Community involvement in the public use of the water reserve

The study found no readily-available information on community involvement or consultation in the declaration of the water reserve by the former colonial government. All information gathered on community involvement with the use of the water reserve concerned the Australian

Tarawa

Water Supply Project and subsequent Government actions. As part of the Department of

Housing

and Construction water supply system project, meetings were held with Bomiki and

Buota

residents in their villages in the mid 1980’s. At the meetings, the aims and operation of the water supply project, the installation of galleries were discussed. Land clearing and compensation for trees destroyed by the project were specifically discussed. At Bonriki, the

project was

greeted with enthusiasm and support, because a lot of local employment was

generated

by the construction phase. No objections to the project or questions on the impacts of groundwater extraction were raised (P. Mylrea, pers. corn., 1999).

It is important to recognise here that the style of community consultation envisaged by developed, donor countries, particularly in the mid 198Os, is fundamentally different from the traditional, discussion and consensus approach followed in the

maneaba

(meeting house). The

expectations and time frames imposed by external agencies for community consultation are not

at all in keeping with the traditional process of consensus operating in the

maneaba.

Much longer times are required for discussion and consultation (Harrison, 1980).

By August 1987, close to the completion of the project, community feelings had

apparently changed. Bomiki

and Buota residents refused to pay for their reticulated water

causing concern

to the

supplier, the

PUB. The

General Manager PUB had a number of

discussions with villagers in an attempt to resolve issues. Unfortunately the situation

was

exacerbated by the disconnection of non payers from the system. Despite disconnections, daily consumption figures continued to rise and it was found that 30% of Bomiki household meters had been tampered with or damaged.

Throughout the 1990’s many meetings with residents were convened by the Government,

through both PUB and the Land Management Division, MHARD. Little progress has been made in negotiations with landowners, or with the signing of leases for the government use of the water reserve.

3. Institutional Arrangements for Water in Kiribati

In many countries, institutional structures and legislation sometimes constitute impediments to the wise and sustainable use and management of water. Often, however, it is not the legislation that needs reformation and change. Good legislation can also lose its impact through poor implementation (AusAID, 1998). One of the key issues in developing small islands states is that traditional resource ownership and use, which previously evolved in low density, subsistence communities, is now often at odds with the requirements of high density, urbanised societies, such as South Tarawa. Of particular interest to the recharge study was the legislative framework and responsibilities for resource ownership and use, as well as the monitoring of recharge and the sustainability of groundwater extraction and the performance of the distribution system. As part of information gathering, a review was conducted of documents relevant to groundwater recharge, use and management, although a detailed review of existing water legislation was not part of this study.

A Draft 10 Year National Water Resources Master Plan (Shalev, 1994) thoroughly reviewed the situation relating to water and sanitation in Kiribati. It highlighted existing deficiencies and called for major legislative and institutional changes. The Draft Master Plan identified key problems that existed in the water sector (Metutera, 1994) including:

water demand in South Tarawa exceeds the existing potable groundwater sources, high losses from the water and sewerage reticulation systems in South Tarawa, insufficient use of rainwater collection,

dilapidated public toilet facilities forcing people to defecate on beaches and in the bush’, shortage of skilled staff and professionals,

low water rates and deficiencies in collection, management and operation, slow progress in the introduction of potable water supply systems in villages, lack of coordination between institutions dealing with water and sanitation.

Some of these issues have been or are in the process of being dealt with by Government.

For example, leak detection and remedial works have decreased leakage losses in the reticulated system in urban South Tarawa. As well, many outer island communities in the Gilbert Group have now had hand or solar water pumps installed under a UNDPAJNCDF project. A planned

’ This misunderstands the issue. I-Kiribati do not like to use public toilets for cultural reasons.

Using the beach is a traditional and preferred choice which is often maintained, especially by outer island relatives, even if people have a private toilet in their home.

ADB project aims to refurbish the water supply system and install appropriate sanitation at individual homesites. Other issues, particularly the larger institutional and management challenges including scarcity of trained personnel, persist. In Kiribati culture there is also a general disinclination to, share knowledge, (which is considered a valuable personal possession) outside the family. This approach is carried over to dealings between government personnel and between different agencies and institutions, creating difficulties in natural resource management, where knowledge sharing is essential.

