Next Article in Journal
Applicability of Zeolite from the Daubabinsk and Chankanai Deposits as a Sorbent for Natural Waters
Previous Article in Journal
The Problem of Selenium for Human Health—Removal of Selenium from Water and Wastewater
Previous Article in Special Issue
Ambiguity, Familiarity and Learning Behavior in the Adoption of ICT for Irrigation Management
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Water
Volume 15
Issue 12
10.3390/w15122232
water-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Strategies for Achieving Sustainability of Water Supply Systems in Rural Environments with Community Management in Brazil

by
Anna Virginia Muniz Machado
1,*,
Pedro A. D. Oliveira
2,*,
Patrick G. Matos
3 and
Ana Silvia Pereira Santos
4
1
LabGEA, Departamento de Desenho Técnico, Escola de Engenharia, Universidade Federal Fluminense (UFF), Niterói 24210-240, Brazil
2
Programa de Pós-Graduação em Geociências, Universidade Federal Fluminense (UFF), Niterói 24210-240, Brazil
3
Escola de Engenharia, Universidade Federal Fluminense (UFF), Niterói 24210-240, Brazil
4
Departamento de Engenharia Sanitária e do Meio Ambiente, Universidade Estadual Rio de Janeiro (UERJ), Rio de Janeiro 12516-410, Brazil
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Water 2023, 15(12), 2232; https://doi.org/10.3390/w15122232
Submission received: 18 April 2023 / Revised: 5 June 2023 / Accepted: 12 June 2023 / Published: 14 June 2023
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Sustainable Water and Energy Use)
Browse Figure
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

:
An urban–rural dichotomy currently exists in policy documentation, accessibility to resources, and human rights. In Brazil, there remains a significant deficit in water and sanitation services coverage, particularly in rural areas. To achieve universal access to water, the legal framework addresses the development of decentralization actions and co-participation in management. As a result, a community-managed water supply (CMWS) has emerged as the social tool in which the community effectively participates in decision-making and oversees the operation and maintenance of water systems. The long-term sustainability of these systems is affected by critical factors in implementation, management, and maintenance. However, no strategic plan exists to solve/mitigate the critical factors commonly associated with CMWS. We proposed an action plan with multiscale intersectoral management strategies to guarantee water security for rural populations. The strategies were separated into areas of responsibility discussed in the recent literature and evaluated by experts. The strategies at the national level were related to institutional aspects and policy formulation. At the local level, the strategies were related to supporting CMWS from project implementation to post-construction. Finally, at the community level, the strategies were related to the quality and financial recognition of the services.

1. Introduction

Water insecurity and injustice almost always respond to the weakened power and lack of visibility that the most remote and peripheral communities have [1]. In Brazil, water and sanitation services (WSS) are structured through public policies with a technical–administrative dimension in the decision-making process, and water supply services are operated by private or public entities. Therefore, it is the responsibility of the state to develop and expand access to water supply [2,3]. Consequently, promoting WSS in areas with low population density, low family income, that are far from urban centers, and that are rural communities is often not considered a priority [4,5,6].
The reality of access to water can be underestimated when analyzed nationally without differentiating between rural and urban areas. Although Brazil still needs to meet the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) targets on advancing access to water supply, the rural population still faces a significant deficit in WSS coverage [7]. Consequently, the rural population becomes more vulnerable and needs to develop other water sources, such as manual pumping, rainwater harvesting, or healthy water [8].
According to the World Health Organization (WHO), 86% of the Brazilian population can access safe WSS. However, only 40.5% of the population in rural areas have adequate water supply, 33.5% have access to precarious services, and 26% have no services at all [9]. In the context of accessibility to water and sewerage, 1 billion Brazilians do not have access to sanitary facilities; of these, 90% live in rural areas [10]. The conditions expressed by the data clash with the human rights to access water and basic sanitation recognized by the United Nations (UN) since 2010 [11].
In Brazil, basic sanitation is a right provided for by law. According to Law No. 11.445, the public authorities must seek ways to universalize access to sanitary sewage services, drinking water supply, garbage collection, and proper disposal of these residues and rejects. Therefore, all Brazilians must have access to safe, quality, and regular water supply [12]. However, the challenge of WSS management in rural areas remains due to the inexistence or insufficiency of public policies for rural sanitation, the distance from urban centers, and the financial limitations of communities. Without profitability, these areas are not attractive for large service providers, and universal access to water is far from being achieved [7,13].
In this context, the National Rural Sanitation Program (PNSR) highlights guidelines and strategies for action in rural areas, aiming to achieve equity and sustainability in access to water in regions far from urban centers [14]. To this end, the PNSR points out, as one of its strategies, the involvement of the community management of water supply systems (CMWS) in implementing and managing water supply systems.
The CMWS has occurred as a response to government negligence in providing water service to rural areas [15]. According to the authors, it is an important model to meet the objectives defined by the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)—“Clean Water and Sanitation” and to achieve universal access to water [16,17,18,19]. The structure of the CMWS is based on the responsibility of the population for the operation, management, and water supply of a local association. Water facilities construction and providing technical, institutional, and political assistance are delegated to external agents [20,21]. However, there is no specific framework for its commencement, since its sustainability depends on adapting to local specificities at an economic, social, and political level. The CMWS is indicated for small water supply systems, especially in communities with 40 to 400 households. This is a central element of investment projects in rural WSS and is already implemented in Brazil and other Latin American countries [14,22,23,24,25].
However, when analyzing the CMWS in the rural communities of several countries, some researchers have indicated the critical factors that influence the sustainability of systems managed by the community in the long term. These factors include the lack of technical and financial capacities, effective empowerment of the community, support after the construction, and interaction between institutional levels [26,27,28,29,30]. Nevertheless, there is a gap in the literature concerning integrated and coordinated strategies and actions to solve/mitigate the critical factors commonly associated with CMWS in several countries [27,31,32,33,34].
In this study, we used a combination of methods based on reviews of the existing literature, lessons learned from successful experiences, and the evaluation of specialists to propose multiscale management strategies helpful in evaluating and planning the management of community-managed water supply systems.

