for community management approach
(Carter et al., 1999). Fourth, this management model is also fraught with types of constraints-
internal and external. Internal constraints include poverty, strong traditions, misplaced
priorities and unfavorable settlement patterns within the rural milieu. External constraints
noted are beyond the control of rural communities and they include time constraints and
sectorial development plans by External Support Agencies (Laryea, 1994). Fifth, community
management is identified as a tool for water and sanitation projects for short to medium term
success (Carter et al., 1999). Doe and Khan (2004) recommended community management for
smaller rural communities in which community will be involved actively. Community
management model, albeit runs smoothly at the initial stage, problems begin within 1-3 years
after the commissioning of systems leading to the breakdown of management system (Harvey
& Reed, 2007). Moreover, Harvey and Reed (2007), identified the causes for breaking of
management system which are dependency on voluntary input, lack of incentives for
community members, absence of appropriate replacement policy for committee members, lack
of transparency, accountability and lack of regulations, lack of legal status and authority of the
water committee, absence of liaison with local government institutions, and inability to replace
the major capital items. Most of the community managed water supply schemes run with acute
financial shortage as this management cannot collect tariff from the beneficiary efficiently
(Whittington et al., 2009). Sixth, in addition to all of these problems, Kleemeier and Narkevic
(2010) have described elaborately the problems of community management approach.
Significant problems are given below:
-
26
1) Impossible to predict funding from one year to the next. As a result it is very difficult
to make even short term sector planning;
2) Poorer, dispersed, and less organized communities cannot address in most of the cases;
3) Dramatic drop of management capacity of local water committee over the time as the
people lost their interest, even though, initially committee members are trained
extensively; no option to skill upgrading, or move away;
4) Spotty cost recovery for operation and maintenance; if too much raised attract
unscrupulous for occupying surplus; otherwise too little is collected which cannot meet
the expenses of repair while needed;
5) For technologically complex system or large number of users, customer operation
becomes challenging;
6) Recuperation of investment cost identically stopped fully once an upfront payment has
been made;
7) Availability of spare parts, trained manpower and tools are scarce for major repair
resulting in the infrastructure sitting idle for a long period of time.
It is mentioned that in developed countries community management model could not manage
rural water supply successfully, so it is not justified to expect breakthrough of community
management in low income countries (Harvey & Reed, 2007). However, Opare (2011)
observed that developing countries adopt community management initiatives as it removes
internal differences, increases technical knowledge and management experiences. Opare
(2011) reveals that community management system works successfully, if local capacity is
adequately strengthened with external support prior to assumption of full community control
-
27
of water supply systems, and if assumption of responsibilities is pursued gradually. In addition,
capacity building, construction supervision and providing support to the community owned
management during the first year of implementation are recommended for maintaining long
term functionality of water points (Jimnez & Prez-Foguet, 2011). Harvey, Uno, and Reed
(2006) have acknowledged low levels of service sustainability in the rural water supply sector
as the effect of community management. Community management dominated the scene of
rural water supplies in developing countries for a long time. However, it has failed to produce
the desired results in terms of sustainability and functionality, and it is time to question the
very nature of the management model instead of blaming practitioners and governments for
poor implementation (Koestler & Shaw, 2009). WELL (1998) suggests that for sustainable
WSS programme design, four success criteria need to be considered. These are effectiveness,
equity, efficiency and replicability. Therefore, to achieve sustainable scheme management
structure, social, economic, technical, institutional and environmental factors of rural water
supply need to be considered in scheme management for long term sustainability of services.