A key issue identified in the Draft Master Plan was that there was no unified and comprehensive water and sewerage law in Kiribati. No responsibility for overall water resource management has been vested in any Government authority (Metutera, 1994). In addition, institutional responsibilities for the assessment, management, protection and conservation of water are not clearly defined. Draft water resources legislation and proposed institutional arrangements drawn up by the UN Interregional Adviser on Water are still before the Government. This effectively means that existing institutions have responsibilities for water inherited from older legislation and past administrations. Inevitably, overlaps in responsibilities and roles persist, which are reflected in the state of the water system.

The agencies currently with responsibility for water are (Metutera, 1994):

The Public Utilities Board (PUB), Ministry of Works and Energy (MWE) - set up in 1977 to coordinate and manage water supply and sewerage disposal in South Tarawa. PUB is a Government-owned corporation which generates and distributes electricity, and provides water supply and sewerage services.

The Water’ Engineering Section (WES) of the Public Works Division (PWD), Ministry of Works and Energy (MWE) - established in 1986 to coordinate outer island water projects by investigating new water supply schemes, preparing designs, estimates and funding submissions, implementing and managing outer islands water supply schemes and providing advice and technical help on outer island water supplies to island Councils. WES has currently taking responsibility for overall water resource management in the Republic of Kiribati.

The Ministry of Health and Family Planning (MHFP) - responsible for water quality monitoring for public health and the provision of sanitary facilities for villages.

The Ministry of Environment and Social Development (MESD) - responsible for environmental impact assessment of major water supply, sewerage and waste disposal schemes.

The Meteorological Ofice, MESD - responsible for the collection and dissemination of rainfall and weather data

The Division of Agriculture, Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR) - responsible for agricultural development including water use by crops.

Ministry of Home Affairs and Rural Development (MHARD) - responsible for land planning including urban planning and development in South Tarawa

The National Water Supply and Sanitation Committee - established in 1990 under the then Ministry of Health, Family Planning and Social Welfare to coordinate water and sanitation in Kiribati. The role of the Committee is to monitor water quality, to review and consider future water and sanitation projects, and to act as an advisory body to Government Ministries and NGO’s on water and sanitation.

Island Councils - implement rural water and sanitation projects and maintain basic equipment with the assistance of PWD.

Other organisations such as NGO’s also have inputs to the water and sanitation sector.

These include the Save the Children Federation, the Kiribati Women’s Federation and the Tarawa Technical Institute’s Rural Training Development Unit. In addition, international organisations such as Au&D, UNDP, UNCDF, WHO and ADB have had significant involvement in water and sanitation development in the provision of both policy and technical assistance.

As in all countries, water and land related issues in Kiribati cut across many Ministries and organisations. Inevitably, arrangements are less than optimal with overlaps of roles and responsibilities and poor co-ordination. In a small, close-knit communities such as in South Tarawa, efficiency gains from rationalisation and clarification of roles and improvement in delivery are essential (Metutera, 1994). The difficulties facing South Tarawa go far beyond those of water, with an umbrella co-ordinating body or Urban Management Committee much needed to bring together urban infrastructure activities in urban South Tarawa (Jones, 1995).

The 10 Year Draft Plan legislation recommended the separation of supply and regulation functions (Metutera, 1994), as has occurred in many countries throughout the world. It recommended that in South Tarawa, the supplier be the PUB and that it be restructured to reflect that role, particularly emphasising its revenue collection (Metutera, 1994). It was envisaged that the PUB would become an independent organisation, subject to laws, regulations and permits and answerable to a regulator. It also recommended that regulation functions for water be transferred to PWD, and that water resources management be assigned to the MESD. It also recommended that the National Water Supply and Sanitation Committee come under the MWE. It is debatable whether such an institutional arrangement is appropriate in small island nations.

In many countries, the role of water regulator has been increasingly assigned to Ministries or Departments concerned with the environmental assessment and protection. However, the strategy of separation of supplier, manager and regulator, used in developed nations, assumes a pool of appropriate expertise is readily available to Ii11 both roles. In small island nations, this is seldom the situation. The shortage of water expertise in Kiribati has long been identified as a key resource management issue (Harrison, 1980).

