revitalising catchment management forums

internet:http://www.emg.org.za

Revitalising Catchment Management Forums

EMG Seminar Series 2015 #1

Revitalising Catchment Management Forums

This presentation represents a seminar and discussion that took place at the EMG offices on 15 April 2015. The session was led by Dr. Victor

Munnik, speaking from his involvement in a WRC-funded participatory action-research

project aimed at supporting the DWS initiative to revitalise catchment management forums

(CMFs) in South Africa.



Acknowledgements

Thanks to Victor Munnik for sponsoring his time to lead the session and for the use of his presentation.

Thanks to Willie Enright for the contribution of slides from his presentation on Water Management

Institutions.

Thanks to all who participated!


Contents

• Part 1: Seminar by Dr. Victor Munnik– Introduction & Background

• Water Management Institutions• Catchment Management Forums • Water Management Areas • Water Resources Management in South Africa

– The DWS Revitalisation Initiative– The WRC Research Project

• Research Aims• Research Processes• Findings, Issues and Opportunities

• Part 2: Discussion (PDF Download)


SEMINAR


Water Management Institutions

• National Utility• Government Departments• Municipalities• Water Boards or Irrigation Boards (IBs)• Water User Associations (WUAs)• Catchment Management Agencies (CMAs)• Catchment Management Forums (CMFs)• Private Organisations / NGOs


What are CMFs?• There are different shapes and

understandings of catchment management forums (CMFs).

• They are part of same system as catchment management agencies (CMAs), so cannot be understood on their own.

• They are the main vehicle for citizen participation in water resources management (WRM).

• Currently, they deal mostly with water quality issues.

Roles of CMFs (1)

• Outreach and facilitation to extend civil-society participation in the water sector.

• Identify and consult with civil-society stakeholders in WRM.

• Facilitate and support civil-society and stakeholder advocacy.

• Build public awareness and capacity of stakeholders & water institutions in WRM.



Roles of CMFs (2)

• Monitor and report on water resources and water resource problems.

• Coordinate WRM strategies and activities.• Identify local water management challenges

and advise on WRM decisions.• Consult on establishment of CMAs and test

different WRM institutional options.


Challenges with CMFs (1)

• They require transformation: – Transformation is a big responsibility placed on

CMFs.– CMFs include corporate citizens.– But there is unequal participation. This includes

issues like: where the venue is, how people get there, what language is used, translating science.

• A real question is: – Can CMFs handle this; can you have

transformation initiated by citizens participating in forums?


Challenges with CMFs (2)

• They have no teeth:– Catchment management forums (CMFs) have no

real delegated powers and are not taken seriously. – This leads to fatigue of participants and declines in

participation.• The historically skewed allocation of water is

a big issue that sits under the surface. – CMFs are not able to tackle reallocation of water.– CMFs are not tackling water services. DWS is

keen to deal with this fact, as this responsibility falls within local government.


Water Management Areas

• From the 1990-1994 policy process, there: – Used to be 19 Water Management Areas (WMAs).– There was discussion to design provincial

boundaries around catchments, but that didn't happen.

• Now:– The WMAs have been consolidated. Still designed

along drainage boundaries, but they align more closely with provincial boundaries.

– This may not be a bad thing at all, as our research has found. Alignment between political structures and catchment structures might be desirable.


WRM in South Africa (1)

• Under Apartheid, water belonged to the landowner - riparian ownership.

• Now water belongs to South African citizens.• Water is held in public trust by Government

as the custodian. • This distinction has important legal/ policy

implications.• A move from riparian rights for water-use to

the conditional licensing of water-use.


WRM in South Africa (2)

• In the policy framework – water use should be governed democratically.

• Key question: How to make this idea of a participatory democracy work in practice?

• Forums have a large role to play in a participatory democracy.

• Catchment management forums (CMFs) have a really big task in terms of living up to this participatory democracy idea.

• The CMFs follow a hydrological or catchment logic.


DWS Initiative

• Following the 2013 National Water Resources Strategy 2 (NWRS2): – Undertake legislative review to re-translate the

cooperative model of catchment management forums (CMFs).

– Establish regional steering committees to coordinate the revival and revitalisation of CMFs in their respective catchments.

– Members of regional steering committees to form part of a national reference group.

– Formulate a strategy for revitalising establishment and existence of CMFs.


DWS Initiative

• The DWS strategy for revitalising catchment management forums (CMFs), should:– Have a financial and non-financial support model

for CMFs.– Advocate establishment of CMFs.– Create incentives for establishment of CMFs.– Foster interdepartmental relations to support

CMFs.

The WRC Research• Aims to support the DWS initiative through

developing research-based understanding. • Takes a participatory action research

approach towards co-creating a vision of revitalising the catchment management forums (CMFs):– In the context of a new roll-out of CMAs, and

potentially, the integration of water resources and water services.

– Based on historical redress and the empowerment of local people in managing water resources.

– A strong focus on public participation. internet:http://www.emg.org.za


Research Aims (1)

• To understand:– History; the shaping forces of history on water

management, institutions and participatory democracy in the water sector.

– Successes, challenges and limitations of CMFs.– The absence of certain groups and agendas that

should be heard/ have influence.– The nature of obstacles to participation and how

to remove them. – Transformation; how to improve the representivity

of CMFs.


Research Aims (2)

• To understand:– The role that CMFs could play in supporting

catchment management. e.g. citizens monitoring – The place of CMFs in the developing catchment

management architecture.– How DWS and the broader water sector can best

support CMFs as vibrant institutions in practice.


Research Aims (3)

• To understand:– How to go beyond catchment management

agencies (CMAs) and deal with local government through IDPs.

– How to go beyond CMFs as governance-type institutions to institutions that actually do things e.g. dev. projects, land care, public works.

– The potential use of payment for ecosystem services (PES).

– The dynamics and debate between CMFs, water user associations (WUAs) and irrigation boards (IBs) that exist in the same space.


Process: Synthesising Research

• Hosting consultations with DWS, ICMA, BOCMA and existing catchment management forums (CMFs).

• Drawing together histories of CMFs.• Analysing the functions, challenges,

successes and failures of CMFs.• Analysing the absence of groups and

obstacles – use examples where they do participate.

• Identifying pathways to transformation.


Process: Regional Research

• Regional research to understand actual workings, challenges, successes etc.

• Looking at: – Upper Vaal and Rand Water investigation 2010.– IUCMA, Crocodile River Forum, Upper & Lower

Inkomati, Sabie and Sand Rivers– AWARD’s work with forums in Sabie-Sand and

Olifants rivers. – Umsunduzi River and DUCT.– BOCMA, Swartkops, Kat-river Forums.– Follow current regional CMA roll-out processes.


Process: Participation

• Regional workshops• Support participation in regional DWS

processes.• Identify participants for national workshop

from research and regional workshops. • Create a forum of forums to co-create

recommendations (sync with DWS initiative) – Aug 2015 in the form of a WAT Indaba.

• Balance the forum of forums in terms of participation of marginalised groups.

Process: Policy Research

• Policy research as a parallel process to align with the developing policy space (i.e. DWS initiative, NWRS2).

• Recommendations from literature, regional research & policy knowledge to be discussed at forum of forums.

• Forum recommendations to be written up in policy format to fit into policy space.

• Regular consulting & meeting with core team.• Strong reference group, including DWS

practitioners, CMAs and civil society.internet:http://www.emg.org.za


Findings, Issues & Opportunities (1)

• Different regions exhibit different dynamics and models of practice.

• Forums have very diverse histories.• Forums have very diverse workings.

(e.g. the Olifants forum is industry based; the Croc and other forums supported by IUCMA and KZN take a wall-to-wall approach; BOCMA uses other forums)


• After riparian rights are removed, water belongs to “the people of South Africa” with Government as the custodian. How is this understood?

• The re-allocation of water has been slow. Many historic rights have survived unchanged. There is skewed allocation. In agriculture, lack of support to emerging farmers makes this situation worse.




• Many questions exist around Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM).– Participation vs good science? Empower to

participate?– Why is water reallocation so difficult? – There is a call for pragmatism – principled

participation or exclusion to “get on with it”?– When forums “don’t have teeth” citizens lose

interest. So, how to get action?– At the same time, how to preserve civil-society

autonomy?



• Decentralisation is good for participation and accessing local knowledge, but in practice it gives stronger water users (e.g. industries and mining companies) the space to dominate.

• There is an absence of communities and their agendas from forum discussions (there are exceptions to this e.g. in Upper Vaal near Kuzulwa Mine where there has been a strong group of black community activists chairing a forum).



• Because CMF participation is voluntary, the manner of communication and language used is very diplomatic, polite and indirect. People are scared to talk-straight or point out offenders. This communicative culture needs to change.

• The scientific language of water quality excludes many participants.

• There is a strong need for capacity building.



• Water resource management is important and complex. Water managers may be reluctant to risk real participation.

• Licensing, the most important instrument, is not working well. Nobody wants to risk CMF processes causing further delay to already delayed licenses.

• Local government, who is both regulator and polluter, is often absent as a participant in CMFs.



• The running of forums – administration, logistics, communication, database management – uses up citizens’ energy and resources (KZN and Croc solved some of these issues – see Rand Water 2010 report).

• Citizens’ energy drives CMFs, but it is limited and sporadic, along with participation.


• New thinking around multiple-use systems and a holistic approach to local water use.

• The use of CMFs to improve communication between local government and catchments (e.g. through IDPs).

• DWS has proposed to involve local government much more strongly, not only in governance, but projects (e.g. land care, citizens monitoring).




• Functions devolved to CMFs (e.g. land care to look after wetlands; adopt-a-river) could be integrated.

• Citizens’ monitoring is feasible, but citizens’ forensic monitoring is difficult.

• Awareness building is feasible; involve youth (e.g. existing programmes like Adopt-a-River)

• Working for water and payment for ecological services (PES) is possible.

• There are legal/ accountability challenges (but unique insight from the DUCT example).



• There are opportunities for support e.g. through universities. (e.g. DUCT is an interesting network model, where the CMF is the outcome of activities in a network.

• The revitalisation of catchment management forums (CMFs) through the introduction of new participation and new agendas shows potential. Citizen-based catchment management is feasible via this route. This could be made part of the new CMA roll-out.


DISCUSSION

Download a PDF of the discussion:Discussion: Revitalising CMFs

@EnvMonGroup

http://www.emg.org.za/news

https://www.facebook.com/pages/Environmental-Monitoring-Group/186208908128580