Water: capacity building

This column has recently argued that the state needs to embark on a cohesive strategy of incremental steps to improve storage systems, achieve efficiency in consumption patterns, and build a network of water recycling and sanitation if we are to meet the challenge of water scarcity in Pakistan.

That certain state institutions have taken it upon themselves to achieve ‘financial close’ of mega-dam projects through public philanthropy should not keep the executive branch from tackling other equally worrying challenges facing the water sector. National Water Policy announced this April argues that “management of water resources requires the highest levels of skills and knowledge to effectively address the looming crisis… the real challenge is not just listing “what” needs to be done, but how to do it, who will do it, and with clear timelines”.

The policy further argues to create “new and vibrant institutions” at both federal and provincial levels by introducing the “highly skilled and technical resource” required to run such institutions. While acknowledging the need for “skilled and technical resource” is a laudable approach, stating truisms and platitudes should hardly be the way to go for a national policy that shall affect future generations.

Similarly, while new institutions might be warranted in certain areas such as Groundwater Authority and Basin management authorities. However, taking corrective measures to reestablish the authority and planning capacity of existing institutions should precede establishment of new institutions. From provincial irrigation and drainage authorities to Area water boards, Pakistan already has a plethora of water sector regulator existing for a good number of years, whose inability or unwillingness to deliver on solutions has made a need to be felt for delegation of organizational role further down the bureaucratic hierarchy.

Creating additional institutions causes a risk of redundancy and exacerbates the possibility of proposals and policies getting lost in the bureaucratic labyrinth which is our government. Furthermore, unless the challenge of capacity building of existing regulators from WAPDA to IRSA is met, proposed new institutions can be expected to fail just the same.

The policy correctly argues for a need to increase the role of provincial authorities in integrated water resource management. It is at the provincial level that the acuteness of water shortage most strongly felt and with increased power and resources under 18th amendment, provinces should not only take up the baton of resource management. If provinces can proudly foot the bill for construction of power plants, why can they not take up the responsibility of building water recycling plants and artificial aquifers?

Lastly, the document misses out on the role of private sector in helping build the capacity of public sector institutions. The depth of knowledge base and financial resources to formulate and ensure policy implementation present with government is unmatched in the private sector. However, public sector organizations can surely draw upon organizations and researchers in the social sector to meet the challenge of finding “highly skilled and technical resource” so emphatically highlighted in the policy. It appears that the complexity and intensity of water crisis has been recognized both by state and society. How about we join hands in action?