Water Supply in Rural Communities in Brazil

In national territories, water supply services are operated by private, public, or mixed capital entities within the urban areas. These entities, in turn, still need to fully meet the demands of the rural regions [35]. The centralized control, the prevalence of poverty, and the ineffective involvement of public and private entities continue to impede water supply in these areas [36]. Consequently, the absence of these services affects 29.9 million people residing in rural communities [37,38]. In these communities, especially with a greater concentration of poverty, only 40% of the population benefits from a high-quality water supply. In addition, some already implemented water-supply systems are considered deficient, inefficient, or improperly used [9,39].
This lack of technical knowledge hinders the creation of strategic programs that guarantee the sustainability of water supply services. Most government policies apply only to urban areas. Rural communities consequently need more appropriate systems for water supply, sanitary sewage, and solid waste collection. In addition, there exists a high dissemination rate of diseases, such as cholera, leptospirosis, and hepatitis A, which promote a low quality of life, health, and wellbeing in the population [40].
Achieving universal access to water in rural communities is challenging due to the heterogeneity of these areas and diffused occupations. It requires interventions that meet each region’s specificities, as conventional technologies in basic sanitation may become unfeasible. Sustainable management models have been implemented to universalize access to water in these regions [41].
The PNSR represents a group of strategies to develop WSS in rural areas [42]. The objectives of PNSR complement the principles of the National Basic Sanitation Plan (PLANSAB) [12,43]. In 2020, Law No. 14.026 was established to rationalize WSS and increase private sector participation, based on its acknowledgment of the following principles: the right to water, achieving universal access, the eradication of extreme poverty, sustainable local development, promotion of population health, and preservation of the environment. Furthermore, this Law encouraged the privatization of the water supply sector. However, privatization may result in a tariff increase and can further impact gender access to water [44,45].
Additionally, PLANSAB considers it essential to develop a conceptual model addressing the relationship of a technological matrix appropriate to the local reality. It should evaluate the social, economic, cultural, institutional, environmental aspects, community participation, educational actions, and model management. Moreover, the accountability and involvement of government agencies, communities, and NGOs are essential in preparing supply system projects [46].
In the state of Ceará, the Integrated Rural Sanitation System (SISAR) has emerged along with the state policy for water supply and sanitary sewage of Ceará (Law No. 162/2016) [47] as an institutional alternative to provide technical, administrative, and social support for the sanitation utilities installed to serve rural communities. The SISAR is present in 1419 communities and benefits 611,252 inhabitants of rural areas (32% of the rural population) [13]. Currently, eight SISARS act in Ceará, operating in sub-regions geographically delimited by the watershed.
The model proposed by the system receives support from the Companhia de Água e Esgoto do Ceará (CAGECE) and is financed by the World Bank, which also provides administrative and technical support to the system’s operations. While community associations assume the management and operation of the system, SISAR provides training and knowledge transfer to the community, equipment maintenance, and water quality control [48].

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Critical Factors

This study brings a methodological outline of the research that discusses the critical factors for achieving sustainability of supply systems in rural communities that had the participation of 88 specialists [17]. Therefore, for this research, eleven specialists with experience in water and sewerage management in rural areas were consulted. This is presented with an order of priority in Table 1.
Once the critical factors were identified, alternative strategies were proposed to implement these criteria. To achieve the sustainability of these supply systems, these proposed strategies had the potential to promote this prioritized list of critical factors. They were based on national and international experiences, with evaluated expert assessments.

2.2. The Strategies Plan

The plan aims to systematize information observed in the literature and successful experiences to suggest specific strategies at the national, local, and community levels to address factors that have been identified as critical to the success of the CMWS in ensuring water security for rural populations.
The local term is regional/sub-regional, with the division considering the states’ geopolitical conditions and the grouping of operational factors by geographic, socioeconomic, cultural, and environmental characteristics. This division favors decision-making and applying strategies more consistent with the reality of the communities in question.
The proposed improvement process is illustrated in Figure 1.
The proposed strategies were based on successful experiences in rural communities in the state of Ceará, which are under the management of SISAR, as examples of achieving sustainability in the administration and management of water supply systems. Such proposals are considered within their scope of competence for implementing action at the national, local, and community levels [6].
There were indications for these strategies to achieve universal access to safe and quality water within the rural communities, primarily those with community-managed and operated water-supply systems. Moreover, the strategies were translated into the Brazilian scenario.
Finally, the proposals were presented to specialists operating in rural water and sanitation areas through face-to-face interviews during the VIII National Seminar and III Latin American Rural Water and Sanitation Meeting, held in May 2016 at Fortaleza-Ceará.

