DeepDyve requires Javascript to function. Please enable Javascript on your browser to continue.
Understanding the political economy dynamics of the water, sanitation and hygiene (WaSH) sector in Rwanda Understanding the political economy dynamics of the water, sanitation and hygiene (WaSH) sector...
Tsinda, Aime; Abbott, Pamela; Chenoweth, Jonathan; Mucyo, Sylvie
2021-05-04 00:00:00
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF URBAN SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT 2021, VOL. 13, NO. 2, 265–278 https://doi.org/10.1080/19463138.2021.1881787 ARTICLE Understanding the political economy dynamics of the water, sanitation and hygiene (WaSH) sector in Rwanda a b c d Aime Tsinda , Pamela Abbott , Jonathan Chenoweth and Sylvie Mucyo a b Department of Geography and Urban Planning, University of Rwanda, Kigali, Rwanda; School of Education, Centre for Global Development, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK; Centre for Environment and Sustainability, Faculty of Engineering and Physical Sciences, University of Surrey, Guildford, UK; School of Agricultural Engineering and Environmental Management, UR- Sweden Programme, University of Rwanda, Kigali, Musanze, Rwanda ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY Received 8 August 2020 Water, sanitation and hygiene (WaSH) services are examined from the Political Accepted 23 January 2021 Economy Analysis (PEA) perspective in Rwanda. Through a participatory qualitative approach, the findings show that water and sanitation services have been relatively KEYWORDS low on the political agenda in Rwanda. There is a shortage of qualified employees at Water; sanitation; hygiene; both local and national levels who should be responsible for the WaSH sector. Other political economy analysis; major PEA issues include limited accurate, reliable and timely WaSH data to inform Rwanda decision-making, sustainability of WaSH services and ineffective decentralisation. A range of strategic entry points are suggested in this paper to address these PEA issues. Introduction provision of basic infrastructure and household ser- vices. Households with access to an improved drink- Adequate safe water, sanitation, and proper hygiene ing-water source (excluding time and distance practices reduce diarrhoeal disease and prevent criteria) were estimated at 85% in 2017; approxi- deaths (Cairncross et al. 2010; Prüss-Ustün et al. mately 84% of the households use basic sanitation 2014; Gentry-Shields and Bartram 2014). Two billion services (if some criteria such as sanitation facilities people lack access to at least basic sanitation services not being shared between households are excluded) and 785 million people are estimated to lack access to (GoR 2017; Tsinda et al. 2020). at least basic drinking water services (UNICEF and However, access and coverage to water services for WHO 2019). Diseases related to unsafe water, sanita- rural populations is still more limited. Only 47.3% of tion and hygiene (WaSH) products and services are the rural population have an improved water supply major causes of mortality and morbidity (Prüss-Ustün within 500 metres of their home (NISR 2016). Water et al. 2014; Barrington et al. 2016). Also, the lack of safe shortage due to insufficient water supply is a key WaSH services affects children’s nutrition and stunts challenge for most households. growth, sometimes leading to cognitive impairments In September 2015, the Sustainable Development (Dangour et al. 2013; Spears et al. 2013; Barrington Goals (SDGs) were adopted and required nations to et al. 2016). These represent serious global health ensure adequate water supply and sanitation for all. burdens in terms of the consequences associated Unlike the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), with a lack of access to drinking water, inadequate which only tracked household access, the SDGs target sanitation, and poor hygiene. provision of ‘universal access to basic drinking water, Rwanda recorded significant improvements in sanitation and hygiene’ (WASH) for non-household access to drinking water and sanitation in recent settings, including schools, health facilities and public years. There have been notable achievements in the institutions (Cronk et al. 2017). CONTACT AimeTsinda aime.tsinda@gmail.com Department of Geography and Urban Planning, University of Rwanda, Kigali, Rwanda © 2021 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group 266 A. TSINDA ET AL. Furthermore, SDG 6 significantly raises the level of 2012; Boex et al. 2020). The PEA framework provides ambition and level of service required for the achieve- the setting and structure for gauging the political, ment of the SDGs. Rwanda’s baseline for SDG 6.1 governance and institutional practices in the WaSH (water) and SDG 6.2 (sanitation) put ‘basic’ water sup- sector. For instance, how do water and sanitation ply service (44%) country-wide while access to the issues define and shape the political agenda of the highest level of service – ‘safely managed’ water sup- government? Where are the key bottlenecks in the ply services – is at 13%. The access to ‘basic’ sanitation system? What are the political economy factors and services country-wide is 62% while 57% for rural and capacity issues hampering system performance? What 64% for urban (MININFRA 2018). are the drivers for improvement? In December 2016, the Government of Rwanda PEA as used here refers specifically to a variety of through its National Water Supply and Sanitation analytical approaches led or supported by interna- policies and related implementation strategies (GoR tional aid donors developed since 2000 (Leftwich 2016; MININFRA 2016) committed to achieving uni- 2007; Fritz et al. 2009a; Copestake and Williams versal access to basic water and sanitation services. In 2014). So far, there are a variety of frameworks rele- 2017, the Government of Rwanda again committed vant to PEA. These frameworks roughly fall into three itself to very ambitious targets of achieving 100% main groups: 1) Macro-level frameworks (understand- universal access to basic water, sanitation and ing PEA processes at the country level and under- hygiene services, in line with its National Strategy for standing the broad PEA context) (Labonté 2018; Transformation (NST1 2017–2024) (GoR 2017). Gkiouleka et al. 2018) Sector-level frameworks (identi- Despite the above ambitions and significant pro- fying particular challenges, interests and incentives gress made, some challenges remain. There is increas- operating in a specific sector, such as the WaSH sector ing recognition across the academic and aid literature (Harris et al. 2011; Scott 2014; Copestake and Williams that development is fundamentally a political process 2014; Williams 2017; Lee and Usman 2018), p. 3) in key respects (Kitschelt and Wilkinson 2007; North Problem-driven analysis (seeking to resolve specific et al. 2007; Plummer and Slaymaker 2007; Kooy et al. problems at the project level or to a specific policy 2012; James 2019). The 2006 Development White issue or process) (Landell-Mills et al. 2007; DFID 2009; Paper, Making Governance Work for the Poor, for exam- Fritz et al. 2009b; Duncan and Williams 2012; Williams ple, argued that the fight against poverty can only be 2016; Abeysuriya et al. 2019). won with capable and accountable governance which However, a critical review shows that in practice, is mainly contingent on getting the right kind of such frameworks overlap and key elements are politics (McGranahan and Satterthwaite 2006; Spiller included in most of the approaches: et al. 2008; Mason et al. 2015). In Rwanda, these 1) Structures – factors such as historical processes, challenges need to be identified in the broader con- demographic trends and environmental issues; text of politics and governance that can, at least in 2) Institutions – a strong emphasis on institutions, part, explain certain aspects of WaSH services which defined as both formal and informal ‘rules of the present barriers to and opportunities for pro-poor ‘game’ (Ostrom 2005; Scott 2014), p. 3) Agents and change. their incentives – structures and institutions provide PEA is primarily concerned with the interaction of incentives for pro-developmental behaviour among political and economic processes in a