Institutional Reform for Community Participation

Abstract

Arsenic contamination of groundwater in Bangladesh is one of the largest naturally occurring groundwater calamity in South Asia. The rural people, about 64% of the population (104 million people) suffer the most from this grand challenge as they are still heavily dependent on groundwater based tubewells which are arsenic contaminated. Government interventions to switch to other arsenic mitigation technologies such Piped Water Supply Systems have not been very successful despite the technology being a long-term feasible solution in arsenic-affected areas. Rural communities find it difficult to make the switch from tubewells to piped water due to issues of high costs, less demand and extensive monitoring requirements of these systems. To align itself with the SGD 6.1 (“Clean Drinking Water for All”) and with the aim to climb WHO/UNICEF’s JMP’s highest ladder for drinking water, the Government of Bangladesh has installed multiple Piped Water Schemes in water-stressed areas. These schemes are technically viable in water-stressed areas and financially supported by the World Bank, UNICEF, WHO and other global organisations. However, at community level, institutionally, they face the challenge of Adoptability and Sustainability. Taking a case study approach, this research aims to suggest strategies that can be implemented to increase community adoption and sustainability of Piped Water Supply Systems in the rural areas of Bangladesh to ensure arsenic-safe water in every household-tap. The goal is to provide institutional insights to a research organisation in Bangladesh. Two relevant methodologies for institutional analysis developed by Nobel Prize Winner Elinor Ostrom: The Institutional Analysis and Development Framework (IAD) and Ostrom’s Design Principles for Governance of Common Pool Resources, are used to tackle this problem. The IAD framework is applied at three different levels of governance (central-local and community) to study the gaps in policy implementation at three different phases of the design process “Planning-Implementation-Community Adoption of Piped Water Schemes”. The findings from the IAD suggest that there are defined gaps between actual policy outcomes and policy expectations. The outcomes of the IAD analysis at each level, are evaluated against six of Ostrom’s evaluation criteria. The design principles are then applied to each of the findings from the evaluation to bridge that gap between actual and desired policy outcomes. Three main design principles, a) Collective-Choice Arrangements, b) Graduated Sanctions and c) Nested Enterprises, support the development of new institutional reforms. Proposed institutional reforms, which are robust in nature, lead to suggesting strategies that that can help to increase rural community adoption and sustainability of piped water supply systems to ensure arsenic-safe water in every household-tap.