2.3. Assessment by Experts

The interviewees were selected according to their interest in participating in this study. Initially, the validation of the preliminary strategies as a solution to the related problems was considered. The specialist panel, with eleven experts in water and sanitation, demonstrated agreement with the actions with either answer ‘yes’ or ‘no’. Based on the first evaluation’s results, the most accepted strategies were selected and improved.
The professionals interviewed had careers in rural water supply and, therefore, had the expertise to judge such proposals. All respondents had at least ten years of professional experience. Among the professionals, five (45%) had between 10 and 15 years of experience in the WSS, and six (55%) had more than 15 years of experience. The distribution by scope of action was also considered. Of the interviewed, three (27%) work in federal institutions, seven (63%) work at the state level, and one (9%) works in the municipal area. The level of education of the specialists was also considered. one of them being a Ph.D. (9%), four with a Master’s (36%), two with a specialization (35%), and four with completed higher education (18%) The survey also gathered the opinions of specialists from different institutions: three (27%) of the interviewees worked in federal institutions, seven (64%) in state institutions, and one (9%) in all areas of activity. The number of specialists interviewed reflects the established parameters of experience and level of education and the history observed in Brazil.
Evaluating the proposals allowed a better adaptation and development of proposals, priorities, and more effective strategies, considering the critical factors and the system’s sustainability in the long term. Only strategies with agreement above 80% among specialists were considered for this study.

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. Strategies at the National Level

The actions determined at the national level are related to the institutional aspects of formulating policies, strategies, and financing. These strategies aim at the institutionalization, legal instrumentalization, and recognition of community organizations. The experts’ assessments of the proposed strategies are presented in Table 2.
Only the proposals that received a positive opinion were considered effective strategies, excluding, therefore, “Define the composition of a national council that acts on issues related to water for human consumption and rural water and sanitation”.
It is possible to observe that the national level is most likely to assume the responsibilities that promote the institutionalization of this management model, favoring an optimistic scenario for developing rural communities and supporting the responsibilities that must be assumed at the local level. The relevance of this level has been reported in other studies. The national administrative and political systems need to support local water supply management systems as a crucial factor in achieving sustainability [15,25].

3.2. Strategies at the Local Level

At the local level, the actions are related to the direct support for rural communities and the strengthening of legal instruments; therefore, strategies must consider the technical, social, and economic variables involved in the implementation and sustainability of services. The assessment of the strategies at the local level is presented in Table 3.
At the local level, all the proposals received mostly positive opinions; therefore, all the proposals were considered effective.
The technology adoption strategy must be influenced by cultural and socioeconomic conditions, considering the principles of acceptability and financial accessibility. In addition, it must consider the environmental and demographic conditions and recognize the local particularities to guarantee access in an equitable and integrative manner [49].
The proposals established that the local level (regional/sub-regional institutions) assumes responsibility for managing the supply, training, administering, and supporting the establishment of tariffs for the self-sustainability of the system. It is the city hall’s responsibility to provide social assistance to support the implementation of the water supply system project, as well as the work execution team, with community participation. To achieve the sustainability of the system, the operating and maintenance costs of the services must be adequate to the population’s ability to pay, with the consequent establishment of a tariff model.
Based on the experience of living in Ceará, SISAR presented the technical, administrative, and social innovations that propose the division of responsibilities within communities and the training and transfer of knowledge to the community, in addition to the use of appropriate management technologies specific to rural areas [48]. In this model, SISAR operates at the subregional level.
The municipality is responsible for the management and planning stages, which must be based on the Municipal Basic Sanitation Policy and the Municipal Basic Sanitation Plan (PMSB), established by Federal Law No. 11.445/2007 as instruments of implementation/jurisdiction [8].
The proposed strategic plan followed the recent literature [16,18,50]. The municipality or state must acquire responsibilities to reduce the urban–rural dichotomy that appears in policy documents. Therefore, this results in making the governance of the resource more effective, establishing more significant political interventions to guarantee equity in water distribution in the communities and outlining co-financing strategies shared by donors, local governments, and community members [15,18,51,52]. It is also up to the state to ensure the effective right to social participation of all social groups, guaranteeing human rights principles and combating social inequalities [53].
Moreover, it is appropriate for the local level to assume responsibility for system maintenance and operation from the planning phase to the support phase. System planning should consider the capacity of the local water resource, incorporate hydrogeological and socioeconomic variables, and understand the economic value that communities attribute to system operation and maintenance services. In addition, adequate technology transfer must be considered to ensure that communities understand the practical options for operation and maintenance [50,54,55,56]. It is essential that, at this stage, the community has its voice heard, and its needs are prioritized. This approach allows for broader community participation to maintain a sustainable supply [57].
After the implementation of the system, there must be post-construction support in the form of a permanent contact channel with the regional or sub-regional institutions, so that communities can routinely contact them to receive assistance, guaranteeing the operations, governance, and financial management of the systems [58].

