Flows, translations and practices in IWRM in Tanzania

Transcription

1 Flows, translations and practices in IWRM in Tanzania Andrew Tarimo, Philip Sumuni, Kulwa Shimiyu, Aurelia van Eeden, Emmanuel Manzungu, Barbara van Koppen

2 Context 1990 Pre-1961 Local smallholder irrigation versus colonial railways, estates, urban, hydropower Colonial custodianship and permits for dispossession Emerging basin thinking Abundant undeveloped water resources

3 Post 1961/1967 African socialism: Context 1990 New undersourced state apparatus trying to decentralize Non-alignment strong donor influence State as service provider also for domestic water and irrigation Strengthening basin thinking: FAO; boundaries for initial decentralization; formalization in 1981 and 1989 Downstream issues: Pangani : hydropower (Norway), Rufiji hydropower (Swedes), Wami-Ruvu: Dar es Salaam (JICA) Permits as ex-post registration

4 Context from 1980s onwards: neo-liberalism 1980s-90s: Structural Adjustment Programs Erosion of state water services for cost-recovery Collusion state- economy (Zanzibar declaration corruption) Opening up for private sector Multi-party system; expanding state apparatus and decentralization

5 Flows of IWRM into Tanzania in 1990s 1991: Pangani RBO, financed by NORAD on hydropower vs upstream irrigation (both JICA schemes and traditional) 1993 Rufiji RBO: government and Rujewa sub-catchment office by Worldbank, also on hydropower, smallholders and nature/wetlands 1994 Worldbank/European donors: Rapid Water Resources Assessment 1996: Worldbank River Basin Management Smallholder Irrigation Improvement Program RBM: Extrapolating local issues to national policy and law SIIP: increased efficiency in irrigation, no expansion

6 Flows of IWRM into Tanzania in 1990s RBM-SIPP Worldbank s IWRM Ideology Water resource allocation is a zero sum game; water as an economic good; prioritizing hydropower and environment against smallholders. Stop water development! Basin organizations (complexity; de -centralized; open up to private players; top-down parallel governance layer without accountability) Pay for basin organisations by redefined and nationwide enforced permits, decentralized from head office to basins

7 National-level translation and interpretation of IWRM IWRMD Plus D Development 2002 National Water Policy and Strategy 2009 Water Act (delayed!) Basins catchment sub-catchment WUAs (to collect revenue!) Reviving and enforcing permits by basin organizations Repeated but failed efforts to better include local government Public fund allocation in IWRMD sector: large-scale infrastructure

8 Basin-level translation, interpretation and practices of IWRM 1991 Pangani basin: Worldbank and research on hydropower versus smallholders, some permits, IUCN - environmental flow 1993 Rufiji basin Upper Ruaha sub-basin: research DFID (SMUWC, Riparwin hydrology, local institutions, some permits, dam management) WWF SAGCOT basin planning USA University 2002: Wami Ruvu basin And: Victoria Lake: transboundary; Ruvuma & Southern Coast; internal drainage basin, lake basins

9 Practices in Wami Ruvu basin Aurelia van Eeden

10 WHOSE WATERS? Large-scale Agricultural Development in the Wami-Ruvu River Basin, Tanzania Aurelia van Eeden Farm Inn, Pretoria - 21 September 2015

11 Whose Waters - Background - IWRM in the WRRB - Upstream: Mtibwa - Downstream: EcoEnergy - Findings at village level

12 Background Large-scale agricultural investment and land acquisitions - Food Security, Climate Change and Economic Development - Development policies and initiatives: Agricultural Sector Development Programme (ASDP), Tanzania Agriculture and Food Security Investment Plan (TAFSIP), ( ), Kilimo Kwanza Agriculture First, (2008-onwards), Southern African Growth Corridor (SAGCOT) - Tanzania Investment Centre - one stop shop that facilitates investment Water grabbing Appropriation Undue Influence of natural and resources, the including land Acts and of Dispossession water, and the control of their Creation associated of New uses and Alliances benefits with or without the transfer of ownership, usually from poor and marginalised to powerful actors Research Questions - How does the IWRM framework deal with and prioritise the competing interests of the various water users in a river basin, in light of the large-scale agricultural development - Does IWRM allow or impede the phenomenon of water grabbing?