It has been suggested that the Water Engineering Section, WES, of PWD be assigned the role of regulator (Metutera, 1994). Its proposed roles are to:

l review and modify existing laws and regulations related to water and sanitation,

l assess and monitor the sustainable yield of groundwater in all islands of the Republic,

l explore and study alternative water reserve areas,

l monitor the chemical and microbiological composition of drinking water in centralised water supply systems in consultation with MHFP,

l review all plans and proposals for the use of groundwater and to recommend appropriate technologies,

l identify and prepare project proposals for consideration by Government,

l establish official standards and codes of practice for construction and installation of water production and supply and sanitation systems,

l examine water tariffs and make recommendations were necessary,

l supply technical and supervisory assistance to outer islands, and

l provide administrative support for the National Water Supply and Sanitation Committee Importantly, the role of the National Water Supply and Sanitation Committee would need to be redefined since it overlaps with that proposed for WES. The question of which Department or section should be the regulator is dependent on the availability and concentration

of water expertise. Currently the hydrologic, engineering and hydrogeologic expertise is spread between PUB, WES in PWD and MESD, with the MIIFP having microbiological expertise.

Importantly, for this study, monitoring of recharge and the yield and sustainability of the Bonriki and Buota lenses is key issue which needs to be clarified, The continuity and training of local expertise are fundamental issues that deserve particular attention in any policy for water resource management in small island states. The role of regional bodies, such as the South Pacific Applied Geoscience Council (SOPAC), in assisting in capacity building and supporting expertise in small island states, is potentially vital.

In the past, monitoring of the salinity profile through the freshwater lenses, as well as the salinity of individual production galleries, is a critical check on the sustainability of groundwater extraction processes. PUB has carried out this task routinely. As part of this study, the PUB also monitored daily rainfall at Bonriki. This is a useful additional input to the rainfall record of South Tarawa and important for assessing groundwater recharge at Bonriki. The recharge study found that, during dry times, significant differences existed between Bonriki and the official meteorological station at Betio. A single agency should be responsible for modelling recharge and the extraction process, primarily using simple water balance models backed up with more sophisticated groundwater models.

The system of salinity monitoring boreholes located across the water reserve (see Figs 2.1 and 2.2) is essential for monitoring of the long-term sustainability of groundwater extraction.

This system has been severely compromised by vandalism of boreholes at Bonriki. The number of complete boreholes had been reduced from the original fifteen to two during the present study. The remaining boreholes are (BN 16) at the centre of the lens and (BN 1) at the seaward edge of the lens. Since the completion of the study, BN 16 has been vandalised, leaving the extreme seaward edge of the lens as the only complete monitoring point. The production of cross sections of the extent of the lens, such as in Fig. 2.2, is no longer possible.

Without comprehensive water legislation and clear identification of roles and responsibilities for water management, backed by a committed Government, it is difficult to address efficiently, effectively, systematically and unambiguously, the complex issues involved in the establishment, maintenance and management of water reserves, groundwater extraction facilities, water reticulation systems and demand management. If the underlying socio-cultural and economic discontent, evidenced in the continued vandalism of equipment in the water reserve, are not addressed, it will not be possible to effectively monitor the sustainability of the groundwater extraction system.

4. Land and Socio-Cultural Norms and Values

It became apparent early in the study that the question of water supply from the Bonriki water reserve was a complex and sensitive social, cultural and economic issue. The community’s affiliation with their land lies at the root of the quest by Bonriki villagers for increased Government compensation for the use of their land for the water reserve and the international airport. Land to the I-Kiribati is both a social and economic resource. No I-Kiribati can be described as being landless as all have an interest in land in one form or other. The I-Kiribati rely substantially on their lands to provide for subsistence living, even in the urbanised setting of South Tarawa.