3.3. Strategies at the Community Level

At the community level, the actions refer to conditions that can be resolved independently, and that would consider the needs and particularities of each community. The experts’ assessments of the strategies at the community level are shown in Table 4.
According to [59], a community organization composed of residents creates conditions for legitimate community decision-making and meeting local needs. While the community association assumes the management and operation of the system, SISAR supports local management by training the operator, a member of the community, in its activities.
In the system operation stage, techniques and methodologies must be incorporated into the rural environment through adaptation to local characteristics and needs. The technical knowledge acquired by community members in their local management and operational activities can also be considered innovation.
Nonetheless, in the proposal of responsibilities and based on the experiences of SISAR, the communities must establish water regulations and keep the community organization regularized. Additionally, they must develop good practices in water use and comply with and enforce the statute and regulations of the rural community. Community organizations are to be encouraged through associations and committees. These organizational structures favor communication with public managers and organizations responsible for technical and financial support, thus managing a more efficient supply system.
The mobilization of financial resources has also been discussed in the literature. The lack of financial resources for organization and maintenance is one of the many problems affecting the long-term functionality of an asset [60]. The community must understand the value of the service and be committed to the purpose of accessing water. Services are negatively affected when there is a lack of persistence on the part of the community regarding the system. Finally, the lack of financial resources for organization and maintenance affects supply functionality in the long term [17,21,61]. However, establishing tariffs must consider the socioeconomic characteristics of the population [25].
Finally, the service quality must be observed. User dissatisfaction with access to resources negatively influences long-term effectiveness. Therefore, a system for the preventive maintenance of reservoirs and the installation of chlorination systems should be proposed, and it should be aimed at maintaining the quality standards of distributed water to protect the consumer [23,62].
A strategic plan to align the critical factors and improve the sustainability of community services is necessary to maintain the functionality of water supply systems in the long term [31,63]. Integrating different factors in the development of a project is essential. In addition, including implementation and process indicators aids understanding the processes by which water points remain functional over time [64].
Therefore, based on these critical factors, a proposal for strategies and actions is presented (Table 5). This was directed among the governmental spheres, indicating their respective responsibilities to provide rural communities with access to quality water and thus achieve sustainability in the management and operation of supply systems.
The political influence in the proposed areas favors the visibility of local communities, allowing them to escape exclusion or peripheralization by positioning them as central actors in the decision-making process. Adopting this plan is believed to provide better local management, foster the empowerment of the population, and articulate and mobilize the community, which can provide new achievements.

4. Conclusions

Community management in rural areas emerged as a solution to the centralized water domain. However, uncoordinated policies, deficiency of technical assistance, and post-construction support negatively influenced access to safe water and the system’s sustainability. The literature indicates that the lack of sustainability in the rural water supply is related to critical factors involving strategies and actions at different levels. This study proposes a multiscale strategy plan to mitigate the critical factors influencing this management model.
At the community level, the strategies focus on system management, the quality of the service provided to the population, the establishment of tariffs for the service, and strategies that should consider the needs and specificities of each community.
At the local level (regional/sub-regional), actions include direct support to communities and legal instrumentalization for the recognition of supply systems, with strategies that include community participation in all the stages of planning and implementation of the system as well as adapting the project to the needs of each community. Sub-regional institutions support a group of communities. Local-level actions are fundamental to community-level strategies. At the national level, actions are related to institutional aspects. The strategies involve formulating a national plan and strengthening local institutions. The actions at the national level are fundamental for the strategies at the local level to be executed.
Notably, due to its continental area, Brazilian rural communities have specific cultural, social, and environmental characteristics in each region. A detailed approach to actions at the regional and sub-regional levels can be carried out in other studies.
To achieve universal access to safe drinking water, all stakeholders must interact with integrated actions at the national, regional, sub-regional, and community levels and in the planning, financing, design, and operation phases involving post-construction support actions.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, A.V.M.M.; methodology, A.V.M.M.; writing—original draft preparation, A.V.M.M., P.A.D.O., P.G.M. and A.S.P.S.; writing—review and editing, P.A.D.O. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Data Availability Statement