society: the key agents or groups in society (Duncan and distribution of power and wealth between different Williams 2012; Chong et al. 2015, 2016a), p. 4) Best groups and individuals, and the processes that create, ‘fit’ rather than best ‘practice’ (Booth 2012)- this is sustain and transform these relationships over time similar to ‘Grindle’s idea of aiming for ‘good enough (Collinson 2003; DFID 2009; Harris and Booth 2013). It ‘governance’. Kelsall calls this ‘going with the grain’, offers an analytical framework to characterise and working with – instead of trying to change – neopa- understand the political and economic incentives for trimonialism systems in Africa (Kelsall 2011) and social actions and behaviours in a society. There is an Rwanda had been identified as a developmental neo- increasing recognition that the governance and insti- patrimonial state (Booth and Golooba-Mutebi 2012). tutional arrangements of a sector and the incentives It is against this background that this study uses generated by such arrangements have a critical the PEA framework to properly examine WaSH prac- impact on how services are delivered (Kooy et al. tices in Rwanda to: (i) better understand the dynamics INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF URBAN SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT 267 Table 1. Key informant and individual interviews in Rwanda. and power relations shaping policy processes and Number of indivi- implementation practices; and, (ii) identify key politi- dual or group cal issues and processes and entry points for promot- Types interviews Institutions N ing change and improving WaSH services. National 1 Ministry of Infrastructure 2 institutions (MININFRA) 2 Ministry of Health (MoH) 1 3 Water and Sanitation 2 Methods and tools Corporation (WASAC) 4 Rwanda Utilities 1 We used consultative, participatory engagement Regulatory Agency techniques to collect and analyse qualitative data. (RURA) 5 Rwanda Environment 1 Participatory engagement is a powerful approach Management used in change-oriented research to help instigate Authority (REMA) changes that endure beyond the end of the research Local 6 City of Kigali 2 institutions 7 District of Nyarugenge 1 project (Kindon et al. 2007). We used a qualitative 8 District of Gasabo 2 approach which included a literature review, in- University 9 University of Rwanda, 1 depth interviews and a workshop. College of Science and Technology First, a literature review was carried out to inform Non- 10 SNV 1 the design of the research. A search for relevant docu- Government 11 WaterAid 1 ments was carried out and the documents were Organisations 12 Water for People 1 (NGOs) reviewed and analysed using the PEA framework. 1 Private sector 13 Boundless Consultancy 1 Second, 14 in-depth interviews with government Group officials, local officials and other key experts in the 14 Rwanda Environment 1 Care private sector, Non-Government Organisations (NGOs) and international agencies about their experiences and understanding of the factors shaping community demand for improving the WaSH sector, key bottle- necks in the system, any key reform champions within the sector, the role opinion leaders or champions play First, based on the analysis of the presentation of in raising the profile of WaSH sector and supporting the available evidence from the literature review and increased sector investment (See Table 1). The purpo- in-depth interviews, participants identified 16 cross- sive sampling of key informants took account of the cutting issues that affect the WaSH sector. These 16 range of stakeholders in the sector in Rwanda. issues were clustered into nine groups: 1) sector pro- Third, engaging with key stakeholders was central cesses (roles of Government, policy reform, sequen- to our approach. We shared preliminary findings from cing, planning, etc.); 2) capacity (quality of a desk review and interviews at a three-day participa- implementations, education and training, experience tory workshop attracting 12 key stakeholders com- and innovation, etc.); 3) sector performance monitor- prising government officials, local officials and other ing (Data, monitoring & evaluation, etc.); 4) coordina- key experts in the private sector, Non-Government tion (coordination in WaSH between sectors, Organisations (NGOs) and academia to get their feed- structures and institutional framework; collaboration back and discuss ideas for strengthening governance between NGOs and WaSH actors, vertical and horizon- (Table 2). Discussions during the workshop were tal co-ordination, etc.); 5) leadership, etc.; 6) learning structured using the PEA framework. On Day One, (documentations, transparency, willingness to share, participants engaged in an action learning process. evidence, research and learning); 7) integration (frag- On Day Two, participants identified key bottlenecks in mentation of WaSH sectors, policy translation into the WaSH sector in Rwanda. On Day Three, partici- implementation, fragmented WaSH policies and bias pants came up with agreed recommendations on how towards water, integration or centrality of WaSH in these bottlenecks might be addressed using development, etc.); 8) prioritisations (low prioritisation a modified deliberative forum consisting of group of WaSH sector and hygiene, financing, inequalities); work, voting system and world café deliberations. 9) citizen voice (ownership, voice, empowerment, The deliberative forum followed three steps: demand, mindset). 268 A. TSINDA ET AL. Table 2. Key stakeholders for a three-day workshop. rather than on WaSH as an integrated package being Types Institutions N central to development (Interview 9). There is also National institutions Ministry of Infrastructure 1 a clear bias towards water as an infrastructural solu- (MININFRA) tion, with sanitation development being a lower prior- Ministry of Health (MoH) 1 ity status and hygiene and related behaviour change Water and Sanitation Corporation 1 (WASAC) often being completely marginalised (Interviews 12, Rwanda Environment Management 1 14). Rwanda has several public water supply and sani- Authority (REMA) tation services policies and regulations as tools for Local institutions City of Kigali 1 District of Nyarugenge 1 solving water and sanitation services problems (See District of Gasabo 1 Table 4). University University of Rwanda, College of 1 Beyond the policy and legal frameworks provided Science and Technology Non-Government SNV 1 in the (Table 4), gender policy sets out key objectives Organisations (NGOs) WaterAid 1 for ensuring the economic empowerment of women: Private sector Boundless Consultancy Group 1 for employment in non-farm jobs and the results from Rwanda Environment Care 1 Total 12 empowering women such as economic growth, improved health of children, among others. However, there is still a more complex and mixed Table 3. Key issues identified by participants in the workshop. story on gender equality as social norms and tradi- 4 Top priority issues for Other issues identified by tional perspectives on gender roles continue to shape Action participants and influence how women and girls are treated and Capacity-16 votes Citizen voice-7 votes positioned within society. Women and girls remain Integration-8 votes Coordination-7 votes Prioritisation/Finance-8 Sector processes-5 votes primarily responsible for domestic tasks, including votes the collection of water and other WaSH-related chores Sector Peformance-8 votes Learning-4 votes for the household (Interview 2). In recent years, men- Leadership-3 votes strual hygiene management has become recognised as an issue affecting adolescent girls, which cuts across development sectors and has an impact on Second, the nine key issues initially identified were ‘girls’ school dropouts (Interview 10). There is no prioritised by participants through a voting system clear roadmap how targets in water and sanitation and only top four in voting were further analysed services will be achieved in relation to their linkages (See Table 3). to policies on gender equality in different develop- Third, in group work, participants were divided into ment sectors. A wider integrated policy framework is three groups and requested to analyse and respond needed to impact decisions at the local level and to questions