13 Background Study Area Village Ward District Region EcoEnergy (EE) Matipwili Mkange Bagamoyo Pwani Mtibwa Sugar Estate (MSE) Village Ward District Region Lukenge Mtibwa Mvomero Morogoro

14 IWRM in the Wami-Ruvu River Basin Organisational structure The many autonomous water governing entities create confusion among water users Water Politics use permits govern and the abstraction governance of water. The institutional Issued framework water allocation of Water exceeds Governance water availability in Tanzania, in some the rivers Water Board, has no voice. Data base not updated (JICA database) Illegal water - Interview abstraction with (only Herbert 11% of Kashililah, old permits WaterAid subject for Tanzania renewal was submitted by the deadline of November 2011) Payment of water permits Only 30% of users pay (10% of annual budget) Not receiving payments from water users (Confusion, Gift from God ) Creating financial challenges leading to corruption Fines and Penalty Structure not implemented Shortage of experienced staff 20 year gap in recruiting staff for WRBWO, 78 people to cover approximately 66,300km 2 Monitoring water allocations in the River Basin

15 Findings Upstream: Mtibwa Sugar Estate (MSE) Undue influence and Ownership Elusive Ownership Structure (Villagers referred to the man ) Special agreement with the ex-president, Mr Mkapa: Locals should be thankful to MSE for development Visits by District and Regional Commissioner, Ministers, Members of Parliament and even the President useless Water Scarcity and Pollution MSE closes weir in the river for months Pollution due to earth dams that fail (pay no fines) Expansion plans ha of sugarcane and a dam for irrigation and hydroelectricity (Non-) Payments to Outgrowers (OG) OGs unable to recover input costs and pay back loans OGs sugarcane sucrose level too low Subsidized sugar imports into Tanzania flood the market (In 2013, GoT allowed an import of tonnes while country only had a deficit of tonnes tonnes in warehouses worth 62,5m USD)

16 Mtibwa Upstream Downstream

17 Findings Downstream: EcoEnergy Sugar Company SEKAB Biofuel Tanzania Process to acquire land started in 2007 On 9 May 2008, the surveying of the land was complete and 22,000 ha of the Razaba Ranch was allocated to SEKAB BT Land in kind GOT provide land for 25 % equity share in EcoEnergy Developed by the Ministry for Lands, Housing and Human Settlements to facilitate development and investment in Agricultural Sector However, in order for the Land for Equity policy to benefit investors and communities, Tanzania s land need to be surveyed before it is given to investors 90% of Tanzania s villages do not have a land use plan - Boundary conflicts Water Permits Largest water permit holder in the basin - lag time between application and decision to grant by WRBO was 2 months Received a temporary permit valid for 5 years (used this one in the IWRMP) However, donors needed more assurance current permit is now permanent valid for 30 years

18 Water is needed for the Outgrowers Companies Individual Direct Contracts 100h 100ha 100ha 80ha 100ha AEE 70ha 100ha 100ha 100ha 100ha Long Term Off-take agreements (11 years) Water use permits are also needed by OGs to access loans (Kilimo Kwanza) A rough estimate calculates the loan to be at 800,000 1,2 million USD over the 11-year off-take agreement AEE was in the process to secure a water permit for the entire OG scheme through circumventing the formal application procedure

19 Findings at the village level Lukenge Village Water collection and governance Collect water from river and water boys Had a water committee that disintegrated WRBO told them to formalize into a WUA committee and register at the WRBWO The Jumuiya ya bonde dogo la mto Mkindo WUA A helping hand to the WRBWO Established in April 2011 Financial and logistical challenges Challenges Outgrowers and Mtibwa conflict Pastoralists conflict Irrigation scheme and pollution by Mtibwa Matipwili Village Water collection and governance - Only collect water from the Wami (300 Tsh for 20 liters) - Water committee (3 woman 7 men) Pioneers for the outgrower scheme - Kilombero Delegation (October 2013) Picture is not so rosy Challenges - Resettlement - Decision over land and water ownership is made during village assembly meetings - Conflict over water and land with pastoralists (Datooga tribe), access to water ways in the Wami have been blocked

20 So is it a case of water grabbing? Powerful actors are able to high-jack the IWRM process through various means Undue Influence and the Creation of New Alliances Acts of Dispossession Permits are granted on a first-come-first-serve basis Creative permit applications - circumventing the legal permit application process Poor financial and human resources opportunities for corruption and undue influence Powerful actors collude with government officials to meet their own needs allocations towards the money Large-scale water users divert water resources to the detriment of down stream users

21 Thank you for your time, and to all who has made this research study possible. Aurelia van Eeden

22 Smallholders in Uluguru mountains Hardly any trickle down of IWRM, except some talk about permits by formal institutions and RBO officer once Permits will create chaos Fear for big investors : vest area-wide permits in local government

23 Conclusions and recommendations Laboratory for donor-driven agendas: More knowledge about water resources Re-emphasis on infrastructure/storage for abundant water resources Policies and laws, but limited implementation Permits; basin-level regulator; payment for water resources ; limited accountability Conservation / environmental flows but pollution issues? Winners: Large-scale foreign and national investors using the knowledge and obtaining water entitlements through permits Losers: Majority of small-scale water users overriding local water management and local government