An interest in land provides a reliable source of food as well as attendant fishing rights in the adjoining lagoon and ocean. It also provides the opportunity for cash income such as harvesting of copra. In contrast, a landless person or family, such as potentially exists at Bonriki, has no reliable means of providing for themselves and their extended family. Further, given that parents have the right to disinherit children from family interests in land, there is a strong tradition and motivation to care for their parents in their old age, so as to share in the families land wealth (Jones, 1997). Added to this is the I-Kiribati norm that people’s activities on their own land and their use of the land’s resources, are their own business (Harrison, 1980).

Traditionally, they can do whatever they wish with their own land. Such socio-cultural norms and values, so fundamental to the I-Kiribati way of life, are increasingly being eroded in the Bonriki community and in urban South Tarawa.

Centralised control of land and resources for public purposes is a notion inherited from the period of colonial rule (Crennan, 1998). It is a concept foreign to the norms and values of the traditional community. These socio-cultural norms and values, their quest for increased compensation and the complexity of issues so coloured the responses of most individuals that it was not possible to clearly separate oral traditions and history concerning groundwater and its use from the on-going dispute with the Government. Moreover, oral traditions about groundwater, evolving from rural, low-density, isolated community experiences would appear to have limited relevance to the urbanised, high density, suburban environment of South Tarawa to-day. What could be ascertained, however, was the identification of a range of socio-cultural norms and values which directly impact on land management practices and water reserve management issues in Bonriki (see Table 4.1). These norms and values go a long way to explaining the attitudes, practices and aspirations of the Bonriki community in regard to the use of their lands as a water reserve by Government.

Table 4.1 Land management practices, Bonriki - The impact of socio-cultural norms and values on water reserve management

Land Management Identified Socio-Cultural Norms Impact on Water Reserve

Element Identified at and Values Management at Bonriki

Bonriki income on a day to day basis enforcement including

security of water reserve

l Provision of housing l landowners can build when and ^l increasing number (30 plus) and shelter where they wish on their land of houses on reserve edge

l landowner must provide housing l increasing number of roads and shelter for immediate and and access tracks crossing

extended family + reserve

l Gardens and animal ^l traditional elements of I-Kiribati ^l contamination of freshwater

enclosures lifestyle lens and disease

Traditionally, rainwater was collected from pamlams palm thatched roofs and was flavoured and discoloured. Additionally, the national drink, palm toddy has to be made with te ran, further adding to the I-Kiribati preference for well water over rainwater (Harrison, 1980).

The distinction between rainwater and well water may indicate that traditional knowledge about water does not include the processes of recharge of or natural losses from groundwater.

Despite the traditional outstanding strengths of the I-Kiribati in navigation and reading the sea and weather conditions, there appears to be a general ‘disconnectedness’ from groundwater and the processes governing its quantity and quality. For example, the study found that there was, in the I-Kiribati language, no word for evaporation, one of the two principal components of atoll water balance (White, 1996). In order to attempt to explain the processes governing the supply of water to the groundwater to the Bonriki people, the word buanerake (literally, vapour upwards) was coined.

A UNESCO-sponsored study of Tungaru (Kiribati) traditions on the impacts of climate change and sea level rise revealed some apparently startlingly ignorance about groundwater (Riinga et al., 1997). When asked What do you think caused the well water to be brackish?, 45.6% of the 201 respondents did not know, 26% thought it was due to the sun or increasing temperature and only 13.7% thought it was due to the sea or increase in sea level. When the same sample population was asked for Ways to improve water quality? 43.6% had no idea, 26.5% said boil water 3.9% said use rainwater and only 0.5% said dig the well away from the sea. Many I-Kiribati do not believe in germs or that they can be made sick by something in water they cannot see.

While such surveys need to be treated with caution, given the I-Kiribati tendency to avoid conflict (Saito, 1997), there does appear to be a general lack of understanding about shallow groundwater and groundwater processes. This is also the case in many other nations. The UNESCO Groundwater Pollution project conducted in Tonga o (Crennan et al., 1998) also revealed a lack of community awareness about groundwater and sources of groundwater pollution. Together, these point to the need for a community education and awareness program, developed with local communities and targeted at key groups such as primary and high school

Dans le document SOPRC . Groundwater recharge in low coral islands Bonriki, South Tarawa, Republic of Kiribati (Page 18-0)