provided using PEA frameworks. The mobilisation of necessary resources (Interview 11). framework divides discourses into three elements for The national decentralisation process is in its third analysis: 1) Country Context; 2) Sector Analysis; 3) phase with the districts now the implementing arm Sector Process). Each group presented their conclu- for all government policies and programmes includ- sions and discussions focused on key PEA issues (what ing water and sanitation (Interview 2). As part of is the problem?), analysis of success factors and hin- upward accountability, the introduction of perfor- drances, identification of key drivers for change (e.g., mance contracts – ‘Imihigo’ in Kinyarwanda – has which institutions, actions, transformation) and had a significant impact at the district level with approaches for improving WaSH services. Mayors being held accountable for targets (including water, sanitation and hygiene) within their areas. Results There are also other formal spaces for citizen engagement in programmes and policies (e.g. Rwanda WaSH political economy context analysis Umuganda) but the extent to which citizens are Different key informants during interviews provided empowered or facilitated to make full use of these insights on WaSH political economy context in spaces is still in question. Civil Society Organisations Rwanda. One respondent argued that more emphasis (CSOs) often play a role of advocacy but their engage- is placed on water being ‘essential ‘infrastructure’ ment in budgetary planning processes is still limited INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF URBAN SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT 269 Table 4. Relevant water, sanitation and hygiene policies and statutes. Policy or relevant statute Key provisions Vision 2050 Aims to ensure high standards of living for all Rwandans; improve quality of life, modern infrastructure by progressively achieving safely managed water and sanitation services for socio-economic development and to all Rwandans by 2050. National Strategy for Transformation 1 (NST 1–2017-2024)/ -Aims to increase the proportion of households accessing improved WATSAN Strategic Plan targets 2018–2024 source of water from 84.8% (EICV 4) to 100% and the proportion with improved sanitation services/facilities from 83% (EICV 4) to 100%. -Ensures the proportion of the rural population living within 500 m of an improved water source from 47.% (EICV4) to 100%, and to raise the proportion of the urban population residing within 200 m of an improved water source from 61% (EICV4) to 100%. -WASAN sector also plans to increase the proportion of schools with latrines complying with health norms will reach a target of 100%. Water Supply Policy and Implementation Strategy 2016 Aims to ensure sustainable, equitable, reliable and affordable access to safe drinking water for all Rwandans, as a contribution to improving public health and socio-economic development. Sanitation Policy and Implementation Strategy 2016 Aims to ensure sustainable, equitable and affordable access to safe sanitation and waste management services for all Rwandans as a contribution to poverty reduction, public health, economic development and environmental protection. National Policy on Environment and Climate change 2019 Aims a clean and healthy environment that is resilient to Climate Variability and Change and supports a high quality of life for its society. It also promote circular economy in key sectors such as sanitation. Two policy actions of policy statement 4 under policy objective 1 focus on “Promoting private sector investment, especially the development of appropriate water and sanitation technologies and infrastructure for waste management as well as technologies for efficient and safe water use, especially in respect to safe wastewater use and recycling. Decentralisation policy 2012 Promotes transparency and accountability for local service delivery through citizen participation in planning. Community Development Policy (2008) Focuses on cooperation and harmonisation between formal and informal communities, the private sector, civil society, NGOs, central and decentralised government institutions; cooperation and coordination are also enhanced through the Joint Action Development Forum (JADF) at a local level. Health Sector Policy Focuses on improving the quality of and demand for services in the control of disease through hygiene promotion. Environmental Health Policy Covers a range of issues, including: a ‘hygiene behaviour change ‘approach’ known as the ‘Community Based Environmental Health Promotion Program (CBEHPP) to build on the community-based approaches tested under Participatory Hygiene and Sanitation Transformation (PHAST) and Hygiene et Assainissement en Milieu Scolaire (HAMS); Hygiene and Sanitation Presidential Initiative (HSPI) which promotes hygiene and sanitation in homes, schools, offices, restaurants, and other public places, and appropriate management medical waste, excreta waste, etc. Urban Housing Policy Recognises the need to ensure that people have access to potable water and adequate sanitation facilities and stresses the importance of upgrading informal settlements. National Policy for Water Resources Management 2011 Recognises water as an economic good, opted for integrated and demand – driven-services. National Water Supply Policy and Strategy (NWSPS) 2016 Attempted to address water and sanitation issues in clearly defined spatial units (urban areas, small towns and rural areas); placed high priority on the development of safe and adequate water supply and sanitation services as a key instrument for fighting poverty and accelerating socio-economic development. (Continued) 270 A. TSINDA ET AL. Table 4. (Continued). Policy or relevant statute Key provisions Constitution of 2003 as amended in 2015 Gives citizens a right to a clean environment. Article 22 on Right to a clean environment: Everyone has the right to live in a clean and healthy environment; article 53 on Protection of the environment”: Everyone has a duty to protect, safeguard and promote the environment. It also indicates that the Government is responsible for protection of the environment. Lastly, it stipulates that law will determine modalities for protecting, conserving and promoting the environment. Law N°62/2008 Lays out the general framework for the principles of integrated water resources management, including the prevention of pollution, and the principle of ‘user pays and ‘polluter pays’ as well as the principle of ‘users’ associations for the administrative management of water. Law N°10/2012 governing urban planning and building in Seeks to protect the physical environment and improve water drainage Rwanda across roads Organic law n° 04/2005 of 08/04/2005 determining the Gives right to every natural or legal person in Rwanda to live in a healthy modalities of protection, conservation, and promotion of and balanced environment and captures a wide range of environment environmental protection, coordination and enforcement functions to ensuring community needs are met (Interview 9). problem. Each of the issues is discussed below in an Water supply, sanitation provisions and hygiene fall attempt to identify entry points for promoting change. within the responsibility of several institutions. The division of stakeholders’ responsibilities regarding Capabilities and skills WaSH services is summarised in (Table 5). In the workshop, capabilities and skills were among However, although an official institutional frame- the most frequently quoted WaSH priority actions. work for WaSH services exists, there is a lack of clarity Lack of capabilities and skills was identified as over the responsibilities of different actors and a lack of a major bottleneck hindering improvements in appropriate managerial, scientific and technical capa- WaSH services. For example, districts do not have city to fulfil their roles (Interview 4). Furthermore, roles insufficient staff to inspect sanitation facilities nor do are often mixed up and there is no clear separation the staff have the required skills to implement WaSH between regulatory, monitoring and executive duties activities. This situation is exacerbated by a high turn- between institutions (Interview 5). For example, in