Scholars have debated the controversial issues surrounding the ways that community and
participation have been conceptualised, mobilised and deconstructed in natural resources
management and development literatures (Leach et al. 1997; Guijt and Shah 1998; Agarwal
2001; Agrawal and Gibson 2001; Cooke and Kothari 2001; Hickey and Mohan 2004; Williams
2004). Despite critiques of exclusions, captures and marginalisation, the considerable staying
power of notions of community and participation in development policies has resulted in a
proliferation of community-based and participatory projects throughout the global South. In
the water sector, creating water user committees as part of community-based water resources
management plans are common, whereby the committee is responsible for representing
-
28
communities in managing water structures and decision making at the local scale (Ahluwalia
1997; Mehta 1997; Bardhan 2001; Meinzen-Dick and Zwarteveen 2001). Committee members
often are assumed to have common interests and goals, overlooking social difference and
heterogeneity of communities as well as environments (Leach et al. 1997). While development
project planners may acknowledge the problems that exist, project implementations often treat
communities as territorially dened intact wholes within the remit of the projects. Ahluwalia
(1997) argues that different water users often have different interests and that inter-group
conicts tend to be suppressed, such that in name of social cohesion the interests of the less
powerful are forgone and existing inequalities are reinforced. Similarly, Mehta (1997) argues
that viewing community historically, as well as out of its social and political context, can
reinforce existing asymmetrical social relations. Thus, notions of community being inherently
egalitarian are problematic (see also Zimmerer 2000; McCay 2001; Staeheli 2003). Mosse
(2003) argues that the social and power relations that play out in water management can
challenge notions of democracy and equity that are increasingly embodied in national water
development policies uncritically espousing community and participation. Thus, while notions
of community in water management may be externally dened by implementing organisations
(e.g. local or extra-local NGOs, donors, states), they are implemented through local power
relations, where different people with various strengths and weaknesses based on their
structural position in village society will negotiate their positions within such projects vis--
vis the costs and benets in the context of their overall lives and livelihoods. As a result, it is
important to look at the ways that community institutions operate in creating boundaries,
exclusions, inclusions and regulations. The second popular discourse, related to that of
community, is participation. Community members are expected to participate in projects in
-
29
order to enhance equity and efciency, as well as to feel greater ownership towards projects,
which is also expected to lead to better water resources management and greater ecological
sustainability. Multinational lenders such as the World Bank and USAID saw community
management as a general transition from supply to demand-driven approaches, which also fits
within broader trends towards decentralization of government services and transfer of
responsibilities to lower levels of government and ultimately to communities themselves
(Nicol, 2000).
-
30
CHAPTER THREE
RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY
3.1 Introduction
This chapter describes the research methods and materials used to collect relevant data. It
covers the location and description of the study area as well as research design, the procedure
for data collection, analysis and presentation of the data.
3.2 Study Area
The area under study is located in the Ga West Municipality. It lies within latitude 548 North,
539 North and longitude 012 west and 022 West. It shares common boundaries with Ga
East and Accra Metropolitan Assembly to the East, Akuapem South to the North and Ga South
to the South and West. It is currently one of the sixteen (16) districts in the Greater Accra
Region with its capital being Amasaman. Ofankor, Medie, Adjen Kotoku and Pokuase are
some of the major towns found in the municipality. It occupies a land area of approximately
305.4 square kilometres with about 193 communities zoned into six zonal councils (Pokuase,
Mayera, Ofankor, Ayikai Doblo, Kotoku and Amasaman) for effective administration. The
councils serve as rallying points for community mobilisation for participation in various
strategic decisions for spatial development management. The councils have delegated power
through the Municipal Assembly. The population of the municipality according to the 2010
National Population and Housing Census is 262,742 with growth a rate of 3.4% (Ghana
Statistical Service, 2012). The municipality is rapidly urbanising as a result of its closeness to
the capital city Accra where there is a lot of inflow of migrant workers. The population is
mainly concentrated along the Peri-Urban areas of the municipality particularly on the border
-
31
with the Accra Metropolitan Assembly and Ga East District Assembly. The 2000 population
and housing census figure also showed a density which was much higher than the national
density though lower than that of Greater Accra Region (with 895.5 persons per sq. km). This
implies great pressure on resources including water (Ga West District Assembly, 2006).