The model form that was used to obtain the data: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1sq0z2W0ypEnekudXRNCqscJuI_2rL4K8/view?usp=sharing.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Cáceres, N.D.; Rodrigues, B.H.M. A gestão comunitária da água: Caminhos para promoção da justiça hídrica e mitigação de conflitos socioambientais. Cad. Leste 2019, 19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Rodrigues, E.A.M.; Coutinho, A.P.; de Souza, J.D.S.; Costa, I.R.d.A.; Neto, S.M.d.S.; Antonino, A.C.D. Rural Sanitation: Scenarios and Public Policies for the Brazilian Semi-Arid Region. Sustainability 2022, 14, 7157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Silveira, A.B.G. Estratégias para a Universalização do Saneamento Rural: Um Estudo Baseado em Experiências Internacionais. Ph.D. Thesis, Fundação Oswaldo Cruz, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 2013. [Google Scholar]
  4. Barde, J.A. What determines access to piped water in rural areas? Evidence from small-scale supply systems in rural Brazil. World Dev. 2017, 95, 88–110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Empinotti, V. Gênero, Recursos Hídricos e Tomada de Decisão: O Papel Das Mulheres Nos Organismos de Bacia Brasileiros. Água e Política: Atores, Instituições e Poder Nos Organismos Colegiados de Bacia Hidrográfica No Brasil; Annablume: São Paulo, Brazil, 2010; pp. 159–189. [Google Scholar]
  6. Machado, A.V.; Oliveira, P.A.; Matos, P.G. Review of Community-Managed Water Supply—Factors Affecting Its Long-Term Sustainability. Water 2022, 14, 2209. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Gontijo, H.M.; Ramos, A.M.; Ângelo, F.A. Saneamento rural: Uma abordagem da comunidade de Amadeu Lacerda, Divinópolis, Minas Gerais. Res. Soc. Dev. 2020, 9, e141932530. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Calzada, J.; Iranzo, S.; Sanz, A. Community-managed water services: The case of Peru. J. Environ. Dev. 2017, 26, 400–428. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Silva, B.B.; Senna, D.A.; Pena, J.L.; Zancul, J.; Magalhães, L.; Santos, L.D.S.; Vilela, Q.; Rezende, S. Programa Nacional de Saneamento Rural PNSR: Processos Participativos. In Série Memórias do Programa Nacional de Saneamento Rural; FUNASA: Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  10. Rosa, A.M.R.; de Miranda Guarda, V.L.; dos Santos Alves, K. Políticas Públicas E Participação Social: A Importância de Políticas Públicas para Às Mulheres No Setor da Água. Rev. Húmus 2019, 9. Available online: https://periodicoseletronicos.ufma.br/index.php/revistahumus/article/view/11782 (accessed on 23 November 2022).
  11. WHO/UNICEF Joint Water Supply, & Sanitation Monitoring Programme. Progress on Sanitation and Drinking Water: 2015 Update and MDG Assessment; World Health Organization: Geneva, Switzerland, 2015. [Google Scholar]
  12. Bolsonaro, J.M.; Mendonça, A.L.D.A.; Guedes, P.; De Freitas, T.G.; Salles, R.D.A.; Marinho, R. Lei n° 14.026, de 15 de Julho de 2020. 2020. Available online: http://dspace.mj.gov.br/handle/1/1069 (accessed on 9 December 2022).
  13. de Macêdo, A.P.; de Araújo, C.P.N.; Soares, J.G. 9561-O Sucesso Do Modelo de Gestão Sisar para Sistemas de Abastecimento de Água Rural No Ceará. Available online: https://tratamentodeagua.com.br/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/9561.pdf (accessed on 23 November 2022).
  14. Rezende, S.; Roland, N.; Heller, L. O Projeto Nacional de Saneamento Rural (1985–1989) no Brasil: Limites e potencialidades 1. Rev. Bras. Estud. Urbanos E Reg. (RBEUR) 2022, 24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Tantoh, H.B.; McKay, T. Assessing community-based water management and governance systems in North-West Cameroon using a cultural theory and systems approach. J. Clean. Prod. 2021, 290, 125804. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Castelli, G.; Oo, W.M.; di Maggio, A.; Fellin, L.; Re, V.; Bresci, E. Participatory analysis of sustainable land and water management practices for integrated rural development in Myanmar. J. Water Sanit. Hyg. Dev. 2021, 11, 26–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Daniel, D.; Prawira, J.; Al Djono, T.P.; Subandriyo, S.; Rezagama, A.; Purwanto, A. A system dynamics model of the community-based rural drinking water supply program (Pamsimas) in Indonesia. Water 2021, 13, 507. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Jimenez-Redal, R.; Arana-Landín, G.; Landeta, B.; Larumbe, J. Willingness to Pay for Improved Operations and Maintenance Services of Gravity-Fed Water Schemes in Idjwi Island (Democratic Republic of the Congo). Water 2021, 13, 1050. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Cunningham, I.; Willetts, J.; Winterford, K.; Foster, T. Participation and power dynamics between international non-governmental organisations and local partners: A rural water case study in Indonesia. Water Altern. 2019, 12, 953–974. [Google Scholar]
  20. Fielmua, N. Myth and reality of community ownership and control of community-managed piped water systems in Ghana. J. Water Sanit. Hyg. Dev. 2020, 10, 841–850. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Dhoba, L. Going to scale with rural water supply: A reflection on experiences from sustaining community managed piped water schemes in rural Zimbabwe. J. Water Sanit. Hyg. Dev. 2020, 10, 527–538. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Acero López, A.E.; Ramirez Cajiao, M.C.; Peralta Mejia, M.; Payán Durán, L.F.; Espinosa Díaz, E.E. Participatory design and technologies for sustainable development: An approach from action research. Syst. Pract. Action Res. 2019, 32, 167–191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Domínguez, I.; Oviedo-Ocaña, E.R.; Hurtado, K.; Barón, A.; Hall, R.P. Assessing sustainability in rural water supply systems in developing countries using a novel tool based on multi-criteria analysis. Sustainability 2019, 11, 5363. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Machado, A.V.; dos Santos, J.A.; Quindeler, N.d.S.; Alves, L.M. Critical factors for the success of rural water supply services in Brazil. Water 2019, 11, 2180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Nelson-Nuñez, J.; Walters, J.P.; Charpentier, D. Exploring the challenges to sustainable rural drinking water services in Chile. Water Policy 2019, 21, 1251–1265. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Hutchings, P. Community Management or Coproduction? The Role of State and Citizens in Rural Water Service Delivery in India. Water Altern. 2018, 11, 357–374. [Google Scholar]