over of staff. relation to financing arrangements for the sector, national policy is ambiguous about when exactly muni- . . ..The overall improvement of the workplace tends to cipalities or central Government can or should contri- decrease with high turnover. . .. Since a new employee has a period of adjustment, he won’t complete tasks as quickly bute to financing the costs of renewal or replacement as the person he ‘replaces’. (Official of SNV in workshop) of rural water infrastructure (Interview 14), a key factor in effective service delivery. Another participant observed that lack of capacity went beyond human capacity and included financial and material resources. Key political economy issues in the WaSH sector ‘. . ..There is a need to ensure that the personnel are and entry points for promoting change working within a functional system, with the financial In Rwanda, there are a number of political economy and material resources to carry out their role effectively . contentious issues in the WaSH sector, and six key PEA (Official of Nyarugenge district in workshop) issues were identified during the workshop. These For most participants, having sufficient, qualified, were: (i) capabilities and skills; (ii) integration; (iii) prior- technical staff and other resources is essential for itisation and finance; (iv) limited reliable data to inform improving WaSH services. The participants also sug- decision-making; (v) decentralisation; (vi) sustainability gested that for sustainable WaSH improvement, the and mitigating risks. The six PEA issues are interlinked Government of Rwanda should continue investing in and, taken together, reflect the complexity of the behaviour changes in hygiene practices in schools. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF URBAN SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT 271 Table 5. Major WASH sector ‘stakeholders’ matrix. Power and Key institutions in sanitation Key responsibilities/Mandates influence Ministry of Infrastructure Responsible for the development of policies and regulations regarding sanitation, water *** (MININFRA) supply, infrastructure, urbanisation and settlements; it supports and supervises districts in the construction of water supply systems, latrines and hygiene promotion; it also prepares, monitors and regulates water quality and hygiene standards. Ministry of Health (MoH) Responsible for the control and monitoring of activities related to hospitals, health *** services; promoting sanitation, healthy standards and regulations for water and sanitation; funding construction of latrines within the hospital, overseeing the implementation of Environmental health related programmes that mitigate water borne diseases, promoting hygiene among the population; develops policies, strategies and guidelines for sanitation and hygiene as well as medical waste disposal and treatment, takes the lead in household sanitation and hygiene promotion. Ministry of Environment (MoE) Responsible for various policies including environment and climate change, water ** resource management as well as land. Ministry of Local Government Responsible for good governance in all local administration levels including *** (MINALOC) environment governance at local level and various community management programmes: Umuganda, Ubudehe, and Imihigo and coordinating implementation of various government programmes (including water and sanitation at the local level. Ministry of Education (MINEDUC) Responsible for school sanitation programmes including both implementation in ** schools and consideration in curricula as well as funding the construction of school latrines, and overseeing the implementation of environmental education programmes in schools (by supporting Environmental Clubs), as well as initiating the process of mainstreaming environment into schools. Ministry of Finance and Economic Responsible for mobilising funds; coordinating the National Budgeting and *** Planning (MINECOFIN) coordination of development partners and allocation of budgets to different Ministries and sectors; overseeing and advising on the formation of various funds. Ministry of Gender and Family Responsible for ensuring strategic coordination of policy implementation around ** Promotion (MIGEPROF) gender, family, women’s empowerment, and children’s issues. It plays a leading role in the implementation of gender agenda in different sectors, including water, sanitation, hygiene, etc. Water and Sanitation Corporation Responsible for urban sewerage systems and sludge emptying services, coordination of *** (WASAC) programmes related to sanitation infrastructure, and funding of the construction of sanitation, water facilities and waste management. Rwanda Environment Responsible for setting up environment standards and regulations; monitoring, *** Management Authority (REMA) inspecting, and ensuring compliance with environmental awareness; enforcing environmental regulations and raising awareness about domestic and industrial solid waste management. Rwanda Utilities Regulatory Responsible for ensuring those basic services including Water and Sanitation provision *** Agency (RURA) are made according to the required standards and that regulations ensure for fair completion in the provision of these public services (i.e. water and sanitation). Rwanda Standards Board (RSB) Responsible for the inspection of sanitation systems in hotels and other businesses in *** collaboration with the Ministry of Health and the City of Kigali. Rwanda Housing Authority (RHA) Responsible for implementing policies, developing housing and urban planning ** strategies and programs; supporting urban infrastructure development programs under the decentralised structures; upgrading and resettling informal settlements. Kigali City Council, Districts, Responsible for the Execution and implementation of the state regulations on *** sectors, cells environmental protection at local (city) level; participate in inspection of sanitation systems, hygiene for hotels and in policy making process, land and environmental management, urban planning, sanitation plants maintenance; providing drinking water, sanitation, and waste treatment and disposal, mobilise funds (e.g. tax collection as stipulated by law and decentralisation policy), preparing budgets and projects including those related to environment and sanitation, implementing government policies and specific projects and participate in the policymaking process. WASH-related research and University of Rwanda through six colleges, Rwanda Polytechnic through various ** education institutions vocational training colleges (eight Integrated Polytechnic Regional Centers, IPRCs), various private universities. NGOs Responsible for the provision of Water and Sanitation facilities (especially to the poor), ** provision of technical support, sensitisation on hygiene, advocacy and advice in policy making. Key NGOs include: Water for People, Water Aid, PROTOS, MLFM, AVSI, CICR, and the World Vision. (Continued) 272 A. TSINDA ET AL. Table 5. (Continued). Power and Key institutions in sanitation Key responsibilities/Mandates influence Private sector Include engineers’ associations, private sector operators in WASH sector, etc. ** Funders Include the World Bank, African Development Bank, WHO/UNICEF, ** UNDP, Government of Japan through JICA, Government of Netherlands through SNV, European Union, UN- Habitat, BADEA, OFID, OPEC, USAID Power and influence: ***: Very High; **: High; *: Low This means that strengthening and empowering the This is considered as important because if districts existing school WaSH clubs is equally important. are to be able to act as service providers and support Village meeting forums such as Umugoroba community in improving WaSH and other services at w’Ababyeyi (Parents’ forum) were also identified as the community level, they require support and assis- a way to empower people, by enabling knowledge tance from central government water ministries, the sharing on good sanitation and hygiene practices: private sector, training or academic institutions and NGOs. . . ..I thought Umugoroba w’Ababyeyi could help house- holds to increase their knowledge on sanitation and hygie- nic best practices as households share experiences and Integration testimonies and learn from