The Pokuase Area Council which falls within this area was chosen for the study because there
is little research and information about the state and management of water facilities through
local community involvement, making the area more suitable for study.
Drainage
The major rivers that flow through the municipality are the Densu, and Nsakyi rivers. Densu,
which is the largest of them drains down from the Eastern Region through the western portions
of the district to Ga South Municipality where it enters the sea. It is also the major supply of
water to most of the people in the municipality and its neighbouring communities and serves
as a natural boundary between Ga West and Ga South Municipalities (Ga West District
Assembly, 2006).
Vegetation and Climate
The municipality lies within the coastal savannah agro-ecological zone and has a bi-modal
rainfall pattern with an annual mean ranging from 790mm on the coast to 1270mm to the
extreme north. The annual temperature ranges from 25C in August to 28C in February and
March, a condition that allows for farming activities and some rearing of animals (Ga West
District Assembly, 2006). The bi-modal rainfall pattern enables some households in the
municipality to depend on rainwater as their main source of water for the home. This reduces
cost and time in accessing water for household use.
-
32
3.3 Research Design
Designing a study helps the researcher to plan and implement the study in a way that will help
the researcher to obtain intended results, thus increasing the chances of obtaining information
that could be associated with the real situation (Burns & Grove 2001). As this study deals with
peoples perceptions and their participation in water project cycle and management, it is mainly
qualitative in nature. Mugenda (2003) define research design as an attempt to collect
information from members of a population in order to determine the current status of the
population with respect to one or more variables.
Qualitative approaches attempt to define the phenomena from the participants perspectives
(Babbie, 2001). The research was conducted within the case study framework. This was used
since the study was mainly qualitative in nature. As Travers (2002) pointed out, there are five
main methods employed by qualitative researchers: observation, interviewing, ethnographic
fieldworks, discourse analysis and textual analysis, a case study can deal with most of these
methods (Yin 1984). This research, though, has adopted four qualitative methods, namely:
interviewing, discourse analysis, observation and textual analysis to explore all research
questions. The ethnographic fieldwork which requires a long time to complete has been
discarded because of time constraints. Cho and Trent assert that qualitative research can be
more credible as long as certain techniques, methods, and/or strategies are employed during
the conduct of the inquiry (2006). Case study is a systematic way of collecting information
about a particular person, social setting, a community or a group and to understand how it
operates. It involves data collection techniques like the interview, observation, and documents.
Case study can be exploratory or descriptive. Descriptive design was chosen because of its
-
33
suitability and applicability to the study area. According to Burns and Grove (2001),
descriptive research is designated to provide a picture of a situation as it naturally happens,
justify current practice and make judgment and also develop theories. In this study the
researcher has given a picture of influence of community participation on management of water
supply projects in the Ga West Municipality. Descriptive research was used to describe
characteristics of a population or phenomenon being studied. It does not answer questions
about how/when/why the characteristics occurred. Rather it addresses the "what" question
(What are the characteristics of the population or situation being studied?). The characteristics
used to describe the situation or population is usually some kind of categorical scheme also
known as descriptive categories. For example, the table categorizes the elements. Descriptive
research design enabled the study to determine the life status of respondents. Moreover,
descriptive statistics was used in the study, as it both saves time and resources. The descriptive
design is employed to facilitate the systematic collection and presentation of data that give a
clear picture of the current situation and the causes of the poor management of the maintenance
of rural water supply facilities in the District. There is a quantitative component to
complement the advantages and disadvantages of the difference between qualitative and
quantitative methods. The quantitative method involves the use of structured and unstructured
questionnaires while the qualitative include the use of focus group discussions with the
sampled subjects selected for this research. This research method permits innovations in
research design, compensates for the weaknesses in individual instrumentation and thus
guarantees the strengths, validity and reliability of findings (Creswell, 2003). Above all, it
allows for flexibility in the study of a complex or an evolving phenomenon with human and
organisational interplay.