  27. Klug, T.; Cronk, R.; Shields, K.F.; Bartram, J. A categorization of water system breakdowns: Evidence from Liberia, Nigeria, Tanzania, and Uganda. Sci. Total Environ. 2018, 619, 1126–1132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Makaya, E.; Rohse, M.; Day, R.; Vogel, C.; Mehta, L.; McEwen, L.; Rangecroft, S.; Van Loon, A.F. Water governance challenges in rural South Africa: Exploring institutional coordination in drought management. Water Policy 2020, 22, 519–540. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Tantoh, H.B.; Simatele, D.M.; Ebhuoma, E.; Donkor, K.; McKay, T.J. Towards a pro-community-based water resource management system in Northwest Cameroon: Practical evidence and lessons of best practices. GeoJournal 2021, 86, 943–961. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Wardle, C.; Zakiriaeva, N. Sustainability and long-term impact of community-managed water supply in rural Kyrgyzstan, central Asia. Waterlines 2018, 37, 118–131. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Basu, P.; Galiè, A. Nested scales of sustainable livelihoods: Gendered perspectives on small-scale dairy development in Kenya. Sustainability 2021, 13, 9396. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Aleixo, B.; Pena, J.L.; Heller, L.; Rezende, S. Infrastructure is a necessary but insufficient condition to eliminate inequalities in access to water: Research of a rural community intervention in Northeast Brazil. Sci. Total Environ. 2019, 652, 1445–1455. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Whaley, L.; MacAllister, D.J.; Bonsor, H.; Mwathunga, E.; Banda, S.; Katusiime, F.; Tadesse, Y.; Cleaver, F.; MacDonald, A. Evidence, ideology, and the policy of community management in Africa. Environ. Res. Lett. 2019, 14, 085013. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Tantoh, H.B.; Leonard, L.; Simatele, M.D. Strengthening the scaffolds of community flexibility: Policy and institutional response to the rural water supply and sustainability challenge. Afr. Geogr. Rev. 2020, 39, 208–223. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Machado, A.V.M.; Nogueira, M.T.; Alves, L.M.C.; Silveira, N.Q.d.; Silva, J.d.C.D.; Aranha, P.A.d.P.; Gonçalves, R.P.; Siqueira, N.L.S.d. Assessment of community-managed water systems in rural areas of Espírito Santo, Brazil, using the SIASAR tool. Rev. Ambiente Água 2020, 15, 2517. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Tantoh, H.B.; McKay, T.J. Rural self-empowerment: The case of small water supply management in Northwest, Cameroon. GeoJournal 2020, 85, 159–171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Altmann, W. Censo IBGE 2010 e Religião (IBGE 2010 Census and Religion. In HORIZONTE-Revista de Estudos de Teologia e Ciências da Religião; Horizonte: London, UK, 2012; pp. 1122–1129. [Google Scholar]
  38. Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia. Atlas do Censo Demográfico 2010; Chiefly color illustrations, color maps. Ministério do Planejamento, Orçamento e Gestão, Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística: Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 2013; 156p. [Google Scholar]
  39. Costa, M.L.; Gonzalez, A.C.; lima Costa, M.; Zonin, W.J. Qualidade Da Água: Estudo De Caso No Assentamento 10 de Abril, Crato-Ceará E Sistema Integrado de Saneamento Rural/Bsa Water Quality: Case Study in The Settlement 10 of April, Crato-Ceará And Integrated Rural Sanitation System/Bsa. Rev. Gestão Sustentabilidade Ambient. 2021, 10, 317–340. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Machado, A.V.; dos Santos, J.A.; Alves, L.M.; Quindeler, N.d.S. Contributions of organizational levels in community management models of water supply in rural communities: Cases from Brazil and Ecuador. Water 2019, 11, 537. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Santana, V.L. Tecnologias sociais de acesso à água para o meio rural: A contribuição do Programa Cisternas e os desafios para o próximo ciclo. Rev. Políticas Públicas Gestão Gov. 2019, 16, 58–72. [Google Scholar]
  42. Andrade, M.; Guides, R.M.; Santos, L.d.O.L.; Mattos, L. Saneamento Rural No Planejamento Municipal: Lições a Partir Do Programa Nacional de Saneamento Rural (PNSR). Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/336820116_Saneamento_rural_no_planejamento_municipal_licoes_a_partir_do_Programa_Nacional_de_Saneamento_Rural_PNSR (accessed on 23 November 2022).
  43. de Castro Freitas, W.M. O Marco Regulatório Do Saneamento Básico. Encontro Int. Gestão Desenvolv. Inovação (EIGEDIN) 2020, 4, 30. [Google Scholar]
  44. Marson, M.; Maggi, E. Light public-private partnerships in the water supply sector: Malawi and other case studies from sub-Saharan Africa. Dev. Policy Rev. 2018, 36, O302–O320. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Peda, P.; Vinnari, E. The discursive legitimation of profit in public-private service delivery. Crit. Perspect. Account. 2020, 69, 102088. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Avignon, A.D. Desafios para a Expansão Do Acesso ao Esgotamento Sanitário em Áreas Rurais Isoladas: O Uso de Tecnologias Sociais e a Experiência Do Programa Cisternas; Banco Nacional de Desenvolvimento Econômico e Social: Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  47. Ceará. Lei Complementar N.o 162, DE 20.06.16 (D.O. 22.06.16). 2016. Available online: https://www.cidades.ce.gov.br/wp-content/uploads/sites/12/2017/06/LEI_COMPLEMENTAR_162_16.pdf (accessed on 23 November 2022).