each other on how they went Fragmentation of the WaSH sector was seen by parti- about settling issues in the ‘family”. (Official of the City of cipants in the workshop as an important issue. Kigali in workshop) Participants thought that fragmentation produces Furthermore, the participants thought that guidelines a confusing and often contradictory landscape in should be distributed to households on how to which practitioners attempt to function: improve hygiene: . . ..Actually, there is no WaSH sector in Rwanda because Such guidelines should be brought to the attention of the local WASH responsibilities are spread across many ministries community using the local media and by leaflet distribution and consequently, there is bound to be duplication of or toolkit via the Community Health Workers, schools, etc. All functions and conflict of authority. The processes that manuals should be illustrative and provided in Kinyarwanda. influence resource expenditure for the provision of safe (Official of the Ministry of Health in workshop). drinking water and sanitation spending (MININFRA) is entirely separate from those that determine allocation of Some participants also recommended setting up hygiene spending (Ministry of Health) . . .. (Professor of demonstration sites so that people can see a range University of Rwanda, College of Science and Technology in workshop) of products certified by the authority in charge of standards (such as pit digging services, superstructure While agreeing with this observation, another partici- building, use and maintenance of latrines) that are pant went further and argued that the bottom line available: when it comes to policy is the lack of coordination and collaboration both within and between governments, I thought the establishment of the sanitation site models within communities will promote the improvements of the NGOs and the public. It was widely agreed in the existing latrines and the construction of new ones, and will workshop that policies should be holistic and provide inform and demonstrate the technology to the ‘public’. for inter-ministerial and trans-boundary mechanisms (Official of WASAC in workshop) that address WaSH as a sector, as a determinant of However, as the participants in the workshop recog- health, a catalyst for economic growth and as nised, a more comprehensive framework considers a prerequisite for safe health care delivery. capacity development on three levels: developing Furthermore, the workshop participants provided a supportive enabling environment consistent with examples of how national forums or platforms can achieving WaSH goals; building the capacity of insti- contribute to strengthening accountability and trans- tutions to ensure that systems and procedures are in parency. Participants recommended that WaSH for- place, and building the skills and capabilities of ums at central and local levels should be set up to employees to improve their job performance. make needs known to the Government and other INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF URBAN SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT 273 providers of WaSH services. Similarly, the active parti- . . .It is difficult to plan and make decisions about where investments in WaSH should go due to the lack of reliable cipation and involvement of all stakeholders – from and accessible information. (Official of Boundless the grassroots up to the higher levels – in improving Consultancy Group in workshop). WaSH is vital (Abbott et al. 2015). This quote is important because data relating to WaSH services in Rwanda remain an issue. Recently, the Prioritisation Management Information System (MIS) was initiated PEA is, among other things, aware of how political by MININFRA as a monitoring and evaluation tool ideology may influence public policy and policy prio- towards improving performance in WaSH. The WaSH rities. One key aspect raised in the workshop is the MIS is web-based software that supports manage- extent to which WaSH services are prioritised as an ment of WaSH data from all districts including data important ‘political’ issue. According to a majority of collection, entry, validation, analysis structuring, sto- participants in the workshop, WaSH services do not rage and summary display through dashboards seem to figure prominently in political discourses (MININFRA 2019), but it is not yet fully effective and although the president is a strong advocate of operational. The lack of data makes investment allo- WaSH. The speeches of government officials have cations difficult and coordination of activities focused on education, health, infrastructure, energy complicated. development and land, rather than the provision of Furthermore, as noted by the participants, there is safe drinking water and sanitation. This does not no clear evidence that evaluations of the various pol- mean, necessarily, that water and sanitation are not icy documents and implementation plans that have important issues for ordinary Rwandans. been developed over the years took place and Although participants in the workshop agreed that whether new plans or policies are based on the les- water and sanitation were low priorities for sons learnt towards effective provision of WaSH ser- Government, sanitation and hygiene were also said vices. Reasons for failures to achieve the set targets to be a low priority compared to water. One partici- are also not holistically documented to inform deci- pant noted that water supply gets the lion’s share of sion-making. resources; sanitation is under-resourced and its administration divided between several ministries Decentralisation each claiming to have specific components relating The workshop participants mentioned that given the to it (Table 5).Some participants noted that politicians PEA context, certain political constraints and incen- need to be informed and held accountable for the tives limit the nature and scope of fiscal, administra- challenges in WaSH. Where political will is weak or tive and political decentralisation in the sector. absent, strategic advocacy efforts are necessary to Potential entry points, as raised by the participants, ensure that the issue of sanitation and hygiene is include the following: placed high on the political agenda. Mitigating the potential risks of decentralisation by According to some participants in the workshop, ensuring real powers and real resources are handed this can be done by (i) raising the profile of sanitation over to local administrations (mainly districts). The and hygiene issues by showing how they link to SDG 6 Vice-Mayor in charge of economic development is targets; (ii) creating pressure groups at national and responsible for water supply while the Vice-Mayor in local levels; (iii) involving the media in bringing the charge of social affairs is responsible for ensuring that issue to the attention of the public; (iv) holding the problems, priorities and needs of the people are national and local forums and learning sessions for taken into account in service delivery. So far, the two developing advocacy/lobbying skills. mayors work in silos with limited integration and to be more effective the two vice-mayors (economic Limited reliable evidence data to inform development and social affairs) at district level need decision-making to work together to ensure seamless integration and There was an agreement among workshop partici- implementation. pants that reliable evidence, data or analysis to inform Addressing the issues of two vice-mayors working decision-making is limited making it difficult to track in silos is important because decentralisation pro- progress. One participant noted: cesses are embedded in the broader political context 274 A. TSINDA ET AL. of Rwanda. Multi-stakeholder dialogues may be useful Districts have not gained the powers and resources to review the bottlenecks in decentralising WaSH ser- required to carry out their mandate. Fiscal decentrali- vices as pointed out by the participants in the work- sation would be one way of enabling local govern- shops. Clarity on complementary roles between ments to increase the resources available to them stakeholders and the resource requirements for each through taxes and tariffs for providing public services could also be assessed in the proposed dialogues. (Arends 2017; Köppl; Turyna et al. 2016; Vybíhal 2018). These opportunities may include new sources of local Sustainability and mitigation risks tax revenue, improving the collection of existing taxes The problem of the sustainability of water and sanita- and user fees or reducing the costs of service delivery tion services is still a critical PEA issue. The majority of and so creating surpluses. participants in the workshop noted that the issue of Measures are also needed to increase the pressures sustainability includes the inadequacy of financial rev- and incentives on local government for accountability enues to cover the full operation and maintenance to citizens and users. This will only be possible if there and capital investment costs of infrastructure. At local is a dialogue and agreement between leaders and levels, these are operation and minor maintenance citizens through the existing frameworks (village expenditure, capital maintenance expenditure, and council, cell council, community health workers, the costs of ongoing support to service providers. etc.). It is widely accepted by scholars that decentrali- However, a minority of participants observed that sation was a key driver for the implementation of the the issue of sustainability and financing of water sup- Community-Based Environmental Health Promotion ply and sanitation services should be analysed within Programme (CBEHPP) (Nkurunziza, UM, and Dlamini their wider political contexts, with particular attention 2013; Tsinda 2011; Ntakirutimana and Rubuga 2017). being paid to understanding the role of external orga- CBEHPP has been instrumental in changing hygiene nisations such as NGOs in influencing institutional behaviour, reaching all communities and empowering change. For rural water services to be sustainable, them to identify their personal and domestic hygiene the participants suggested that the full costs of pro- and environmental health-related problems (includ- viding the services must be matched to adequate ing access to safe drinking water and improved sani- sources of financing. tation) and solving them. The Government of Rwanda has a decentralisation policy and this has the potential to better serve the Discussion and conclusion interests of ordinary citizens. However, decentralisa- The purpose of this article was to use PEA framework tion has been partial and incomplete with an acute to examine WaSH practices in Rwanda through better shortage of qualified and trained personnel, particu- understanding of the dynamics and power relations larly at lower tiers of government. There are still sig- shaping policy processes and implementation prac- nificant technical capabilities’ gaps everywhere, which tices, identifying the key political issues and processes act as a brake on Rwanda’s economic, social and and entry points for promoting change. political development (Booth et al. 2014). As has It is clear from the above findings that in Rwanda been found in other studies – for example, in there is an acute shortage of qualified and trained work- Burkina Faso, Mali and Mozambique – decentralisa- ers, especially in the lower tiers of government. There is tion can result in reduced service delivery in the also a lack of integration of policies and duplication of absence of increased resources at the local level responsibilities, and limited reliable, accurate and timely (Resnick 2014; Dickovick et al. 2014). WaSH data to inform decision-making and the sustain- While decentralising service delivery can improve it ability of WaSH services. At the sector level, political by making it more responsive to the needs of citizens, blockages and drivers include the fact that WaSH has this has not yet happened in Rwanda. This is partly featured relatively low on the political agenda – com- because of limited engagement of citizens in advo- pared to health and education. There is a lack of prior- cacy combined with a shortage of skilled workers and itisation of the WaSH sector and limited funding. limited funding (GOR 2015). To be effective, real Complex fiscal, administrative and political decen- powers and resources need to devolve to local admin- tralisation processes have taken place, but political istrations and the consequence of not doing so is to reforms have limited effectiveness in practice. limit their ability to operate and their political INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF URBAN SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT 275 legitimacy. However, the effective delivery of services This was evidenced in other countries such as also depends on the coordination of all functions, Malaysia and Indonesia where the centrally controlled with each institution having a clear understanding of but locally undertaken planning model was designed what is to be done, the means to do it, accountability to produce local ownership of sanitation challenges for doing it, and an agreed mechanism to ensure and improvements, through giving special attention effective coordination of necessary activities to city-level planning, strengthening sector strategy (Schrecongost et al. 2020). and institutional arrangements, and advocacy and In Rwanda, many institutions are still involved in awareness-raising at all levels (Ostrom 2011; WaSH issues. Identifying leadership will help to ensure Abeysuriya et al. 2019). that policies are developed and programmes imple- In a PEA context, operational solutions are not mented. As demonstrated in Kenya, in 2010, the always clear-cut, but they need to be more effective, Ministry of Health established an Inter-Agency politically feasible and sustainable in the long term. Coordination Committee (IACC) for Sanitation and However, Rwanda still lacks adequate frameworks for Hygiene bringing together different ministries – financial planning to ensure that all the long-run costs including those for Water Resources, Education, and of rural water services are included. Therefore, the Science and Technology – along with development following are the four suggestions to promote sus- partners. This fostered dialogue and ensured coordi- tainability in water and sanitation: nation between ministries. Effective inter-ministerial and cross-sectoral collaboration, particularly between (1) There must be real demand from users which is MININFRA and MoHand between WASAC and districts evidenced by the consistent use of improved at the local level is required in Rwanda. water and sanitation services and the practice To be more effective, MININFRA, MoH, WASAC and of good hygiene behaviours. districts should consider working with and through (2) There must be a functioning management and ‘parents’ forums’ (Umugoroba w’ababyeyi), community maintenance system comprising tools, supply works (Umuganda), village council commissions, dis- chains, transport, equipment, training and indi- trict council commissions (social, economic, political), viduals/institutions with clear responsibilities. and Community-Based Organisations (CBOs) such as (3) When systems are managed by communities elders, national women council at the village level, or institutions, there must be effective external national youth women council at the village level, support to those community-level structures Community Health Workers (CHWs), associations and institutions. (people with disability, etc.) and cooperatives. The (4) Households and communities are kept dialogue using these forums and groups could help informed of the likely life cycle costs (operation, counteract the risks of politically expedient cost- maintenance and eventual rehabilitation) of cutting bottlenecks. their services, and affordable tariff structures or A further set of possible entry points for driving other arrangements are put in place to generate change as provided by scholars (Cotula 2012; Harris the necessary revenues, in a manner which and Wild 2013; Allouche et al. 2015) include the takes full account of those lacking the ability political commitments, the strength of oversight sys- to pay (for example, the elderly, widowed, dis- tems, coherence (between policies and processes for abled or otherwise disadvantaged). implementation), and capacities for local problem- solving and collective action and identification of the The findings