-
34
3.4 Population of the Study
Population is a group of individuals, objects or items from which samples were taken for
measurement (Kombo, 2006; Mugo, 2000). Best et al (1998) reiterates that population is a
group who have one or more characteristics in common. The total population for Pokuase
Zonal council is 10,858 (Ghana Statistical Service, 2010). The population for the study therefor
includes all households in Pokuase and Abensu communities. The target population comprised
the of all WATSAN Committee members, Community opinion leaders, officials of the
Community Water and Sanitation Agency (CWSA) and District Water and Sanitation Team
(DWST).
3.5 Sampling Method
The process of selecting a portion of the population to represent the entire population is known
as sampling (Webster, 1985; LoBiondo-Wood & Haber 1998; Polit 1999). Purposive sampling
approach was adopted to select the Pokuase and Abensu communities due to the high number
of water facilities available to compare to the other communities in Pokuase Zonal Council.
The target number of respondents from the communities of Pokuase and Abensu administered
with questionnaires was sixty (60) and ten (12) local leaders, while focus group discussion
comprised seven (7) WATSAN members in Abensu and three (3) member in Pokuase. A total
number of two (2) DWST officials were interviewed. This brings to the overall number of 84
respondents. The sample size was arrived looking at the time frame in which to conduct a field
research and also the number was good enough to generalise the findings in that area.
-
35
A random sampling technique was used to select respondents in each community. In addition,
focus group discussion (FGD) was conducted among the WATSAN committee members in
order to complement any weakness that might arise from the questionnaire survey.
Terreblanche and Durrheim (2002) note that focus group discussion is typically a group of
people who share a similar type of experience, they continue to emphasize that the group is not
naturally constituted as an existing social group. Morolong and Lemphane (2000) echo the
contention by saying focus group discussion is a method, which a small group of people is
brought together to discuss a topic. In this regard the participants are guided by a set of detailed
questions.
Out of this, a sample size of hundred (100) household respondents was selected. The final
number of the respondents consisted of 72 people. There was a 28 percent decrease from the
initially proposed number of 100 people.
3.6 Data Collection
3.6.1 Secondary data
The secondary data collection procedure includes a review of relevant documents on the study
area and other related research. The research was carried out using secondary data from
journals, articles, documents from the municipal office and Ghana water policy documents.
Again, the District Assembly Data on water and sanitation, Water Liaison Officer and the
District Water Sanitation Team provided information. Furthermore, Water and Sanitation
Committee (WATSAN) and Water and Sanitation Development Boards (WSDB) supplied
relevant data.
-
36
The secondary data were used to increase the reliability and validity of data collected (Baddie,
2002; Kumar, 2002 cited in Phiri, 2009). The review provided valuable insight into the study
area and issues surrounding the research core objectives, relevant literature, the methodological
approach for general survey and discussion of research findings.
3.4.2 Primary Data
The primary data sources were generated from the questionnaire and interviews with the key
stakeholders. The interviews lasted on the average 45 minutes but the in-depth discussions
with the DWST members lasted for an hour. A focus group discussion was also used to gather
some primary data from stakeholders who were purposively selected due to their role in the
planning process. An observation was also employed to further ensure reliability. A sample of
the questionnaire, semi-structured interview and the interview guide are attached as
appendices. Some pictures of the interviews and focus group discussions are also attached as
appendix.
3.7 Data Analysis
Questionnaire administered were analysed using the Statistical Product and Social scientist
(SPSS 16.0 for windows). While qualitative data gathered through focus group discussion and
key informant interview were described qualitatively. Data collected were transcribed,
categorised and discussed.
-
37
3.8 Ethnical Consideration
The study has taken into account ethical implications that may arise from a study of this nature,
including consent, confidentiality and anonymity and burden to participants. De Vos (2005)
defines ethics as a set of moral principles which is suggested by and individual or group, is
subsequently widely accepted, and which offers rules and behavioural expectations about the
most correct towards experimental subjects and respondents, employers, assistants and
students. In Neuman (2006) prints out that ethics in research is a set of principles that reveal
what is or is not legitimate to do in research practice.
Ethical issues simply explain the codes of practice and acceptable moral behaviour one needs
to consider when undertaking research (May, 2001; Hopf, 2004). Researchers inevitably
encounter ethical problems (Hopf, 2004) because research activities usually involve different
stakeholders, with different backgrounds, aspirations and ideologies. The participants
involved in the research were made aware of the benefits of the research, especially of the
individual benefits which might be derived either directly or indirectly. Their role in the
research was also explained and they were made aware of what was expected of them if agreed
to participate (Silverman, 2000; Laws et al, 2002; Hopf, 2004).
The consent of all participants was sought and enough time was given to them to decide if were
willing to participate in the study. Additionally, enough time was given to respondents to
enable them to comprehend the objectives of the research which enabled them to make
informed decisions about whether they wanted to participate (Silverman, 2000: Laws et al,
2002: Hopf, 2004).
Research participants have their own priorities, which may or may not be similar to that of the
research. Efforts were made to avoid any intrusion into the participants private lives. This was
-
38
done for example, by avoiding questions that could intrude into the participants private lives,
and which might not have any bearings on the research anyway. Anything that could cause
harm to the participants, for example causing them to be stressed, depressed or anxious
(Kumar, 1996: Robson, 1999) as a result of their participation in the data collection was
avoided. Anything that it was considered could damage rapport between the researcher and the
participants, either in a form of bad language or ill treatment, and which could endanger trust
also reduce participant willingness to continue, was avoided (Hopf, 2004). Efforts were also
made to avoid triggering displeasure during the data collection that could make the participants
not welcome the researcher back, if it became necessary for further data to be gathered (Laws
et al, 2002).
3.9 Limitation of Study
The research is limited in scope because the collection of primary data from the local
government institution as well as the community representatives was not an easy task. This
was further constrained by the limited time for data collection. Also at the time of data
collection some district officials who had participated in the process have been transferred.
The above mentioned limitations culminated in my not being able to administer adequate
survey questionnaires, because most of the key stakeholders who have participated in the
planning process were no more in the municipality. Furthermore, the local government
authority does not involve NGOs in the community development program, so none could be
interviewed. This limitation however did not significantly affect the research because the main
respondents for the interviews were available during, that is the in-depth discussions.
-
39
CHAPTER FOUR
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
4.1 Introduction
In this chapter, the major results of the study are presented and discussed. Statistical methods
such as percentages, frequencies and cross tabulations were used to analyze the socio-
economic status of the community; factors affecting community participation in water facility
management; roles played by the community in the sustainable management of facilities; the
level of participation of community members in sustaining water delivery services and the
variations that exist among the selected community water projects. Tables and graphs were
used to present results.
4.2. Socio-Demographic and other Characteristics of the Community
The study sought to establish information on various aspects of respondents background such
as the length of time of being a resident, level of education, income generating activities, and
age and sex composition. This information aimed at testing the appropriateness of the
respondent in answering the questions regarding how community participation can influence
the sustainable management of water facilities in the Pokuase and Abensu communities.
4.2.1 Being a Resident
The study sought to find out whether the household respondents were residents of the area
-
40
Table 4.1 Being a Resident
Resident Status Frequency Percentage
Yes 72 100
No 0 0
Total 72 100
Source: Authors Field Work, 2014
From the Table 4.1, all of the respondents (100%) were residents of the study area and,
therefore, they would give valid and reliable information about water facility.
4.2.2 Years of being a Resident
The study sought to find out for how long the household respondents had lived in the selected
communities.
Table 4.2 Years of being a Resident
No. Years of being a resident Frequency Percentage
10 years and below 6 8.3
11-20 years 21 29.2
21-30 years 18 25
31years and above 27 37.5
Total 72 100