  48. Aleixo, B.; Rezende, S.; Pena, J.L.; Zapata, G.; Heller, L. Direito humano em perspectiva: Desigualdades no acesso à água em uma comunidade rural do Nordeste brasileiro. Ambiente Soc. 2016, 19, 63–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Roland, N.; Rezende, S.; Heller, L. Fatores condicionantes da adoção do tipo de prestação de serviços de abastecimento de água e esgotamento sanitário: Um estudo em oito municípios de Minas Gerais. Rev. AIDIS Ing. Cienc. Ambientales. Investig. Desarro. Práctica 2020, 13, 66–83. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Kativhu, T.; Mazvimavi, D.; Tevera, D.; Nhapi, I. Influence of multiple uses of water on the sustainability of communally-managed rural water supply systems in Zimbabwe. J. Water Sanit. Hyg. Dev. 2021, 11, 91–101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Marks, S.J.; Clair-Caliot, G.; Taing, L.; Bamwenda, J.T.; Kanyesigye, C.; Rwendeire, N.E.; Kemerink-Seyoum, J.S.; Kansiime, F.; Batega, D.W.; Ferrero, G. Water supply and sanitation services in small towns in rural-urban transition zones: The case of Bushenyi-Ishaka Municipality, Uganda. NPJ Clean Water 2020, 3, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Silva-Novoa Sanchez, L.M.; Kemerink-Seyoum, J.S.; Waiswa Batega, D.; Paul, R. Caught in the middle? Access to water in the rural to urban transformation of Bushenyi-Ishaka municipality, Uganda. Water Policy 2020, 22, 670–685. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Matos, F.; Carrieri, A. Coorganização. Água Gênero Perspect. Experiências 2022, 2, 586. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Chan, T.; MacDonald, M.; Kearton, A.; Elliott, M.; Shields, K.; Powell, B.; Bartram, J.; Hadwen, W. Climate adaptation for rural water and sanitation systems in the Solomon Islands: A community scale systems model for decision support. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 714, 136681. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Foster, T.; Willetts, J.; Lane, M.; Thomson, P.; Katuva, J.; Hope, R. Risk factors associated with rural water supply failure: A 30-year retrospective study of handpumps on the south coast of Kenya. Sci. Total Environ. 2018, 626, 156–164. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  56. Kativhu, T.; Mazvimavi, D.; Tevera, D.; Nhapi, I. Implementation of Community Based Management (CBM) in Zimbabwe: The dichotomy of theory and practice and its influence on sustainability of rural water supply systems. Phys. Chem. Earth Parts A/B/C 2018, 106, 73–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Senbeta, F.M.; Shu, Y. Project implementation management modalities and their implications on sustainability of water services in rural areas in Ethiopia: Are community-managed projects more effective? Sustainability 2019, 11, 1675. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Kumasi, T.; Agbemor, B.D. Tracking user satisfaction of rural water services in northern Ghana. J. Water Sanit. Hyg. Dev. 2018, 8, 307–318. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Aleixo, B. Avaliação do Sistema Integrado de Saneamento Rural do Ceará (SISAR/CE) a partir da concepção de inovação sociotécnica. In Proceedings of the I Congreso Interamericano de Agua Potable y Saneamiento Rural/Ecuador, Cuenca, Ecuador, 6–9 August 2014. [Google Scholar]
  60. Truslove, J.P.; Coulson, A.B.; Nhlema, M.; Mbalame, E.; Kalin, R.M. Reflecting SDG 6.1 in rural water supply tariffs: Considering ‘affordability’ versus ‘operations and maintenance costs’ in Malawi. Sustainability 2020, 12, 744. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Gurmessa, B.; Mekuriaw, A. What determines the operational sustainability of rural drinking water points in Ethiopia? The case of Woliso woreda. J. Water Sanit. Hyg. Dev. 2019, 9, 743–753. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Gaviria-Montoya, L.; Pino-Gómez, M.; Soto-Córdoba, S.M. Risk associated with the water infrastructure in rural water suppliers in Turrialba Cartago, Costa Rica. Sustain. Water Resour. Manag. 2020, 6, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Valcourt, N.; Walters, J.; Javernick-Will, A.; Linden, K.; Hailegiorgis, B. Understanding rural water services as a complex system: An assessment of key factors as potential leverage points for improved service sustainability. Sustainability 2020, 12, 1243. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Anthonj, C.; Fleming, L.; Cronk, R.; Godfrey, S.; Ambelu, A.; Bevan, J.; Sozzi, E.; Bartram, J. Improving monitoring and water point functionality in rural Ethiopia. Water 2018, 10, 1591. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Water 15 02232 g001
Figure 1. Methodological representation for the formulation of sustainability strategies.
Figure 1. Methodological representation for the formulation of sustainability strategies.
Water 15 02232 g001
Table 1. Priority critical factors for achieving sustainability of supply systems in rural communities.
Table 1. Priority critical factors for achieving sustainability of supply systems in rural communities.
Priority OrderCritical Factors
1°Existence of an enabling environment with national-level policy formulation; legal and institutional frameworks; and macro-level investment planning, learning, and innovation
2°Compliance with the quality standard of water for human consumption in accordance with current legislation
3°Existence at the local (municipal) government level of an institution dedicated to planning, contracting, regulating, and supporting service providers.
4°Tariff establishment according to the payment capacity of all users in the rural community (water as a social good)
5°Existence of a structured system of direct support (post-construction) available to safeguard and support community management entities and other service providers
6°Existence, at the level of installed systems or communities, of service providers responsible for day-to-day operation, administration, and maintenance, which may be community-managed or otherwise
7°State policy and plan for rural water supply: Existence of an enabling environment with state-level policy formulation; legal and institutional frameworks; macro-level investment planning, learning, and innovation.
8°Subsidy: existence of necessary subsidies to cover part of the recovery costs of the total life cycle of the system
9°Adoption of appropriate technology, considering local and cultural characteristics and the ability to pay maintenance and operation costs
10°Formalization of community organizations and their role in water management
Note: Source: [24].
Table 2. Experts’ assessment of strategies at the national level.
Table 2. Experts’ assessment of strategies at the national level.
National Level
StrategiesThe Experts’ Assessment
In FavorAgainst
Formulate a national plan that addresses universal access to safe water and investment planning.110
Strengthen local institutions to provide services and operate community management.110
Recognize community organizations for water management.101