also reveal that WaSH improvement right agents of change. In Rwanda, given the PE needs prioritisation of WaSH services. However, chan- context, the most powerful agent of change is the ging the political agenda is a long and complex process, Government. The Joint Sector Reviews and Technical although some entry points are worth considering. Working Groups at a national level including Ministry First, raising awareness among opinion leaders of Infrastructure (MININFRA), Ministry of Health and in schools on water supply issues through main- (MoH), Water Sanitation Corporation (WASAC) and streaming WaSH issues into school curricula and Ministry of Local Government (MINALOC) and the communication programmes. Awareness-raising Joint Action Development Forum (JADF) at a district and education among opinion leaders such as the level are a good entry point for change. National Women’s Council, the National Youth 276 A. TSINDA ET AL. Council and Community Health Workers would focusses on WASH, climate change, environment, sustainability and urban planning in East Africa. He also served previously as a enable them to raise citizens’ awareness. An evi- Senior Research Fellow at the Institute of Policy Analysis and dence-based dialogue with Government about the Research (IPAR-Rwanda) where he published a number of influ - strengths and weaknesses of water supply, hygiene encing policy briefs on sanitation, urbanization, climate change and sanitation policy and services through existing and environment. forums such as parents’ forums Umugoroba w’aba- Prof. Pamela Abbott a Professor in the School of Education at byeyi), community juries (Inteko z’ abaturage) could the University of Aberdeen and Director of the Centre for Global lead to an improvement in services. Development. Her current research interests are in gender, quality of life, water and sanitation, and social quality, and social, Second, strengthening the capacity of citizens and economic and political transformations. She has carried out opinion leaders to pressure politicians to place water, research in the UK, the European Union, the former Soviet sanitation and hygiene higher up the agenda – com- Union, East Africa and the Middle East and North Africa. munications (during community works or Umuganda) Dr Jonathan Chenoweth is a Senior Lecturer and Director of CES on ‘rights to water and sanitation’ may have the MSc Programmes at the University of Surrey, UK. He researches potential to slowly transform political obligations on on water policy, sanitation and sustainable development in water and sanitation issues. developed and developing regions, including in the UK and These findings have implications for other low- elsewhere in Europe, the Middle East and Africa. income countries where efforts are underway to Dr. Sylvie Mucyo is a Lecturer in Environmental Sciences and improve WaSH services. We hope our findings will Deputy overall coordinator and Student Manager of the UR- Sweden Programme for Research, Higher Education and enable practitioners to develop interventions which Institutional Advancement at the University of Rwanda. are more effective and politically feasible. Notes ORCID 1. Often conducted individually or in a group of two offi - Aime Tsinda http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4208-480X cials working in the same organisation. Pamela Abbott http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5013-343X 2. Umugoroba w’ababyeyi is an initiative that began in 2010 Jonathan Chenoweth http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7579-9951 and involved parents in local community to regularly meet during the evening to discuss challenges in their house- holds and devise solutions. It started as a women’s platform References but given the importance of this forum, it has been decided to make it a parents’ forum for both men and women. Abbott P, Tsinda A, Sapsford R, Rwirahira J. 2015. A critical 3. One of the reasons for the low priority of water and evaluation of Rwanda’s potential to achieve the millennium sanitation is that Rwanda is comparatively good, espe- development goals for clean water and sanitation. Journal of cially on sanitation compared to other low-income and Water, Sanitation and Hygiene for Development. 5 many low-middle-income countries. (1):136–142. doi:10.2166/washdev.2014.188. 4. However, there are some scholars who argue that it is Abeysuriya K, Willetts J, Carrard N, Kome A. 2019. City sanitation difficult for local governments to raise local taxes or planning through a political economy lens. Water alterna- tariffs because their citizens are poor and central govern- tives. 12(3): 907–929. ment often wants to retain fiscal control over both the Allouche J, Middleton C, Gyawali D. 2015. Technical veil, hidden levels set and how they are collected. politics: interrogating the power linkages behind the nexus. 5. Because it depends on citizens’ awareness of and inter- Water Alternatives. 8(1): 610–626. ests in the performance of the sector. Arends H. 2017. More with less? Fiscal decentralisation, public health spending and health sector performance. Swiss Political Science Review. 23(2):144–174. doi:10.1111/ spsr.12242. Disclosure statement Barrington DJ, Sridharan S, Saunders SG, Souter RT, Bartram J, No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors. Shields KF, Meo S, Kearton A, Hughes RK. 2016. Improving community health through marketing exchanges: a participatory action research study on water, sanitation, and hygiene in three Melanesian countries. Soc Sci Med. Notes on contributors 171:84–93. doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2016.11.003. Dr Aime Tsinda is a Senior Lecturer of Environment and Urban Boex J, Malik AA, Brookins D, Edwards B, Zaidi H. 2020. The Planning with the University of Rwanda. His current research political economy of urban governance in asian cities: INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF URBAN SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT 277 delivering water, sanitation and solid waste management Dickovick, Tyler J, Wunsch JS. 2014. Decentralization in Africa: services.In: Dahiya B., Das A. (eds) New Urban Agenda in the paradox of state strength. Boulder, Colorado:Lynne Asia-Pacific. Advances in 21st Century Human Settlements. Rienner Publishers. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13- Duncan A, Williams G. 2012. Making development assistance 6709-0_11 . more effective through using political-economy analysis: Booth D. 2012. Development as a collective action problem: what has been done and what have we learned? Addressing the real challenges of African governance. Development Policy Review. 30(2):133–148. doi:10.1111/ Synthesis report of the Africa Power and Politics j.1467-7679.2012.00568.x. Programme, Overseas Development Institute, London, Fritz V, Kaiser K, Levy B. 2009a. Problem-driven governance and UK. political economy analysis, Washington, DC: World Bank. Booth D, Cooksey B, Golooba-Mutebi F, Kanyinga K. 2014. East Gentry-Shields J, Bartram J. 2014. Human health and the African prospects; An update on the political economy of water environment: using the DPSEEA framework to iden- Kenya, Rwanda, Tanzania and Uganda. Technical Report, tify the driving forces of disease. Science of the Total Overseas Development Institute, London, UK. Environment. 468:306–314. doi:10.1016/j. Booth D, Golooba-Mutebi F. 2012. Developmental patrimonial- scitotenv.2013.08.052. ism? The case of Rwanda. Afr Aff (Lond). 111(444):379–403. Gkiouleka A, Huijts T, Beckfield J, Bambra C. 2018. doi:10.1093/afraf/ads026. Understanding the micro and macro politics of health: Cairncross S, Hunt C, Boisson S, Bostoen K, Curtis V, Fung ICH, inequalities, intersectionality & institutions-A research Schmidt W-P. 2010. Water, sanitation and hygiene for the agenda. Soc Sci Med. 200:92–98. doi:10.1016/j. prevention of diarrhoea. Int J Epidemiol. 39(suppl_1):i193– socscimed.2018.01.025. i205. doi:10.1093/ije/dyq035. GoR. 2016. National sanitation policy. Kigali:Ministry of Chong J, Abeysuriya K, Hidayat L, Sulistio H, Ross K, Willetts J. Infrastructure. 2015. Strengthening governance arrangements for small city GoR. 2017. National strategy for transformation (NST1)-social and town sanitation. Technical Report, Institute for pillar chapter. Kigali:Office of the Prime Minister & Ministry Sustainable Futures, University of Technology Sydney, of Finance and Economic Planning. Kemitraan Partnership for Governance Reform and SNV Harris D, Booth D. 2013. Applied political economy analysis: five Indonesia for the Australian Aid Indonesia Infrastructure practical issues. Overseas Development Institute, London, UK. Initiative. Harris D, Jones L, Kooy M. 2011. Analysing the governance and Chong J, Abeysuriya K, Hidayat L, Sulistio H, Willetts J. 2016. political economy of water and sanitation service delivery. Strengthening local governance arrangements for sanitation: Overseas Development Institute, London, UK. case studies of small cities in Indonesia. Aquatic Procedia. Harris D, Wild L. 2013. Finding solutions: making sense of the 6:64–73. doi:10.1016/j.aqpro.2016.06.008. politics of service delivery. Overseas Development Institute, Collinson S. 2003. Power, livelihoods and conflict: case studies in London, UK. political economy analysis for humanitarian action. James AJ. 2019. Getting the politics right: understanding the Humanitarian Policy Group, Overseas Development political economy of rural and urban WASH in South Asia. Institute, London, UK. Hague: IRC. Copestake J, Williams R. 2014. Political-economy analysis, aid Kelsall T. 2011. Going with the grain in African development? effectiveness and the art of development management. Development Policy Review. 26(6):627–655. doi:10.1111/ Development Policy Review. 32(1):133–153. doi:10.1111/ j.1467-7679.2008.00427.x. dpr.12047. Kindon S, Pain R, Kesby M. 2007. Participatory action Cotula L. 2012. The international political economy of the global research approaches and methods: connecting people, land rush: a critical appraisal of trends, scale, geography and participation and place. London: Routledge Taylor and drivers. J Peasant Stud. 39(3–4):649–680. doi:10.1080/ Francis Group. 03066150.2012.674940. Kitschelt H, Wilkinson SI. 2007. Patrons, clients and policies: pat- Cronk R, Slaymaker T, Bartram J. 2017. Monitoring drinking terns of democratic accountability and political competition. water, sanitation, and hygiene in non-household settings: Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. priorities for policy and practice. Int J Hyg Environ Health. Kooy M, Harris D, Lindsey J. 2012. Political economy analysis for 218(8):694–703. doi:10.1016/j.ijheh.2015.03.003. water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) service delivery. Dangour AD, Watson L, Cumming O, Boisson S, Che Y, London: Overseas Development Institute. Velleman Y, Cavill S, Allen E, Uauy R. 2013. Interventions to Labonté R. 2018. From mid-level policy analysis to macro-level improve water quality and supply, sanitation and hygiene political economy: comment on” developing a framework for practices, and their effects on the nutritional status of a program theory-based approach to evaluating policy pro- children. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews.8.Art. cesses and outcomes: health in all policies in South Australia”. No:CD009382;accessed [2021 January 30]. doi:10.1002/ International Journal of Health Policy and Management. 7 14651858.CD009382.pub2. . (7):656. doi:10.15171/ijhpm.2018.12. DFID. 2009. How to note political economy analysis. A DFID Landell-Mills P, Williams G, Duncan A. 2007. Tackling the political practice paper. Department for International Development, barriers to development: the new political economy perspec- London, UK. tive. Brighton, UK: The Policy Practice. 278 A. TSINDA ET AL. Lee AD, Usman Z. 2018. Taking stock of the political economy of hygiene in low- and middle-income settings: a retrospective power sector reforms in developing countries: a literature analysis of data from 145 countries. Tropical Medicine & review (The World Bank). International Health. 19(8):894–905. doi:10.1111/tmi.12329. Leftwich A. 2007. ‘The political approach to institutional forma- Resnick D. 2014. Urban governance and service delivery in tion, maintenance and change’, IPPG Discussion papers series. African cities: the role of politics and policies. Development Mason N, Ross K, Mitchell C. 2015. A case study analysis of Policy Review. 32(s1):s3–s17. doi:10.1111/dpr.12066. formal and informal institutional arrangements for local Schrecongost A, Pedi D, Rosenboom JW, Shrestha R, Ban R. 2020. scale wastewater services in Indonesia. Sydney: Overseas Citywide Inclusive Sanitation: a public service approach for Development Institute and the Institute for Sustainable reaching the urban sanitation SDGs. Frontiers in Futures. Environmental Science. 8:19. doi:10.3389/fenvs.2020.00019. McGranahan G, Satterthwaite D. 2006. Governance and getting Scott WR. 2014. Institutions and organizations: ideas, interests, the private sector to provide better water and sanitation and identities. California: Sage Publishing. services to the urban poor. International Institute for Spears D, Ghosh A, Cumming O, Chaturvedi V. 2013. Open Environment and Development (IIED), London, UK. defecation and childhood stunting in India: an ecological MININFRA. 2016. National water supply policy. Kigali:Ministry of analysis of new data from 112 districts. PloS One. 8(9): Infrastructure. e73784. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0073784. MININFRA. 2018. Water and sanitation sector strategic plan Spiller PT, Stein EH, Tommasi M, Scartascini C, Alston LJ, (2018-2024). Kigali:Ministry of Infrastructure. Melo MA, Mueller B, Pereira C, Aninat C, Londregan J. 2008. MININFRA. 2019. Concept note for WASH MIS roll out in Rulindo Policymaking in Latin America: how politics shapes policies. and Ruhango district. Kigali:Ministry of Infrastructure. Washington: IDB Publications. NISR. 2016. Integrated household living conditions survey: the- Tsinda A. 2011. Policies, regulations and institutional framework matic report- utilities and amenities. Kigali:Republic of for improved sanitation in Rwanda. Kigali: Institute of Policy Rwanda. Analysis and Research (IPAR-Rwanda). North DC, Wallis JJ, Webb SB, Weingast BR. 2007. Limited access Tsinda A, Chenoweth J, Abbott P. 2020. Strengthening interlinked orders in the developing world: a new approach to the pro- marketing exchange systems to improve water and sanitation in blems of development (The World Bank). informal settlements of Kigali, Rwanda. International Journal of Ntakirutimana T, Rubuga FK. 2017. Assessment of community Urban Sustainable Development.12:3,300–308. doi: 10.1080/ based environmental health promotion program (CBEHPP) 19463138.2020.1727909. achievements and its sustainability in Bugesera district. Turyna K, Monika GK, Balmas A, Waclawska K. 2016. The Rwanda: WaterAid-Rwanda. effects of fiscal decentralisation on the strength of political Ostrom E. 2005. Understanding institutional diversity. Princeton: budget cycles in local expenditure. Local Government Princeton University Press Studies. 42(5):785–820. doi:10.1080/ Ostrom E. 2011. Background on the institutional analysis and 03003930.2016.1181620. development framework. Policy Studies Journal. 39(1):7–27. Vybíhal V. 2018. Fiscal decentralisation and its impact on econ- doi:10.1111/j.1541-0072.2010.00394.x. omy of municipalities in the Slovak republic and Czech Plummer J, Slaymaker T. 2007. Rethinking governance in water republic. Politické Vedy. 21(2):78–100. doi:10.24040/politick- services.Working paper, Overseas Development Institute, evedy.2018.21.2.78-100. London, UK. Williams T. 2016. ‘Oriented towards action: the political GOR. 2015. Imihigo evaluation (2014-2015). Kigali: Office of the economy of primary education in Rwanda’, Effective Prime Minister . States and Inclusive Development (ESID) Working Paper. Prüss-Ustün A, Bartram J, Clasen T, Colford JM, Cumming O, Williams TP. 2017. The political economy of primary educa- Curtis V, Bonjour S, Dangour AD, France JD, Fewtrell L. 2014. tion: lessons from Rwanda. World Dev. 96:550–561. Burden of disease from inadequate water, sanitation and doi:10.1016/j.worlddev.2017.03.037.
http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png
International Journal of Urban Sustainable Development
Taylor & Francis
http://www.deepdyve.com/lp/taylor-francis/understanding-the-political-economy-dynamics-of-the-water-sanitation-ebtdgScreR