Define the composition of a national council that acts on issues related to water for human consumption and rural water and sanitation.56
Articulate the institutions at the national level.101
Table 3. Experts’ assessment of strategies at the local level.
Table 3. Experts’ assessment of strategies at the local level.
Local Level
StrategiesThe Experts’ Assessment
In FavorAgainst
Establish technical guidelines for conducting works, considering the appropriate technology, local and cultural characteristics, and the cost of operation and maintenance.110
Elaborate the technical engineering projects involving a technical–social diagnosis and definition of the source and physical project.110
Technical monitoring of the execution of the work by performance monitoring and compliance with efficiency standards92
Articulate the legal instrument between the municipality and the community association responsible for the local water supply system.92
Establish instruments for planning, contracting, regulating, and supporting service providers.101
Formulate a municipal plan considering access to water in rural communities, both in the diagnosis and prognosis.110
Social/socio-environmental implementation, execute an association and strengthen community participation, define local water regulations101
Table 4. Experts’ assessment of strategies at the community level.
Table 4. Experts’ assessment of strategies at the community level.
Community Level
StrategiesThe Experts’ Assessment
In FavorAgainst
Perform water quality surveillance by current legislation.101
Establish tariffs so that the population can assume operation and maintenance costs according to the level of service, conforming with the hydrological, environmental, and social characteristics.101
Table 5. Plan of strategies and coordinated actions to achieve sustainability of water supply systems managed by the community.
Table 5. Plan of strategies and coordinated actions to achieve sustainability of water supply systems managed by the community.
LevelCoordinated ActionsStrategies
NationalFormulate national policies, strategies, implementation, and financing.Formulate a national plan that addresses universal access to safe water and investment planning.
Strengthen the local institutionality to provide operating services with community management.
Recognize community organizations for water management.
Articulate the institutions at the national level.
Local
(regional/subregional)		Establish state-level policies and plans for rural water supply with state-level formulation of legal and institutional frameworks.Establish financing mechanisms for the implementation of works.
Establish necessary allowances to cover a part of the total system’s lifecycle recovery costs.
Establish a direct (post-construction) support system to safeguard and support the community management entities and other service providers.Establish technical guidelines for conducting works considering the appropriate technologies, local and cultural characteristics, and system operation and maintenance costs.
Elaborate technical engineering projects involving technical–social diagnosis, definition of the source, and physical project.
Technical monitoring of the execution of the work and monitoring of performance and compliance with standards
Articulate the legal instrument between the municipality and community association responsible for the local supply system.
Establish an instrument for planning, construction, regulation, and support for service providers.
Implement social/socio-environmental actions to construct a community association and define local water regulations and strengthen community participation.
Establish service delivery systems responsible for the day-to-day operation, maintenance, and administration, which may be community-managed or managed in a different way.Manage the water supply system ensuring its operation and maintenance in a self-sustainable way.
Conduct water quality control in accordance with current legislation.
Train technical staff and community operators.
Adopt the use of micrometers.
Collect established fees.
Manage the resources from the tariff.
Support the holding of regular community meetings.
Develop environmental mobilization actions.
Follow up on defaults with cuts.
Calculate the cost of operating and maintaining the water supply system.
Support the establishment of tariffs, based on the sustainability of the systems.
Execute water quality surveillance in accordance with current legislation.Conduct water quality inspection.
Establish municipal policies and plans that address rural water supply.Include diagnoses and goals for serving the population in rural communities within the municipal’s basic sanitation plans.
CommunityEstablish tariffs so that the population can assume the costs of operation and maintenance according to the level of civil attendant and hydrological, environmental, and social characteristics.Establish a tariff to maintain the sustainability of the water supply service.
Establish water regulation and keep the organization regularized.Develop good water use practices.
Maintain the legality of community organizations.
Comply with and enforce the statute of the association and the regulations of the rural community.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Machado, A.V.M.; Oliveira, P.A.D.; Matos, P.G.; Santos, A.S.P. Strategies for Achieving Sustainability of Water Supply Systems in Rural Environments with Community Management in Brazil. Water 2023, 15, 2232. https://doi.org/10.3390/w15122232

AMA Style

Machado AVM, Oliveira PAD, Matos PG, Santos ASP. Strategies for Achieving Sustainability of Water Supply Systems in Rural Environments with Community Management in Brazil. Water. 2023; 15(12):2232. https://doi.org/10.3390/w15122232

Chicago/Turabian Style

Machado, Anna Virginia Muniz, Pedro A. D. Oliveira, Patrick G. Matos, and Ana Silvia Pereira Santos. 2023. "Strategies for Achieving Sustainability of Water Supply Systems in Rural Environments with Community Management in Brazil" Water 15, no. 12: 2232. https://doi.org/10.3390/w15122232

APA Style

Machado, A. V. M., Oliveira, P. A. D., Matos, P. G., & Santos, A. S. P. (2023). Strategies for Achieving Sustainability of Water Supply Systems in Rural Environments with Community Management in Brazil. Water, 15(12), 2232. https://doi.org/10.3390/w15122232

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop