Final report for 2013 Water Integrity Forum at delft, The Netherlands

REPORT | 2013

www.waterintegrityforum.com

“THE FORUM SUCCEEDED IN BRINGING THE PROBLEM OFCORRUPTION OUT OF THE CLOSET INTO THE OPEN AND RAISING THE STAKES TO ADDRESS THIS CHALLENGE.”

2

Water Integrity Forum, 2013

MESSAGE FROM THE CHAIR OF THE FORUM TEUN BASTEMEIJER 3

BACKGROUND 4

HIGHLIGHTS FROM THE OPENING OF THE FORUM 6

SUMMARY OF THE FORUM’S WORK STREAMS 8

SUMMARY OF THE OPEN SPACE SESSIONS 24

HIGHLIGHTS FROM THE CLOSING SESSION 26

CONTINUING THE MOMENTUM 27

DELFT STATEMENT ON WATER INTEGRITY 28

CONTRIBUTORS 30

REPORT | 2013 www.waterintegrityforum.com

CONTENTS

Acknowledgements This report was prepared by Binayak Das, Jaap Evers, Annemiek Jenniskens, Alexandra Malmqvist, EllenPfeiffer and Rozemarijn ter Horst. It was edited by Stephanie Debere and designed by Jens Christiansen and Tania Dunsterfrom onehemisphere. The logo was designed by Rustam Vania. We also would like to extend our gratitude our donors; BMZ,DGIS, SDC, and Sida. Disclaimer Every effort has been made to verify the accuracy of information contained in this report. Allinformation was believed to be correct as of August 2013. Nevertheless, the Water Integrity Network cannot acceptresponsibility for the consequences of its use for other purposes or in other contexts.

images © cover: Hans de Lijser (3), Wim Glas, p 3: Hans de Lijser, p 4: Wim Glas, Hans de Lijser, p 5: Hans de Lijser, p 6: Hans de Lijser, p 7: Hans de Lijser, p 8: onehemisphere, p 9: Kalenderli Erkan, TranThe Vuong/IStock, Sudipto Das, p 10: Shutterstock, p 11: Shutterstock, p 12: Shutterstock, p 13: Shutterstock, p 14: Shutterstock, Michael Buckley/Istock, p 15: antikainen/Istock, Shutterstock, Shutterstockp 16: Kai Wegerich, Leontura/Istock, p 17: Joshua Hodge Photography/Istock, Sen Lin/Istock, Joshua Hodge Photography/Istock, p 18: Wim Glas, p 19: Wim Glas, p 20: Wim Glas, p 21: Wim Glas, p 22: WimGlas, p 23: Wim Glas (3 sml), Hans de Lijser (lrge) p 24: Wim Glas, p 25: Wim Glas, p 26: Hans de Lijser, p 27: Hans de Lijser, p 28: Wim Glas, Hans de Lijser, p 30: Hans de Lijser, p 31: Hans de Lijser.

3

On the second day, there were also ‘open spaces’ – onehour sessions that encouraged further discussion andreflection in a more casual format, to promote interactionbetween participants. Discussions ranged from varioustools to improve the sector and how to increase informationflows, to how to engage diverse stakeholders and how toscale up action. Throughout the forum, during theworkstreams and open spaces, participants recognised theimportance of inviting different people from across and evenbeyond the water sector to create a broad platform forwater integrity. The importance of linking up with the mediaand making information available was also a recurringtheme. As participants observed, ‘information is power’.

The closing session on the third day was another excellentopportunity to scale up commitment. The forum endedwith summaries from the various workstream leaders and ahigh-level panel discussion with Her Excellency, BettyOyella Bigombe, Kitty van der Heijden, Director of theDepartment for Climate, Environment, Energy and Water atthe the Netherlands’ Ministry of Foreign Affairs, AndrásSzöllösi-Nagy, Jack Moss, Senior Advisor at Aquafedand myself. During the closing session, the forumstatement was shared with participants. Creating thestatement was a participatory and inclusive process, whichenabled delegates to share their views and experiences.

Participants expressed appreciation of the forum’s focuson practical tools and action to improve water integrity, andof the many opportunities it offered for valuable discussionand learning experiences. Now that the forum is over, it isthe time to turn our words into action. We encourage youall to endorse and promote the forum statement, to helpdrive wide acceptance of water integrity.

Our sincere thanks to the members of the forum’sorganising committee, the keynote speakers, theprogramme committee and UNESCO-IHE – not only forhelping organise the event, but for hosting it. We alsoextend our appreciation to the WIN team and SteeringCommittee members, and – importantly – the participantswho made the forum such a successful and inspiring event.

In June 2013, the UNESCO Institute for WaterEducation (UNESCO-IHE) hosted the first everWater Integrity Forum, in Delft, the Netherlands.This event was organised by the Water IntegrityNetwork (WIN), UNESCO-IHE and the WaterGovernance Centre. For WIN and our two partners,as well as the many contributors to the forum, itwas a great opportunity to bring together a groupof key actors in the water sector who have taken aninterest in water integrity, and to take stock ofparticipants’ varied experiences.

The forum’s potential was fulfilled from the start, with anopening session led by our co-organiser András Szöllösi-Nagy, Rector of UNESCO-IHE. Full of enthusiasm, this setthe tone for the forum and gave the audience a taste ofwhat the coming days would bring. It included someexcellent speakers, notably Her Excellency, Betty OyellaBigombe, Minister of State for Water, Uganda, ChristiaanPoortman, Senior Advisor, Transparency International,Aziza Akhmouch, Head of the Water GovernanceProgram for the Organisation of Economic Cooperationand Development (OECD) and Julia Bucknall, Manager ofthe World Bank Central Water Unit (Water Anchor).

Participation being a key pillar of integrity, the audience wasgiven the opportunity to comment during the openingsession. We were very pleased by the high number ofparticipants who joined the forum and were enthusiasticenough to share their perspectives and experiences. Theforum was designed in such a way that participants wouldhave real opportunity to contribute. We divided theprogramme into seven workstreams that tackled differentsub-topics and areas linked to the water sector:

° river basins, ° hydropower, ° water and food, ° the media and water integrity, ° rural water supply° urban water supply° sanitation and hygiene.

FROM THE WATER INTEGRITY FORUM CHAIR – TEUN BASTEMEIJER


MESSAGE

4


Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). Population increase,globalisation, urbanisation, climate change and new insightsinto the long-term consequences of environmental changechallenge traditional approaches to water management andaggravate the impacts of corruption. Improving watergovernance requires improving water integrity, wherespecifically strengthening transparency, accountability andparticipation is crucial. Stakeholders need to come togetherand bring water integrity principles into international waterdiscourses and political and development processes.

OPPORTUNITIES

Over the past two decades, public awareness of the impactsof corruption on water governance has increased. The WaterIntegrity Network (WIN) was formed in 2006 specifically tosupport anti-corruption activities in the water sector worldwide.It works by forging coalitions and partnerships that can takeaction in ways that individuals or single organisations cannot.Since its establishment, there has been major national andinternational recognition of the need to address the corruptionproblem in the water sector. The 2008 Global CorruptionReport on Water by Transparency International was amilestone in building global awareness of how corruption playsout and impacts the development of water resourcesmanagement, water supply, sanitation, water for food, andwater for energy. Concrete solutions and programmes nowexist to promote water integrity, and more and moreorganisations have taken up the cause. There is a wide rangeof capacity-building programmes, tools have been developedand are being used, and strong networks and partnershipsare forming around the topic of water governance and integrity.There is wide agreement that without increased advocacy tostop corruption in the water sector, there will be high costs toeconomic and human development, the destruction of vitalecosystems and the fuelling of social tension. Meeting thechallenges and providing such advocacy requires broadcollaboration. No actor can facilitate change alone.

INCREASING THE PACE

But the current pace of progress is not fast enough tosolve the water crisis. Global water governance has to findanswers to multiple challenges simultaneously, but this isnot happening quickly enough. There are too few

How humanity deals with water will determine theworld of future generations. Water is essential to allfacets of life, but increasing scarcity, conflicts overshared water resources, droughts and major floodsin some of the world’s most densely populatedareas have made access to water more complex inthe last century. There is an ever-increasingdemand for water, while the number and types ofchallenges in its supply are increasing.

RISKS

In many cases, a shortage of access to water is not due toa shortage of water resources, but to failures ingovernance, such as institutional fragmentation, lack ofcoordinated decision-making, corruption, and poortransparency and accountability. The water sector isvulnerable to corruption, in part because of its particulartraits. Public utilities supply water in local or regionalmonopolies that are easily exploited. Water management iscapital-intensive and large infrastructure, irrigation or damprojects are complex, making procurement manipulationlucrative and difficult to detect. Decision-making in thewater sector is dispersed across many political andadministrative jurisdictions, defying legal and institutionalclassification. This allows loopholes to be readily exploited.

Clientelism and kickbacks in contracting are common in allwater sectors around the world. Studies suggest that corruptiondecreases the efficiency of utilities in Africa by more than 60 percent. In one case in Latin America, the cost of a hydropowerproject increased almost fivefold. In developing countries andemerging economies in particular, private water supply is heavilyaffected by rigged metering, illegal wells and connections,‘speed-money’ for services, site selection of wells in favour oflocal elites, and bribery at the irrigation point and for waterreleases. Regulation protecting the environment or vulnerablesocial groups is often barely enforced. At the national level,political and economic elites can capture policy developmentprocesses and infrastructure investment schemes.

Integrity issues can lead to conflicts around water at local,national and international levels, and to competing demandsfrom the water, food and energy sectors. They also form amajor barrier to achieving global targets such as the

BACKGROUND

5


commitments. Substantial efforts and means are neededto meet today’s challenges and the water managementtargets enshrined in the MDGs and beyond. At the sametime, the degradation of valuable bodies of water and theloss of productive aquatic ecosystems continue unabated.Even bigger efforts will be needed to solve the challengesof the future. Improving water integrity will require moreholistic and systemic changes, increased resilience andadaptability of water management systems, and a strongerfocus on preventive measures, as well as on transparency,accountability and participation. It is now critical to promoteevidence-based water integrity measures to showcase thebenefits of promoting greater integrity in the sector.

Increasing the pace of improving water integrity requires notonly specific capacity development, but also streamliningintegrity in governance frameworks and supporting thescale-up of successful programmes – as well as providingthe tools to do so. The 2013 Water Integrity Forum providesstrategic opportunities to make inroads into majordevelopment processes, such as the post-2015 UNdevelopment agenda (Sustainable Development Goals).This emerging framework is expected to guidedevelopment priorities for many years to come.

To extend the base of support for tackling corruption andpromoting integrity through cooperative approaches, and toincrease the pace of action, WIN, UNESCO-IHE and the WaterGovernance Centre came together to organise the first WaterIntegrity Forum. The forum aimed to harness the knowledgeand experience of different water sector stakeholders, soparticipants could take stock, share tools, discover innovativemethods to fight corruption, and build alliances to address theintegrity challenges in the sector now the forum is over.

2013 is the international year of water cooperation.Overcoming the divides between many organisations is ofcrucial importance. Expanding the base of support byforming a strong alliance between existing actors is anecessary first step to promoting water integrity. Finding acommon language and developing common understandingis a key concern of the Water Integrity Forum. Thecomplexity of multiple geographical and institutional levelstypical of water sub-sectors makes coalitions essential.

The forum is an important landmark in making the case forwater integrity, clarifying the various roles different stakeholders

can play: who can do what to promote strong governance asa goal in its own right. The water integrity community has toengage with in this debate to be more effective. The forumalso provided an opportunity to take the issue of integritybeyond the water and sanitation sector, into areas such asriver basins, Integrated Water Resources Management, thenexus approach and urban water management, amongothers. Through these wide-ranging discussions, it helpedadvance the water integrity objectives and targets set at theWorld Water Forum (WWF) 2012, and the resulting OECDInitiative on Water Governance. It is a key stepping-stonetowards these objectives ahead of the next WWF in 2015.

“THE GLOBAL WATER CRISIS IS A CRISIS OF GOVERNANCE: MAN-MADE, WITH IGNORANCE, GREED AND CORRUPTION AT ITS CORE” (WANGARI MATHAI, 2008)

WATER INTEGRITY

The core of water integrity lies in the integrity ofpeople and institutions governing water resources. Itrequires decision-making that is fair and inclusive,honest and transparent, accountable and free ofcorruption. The term recalls that managementdecisions have an ethical dimension, and thatleadership needs courage as well as technical skills.

TAP

Transparency refers to citizens’ rights to accessinformation. This makes citizens knowledgeable aboutthe standards to expect from public officials andenables them to protect their rights.

Accountability refers to mechanisms to hold peopleand institutions to account for their actions, makingthem adhere to set rules and standards. An individualin a public function or institution must answer for theiractions. This includes political, administrative andfinancial dimensions.

Participation means that anyone affected by adecision should have the chance of intervening in andinfluencing it. It fosters ownership, as decisions areincreasingly accepted and implemented jointly.

6


water sector. The resulting action plan was approved in2009 and has generated positive results, including a broadacceptance among all stakeholders that corruption ispervasive in Uganda. But the working group also faceschallenges, such as a lack of resources which slowsimplementation of their recommendations. Ms Bigombeconcluded that progress in integrity is best achieved viamulti-stakeholder participation, evidence-based decision-making and sustained political will.

The address was followed by three keynote speakers.Christiaan Poortman, Senior Advisor at TransparencyInternational, described the main trends and findings incorruption and integrity, stressing that monitoring is key inachieving genuine and sustainable results. Everygovernment and government agency needs to provide fulldisclosure for all public sector projects, which requiresstrong commitment from policy makers. Actively outliningthe benefits of improved integrity helps achieve thiscommitment. Civil society organisations need to begranted access to information, supported in their capacityto process it, and able to exercise their right to hold toaccount those responsible.

Aziza Akhmouch, Head of the OECD Water GovernanceProgram, talked about the importance of governance in thewater sector and the need to bring integrity andtransparency to the post-2015 agenda. Integrity is aconcern not only for the water sector, but for society atlarge. It can best be achieved through larger governanceframeworks which cut across all sectors. In both rich anddeveloping countries, trust in governments has become amajor issue, prompting a cry for more transparency andaccountability. Tools are available, but good practices needto be identified and scaled-up for wider impact. The OECDwill emphasise the importance of integrity in watergovernance in upcoming publications.

Julia Bucknall, Manager of the World Bank Central WaterUnit (known as the Water Anchor), presented the Bank’s rolein promoting transparency, access to information andaccountability in the water sector. She focused on how theneed for accountability increases when countries face morecomplex water challenges. As water scarcity grows and

The organisers of the first Water Integrity Forumwere proud that over 120 participants from morethan 60 organisations across the world attendedthe opening session. One of the forum’s main goalswas to set the stage for launching water integrity onthe international agenda for sustainabledevelopment. The forum achieved this by sharingand improving common knowledge on corruptionand integrity issues in the water sector. Itsorganisers believe that providing an internationalplatform for sharing experiences and knowledge,and building alliances among practitioners andscientists, will be of great benefit for getting waterintegrity issues onto the global agenda.

Opening the forum, András Szöllösi-Nagy, the Rector ofUNESCO-IHE, reminded participants of the ever-increasingdemand for safe water, but that water shortages are notdue to a lack of water resources, but to failures ingovernance. He emphasised that integrity is key to realisingthe MDGs, adding that the Budapest Water Summit inOctober 2013 will give concrete recommendations to theUN General Assembly for the post-2015 SustainableDevelopment Goals. He assured participants that therecommendations from the Water Integrity Forum will feedinto the Budapest summit.

The opening address was delivered by her Excellency,Betty Bigombe, Uganda’s Minister of State for Water andmember of the African Ministers Council of Water. Shestressed that a lack of coordinated decision-making,regulation, transparency, accountability and integrity are thereal reasons behind the water crisis. Giving large-scaleexamples, she called for improvements in procurementprocesses and said when looking for solutions, you needto involve stakeholders from across society. Since 2006Uganda has placed integrity high on the agenda. TheMinistry of Water and Environment established a GoodGovernance Working Group consisting of public andprivate stakeholders, civil society organisations anddevelopment partners. It is tasked with identifying andrecommending measures to promote and monitortransparency, accountability and good governance in the

THE FIRST WATER INTEGRITY FORUM: SETTING THE STAGE

HIGHLIGHTS

7


quality deteriorates, engineering and institutional solutionsalone are not sufficient. The challenge becomes one ofefficiency and accountability. All parties, including users,need the same information and to have an equal voice –there is no integrity where information is secret. Decisionsneed to be clearly explained and implemented accordingly,and people need to be able to hold those responsibleaccountable when their rights to water are violated. Thehigher countries score in accountability, the better theyperform in water management. New technologies can helpto improve accountability, for example through ‘hackathons’,in which talented young software programmers are broughttogether in one room with water professionals to developsoftware applications that can help monitor and meet thechallenges of promoting integrity in the water sector. Theresults show the level of creativity that can be achieved byputting people together who do not normally interact: 75 percent of the applications created during the 2011 waterhackathon are still in use. These new technologies provide alow-cost approach to making information more transparentand accessible to future generations. However, informationalone is not sufficient. Changes in behaviour and action arealso needed, based on the available information.

“WATER IS EMOTIONAL AND POLITICALLY HIGHLY SENSITIVE: IF YOU CUT PEOPLE OFF FROMWATER IT HAS FAR MORE CONSEQUENCES THAN CUTTING PEOPLE OFF FROM ENERGY.”

JULIA BUCKNALL – MANAGER WORLD BANK CENTRAL WATER UNIT (WATER ANCHOR)

The opening session of the first Water Integrity Forumwas broadcasted and can be viewed here:www.waterintegrityforum.com/?page_id=495

SOME TOOLS FOR IMPROVING INTEGRITY:

° Annotated Water Integrity Scan

° Integrity Pact

° ICT tools-FLOW, WMTI, Ugatuzi, AKVO Market Place

° Irrigation and agriculture: MASSCOTTE, AQUASTAT

° Business Principles for Countering Bribery (TI);Integrity Management Toolbox (CEWAS-WIN),Benchmarking WATSAN utilities (World Bank)

° Civil Society Procurement Monitoring (CSPM) Tool,Citizen Report Cards

° Tool Resources-Water Integrity Space(www.waterintegritynetwork.net/integrityspace);Gateway toolbox (http://gateway.transparency.org/)

8


Social accountability was presented as a tool fordemanding integrity. Evidence shared from Ecuador, Peruand Tanzania pointed towards the need for multi-stakeholder platforms which play a crucial role in improvingtransparency and accountability in water governance. Therole of local populations is crucial in holding the authoritiesto account over water. Sometimes they will need todemand accountability which does not emerge from legalregulations. Emphasis was also laid on the performanceand integrity of institutions.

Various presentations identified multiple causes andsupporting factors of unethical practices in the water sector:

° Power and information asymmetry° Complexity of the sector° The multiplicity and lack of coordination of actors involved ° Vulnerable and weak institutions.

Contributors also highlighted the importance of using arigorous analytical framework to identify the right leveragepoints to enhance integrity. In the case of the food-waternexus, it is crucial to consider the social-ecological systemas the unit of analysis, as unethical practices might alsoaffect vital characteristics of the natural resources whichfarmers need to make a living.

Several actions were identified as promising for enhancedintegrity:

° Building alliances by engaging multiple actors throughbottom-up approaches or multi-stakeholder platforms.However, actors need mutual trust in order to engagewith each other.

° Demanding accountability from below through afederation of grassroots organisations. This can bemore effective than top-down legal reforms.

° Defining principles and guidelines, which can supportthe development of a normative framework at the policy level.

° Devolving to regulatory actors both power and capacityto achieve their mission.

Fresh water is a finite resource facing a new set ofchallenges as those competing for it become moreassertive. In a fast-developing and urbanisingworld, also facing the impacts of climate change,the demands for water, food and energy areincreasingly competing. This makes naturalresources scarcer and more valuable. Complexgovernance structures for water, food, energy andclimate all work in their closed shells, in turnincreasing opportunities for corruption.

The first of two sessions under this workstream, Integrityin Water and Food Security, covered a diverse range oftopics, from climate change, water and land grabbing, tosolution-oriented examples focused on socialaccountability. Both climate change measures and theleasing of land and water (by governments and privateowners) are widely discussed activities involving high-valueinvestments, which makes them vulnerable to corruption.There is a lack of strong oversight and legal regulation bothin climate finance and land dealing processes.Approximately US $1 billion per year by 2020 has beencommitted to climate change mitigation and adaptationprogrammes globally, but there remain widespreadchallenges. In Bangladesh, for example, a lack ofcoordination, inadequate disclosure and lack of capacityare hindering transparency and accountability in theimplementation of climate projects. In land leasing,especially in African countries such as Ghana, there ispower asymmetry in the transaction process, with landdemarcation and rights issue not extending to smallfarmers’ customary plots. Land concessions arenegotiated and agreed between private sector actors andgovernment agencies, sometimes without significantinvolvement from direct line agencies or ministries. Thisnarrow contractual agreement leads to poor compensationfor farmers who lose their land. There is a need torecognise the role of communities in these processes,either in participatory decision-making (for climatemeasures) or through legislative reforms (for land leasingprocesses). The need for alternative institutionalarrangements was also highlighted, especially when foodproduction is affected via these interventions.

DAY ONE:

WORKSTREAM 1INTEGRITY IN WATER FOR FOOD AND ENERGY: THE NEED FOR A COORDINATED APPROACH

WATER INTEGRITY THEMES

9


The second session, Water, energy and food: promotingintegrity and sustainability in hydropower andmultipurpose dam projects, focused on the HydropowerSustainability Assessment Protocol (HSAP). It also lookedbroadly at the issue of integrity in the sphere of interactionbetween water and energy. The session discussed HSAPas a framework for assessing the sustainability ofhydropower projects. These assessments can identifygaps and problems, exposing a project’s weak points.Integrity is linked with sustainability in hydropower andmultipurpose dam development, as the nature of thesector is one of high capital flows, the construction sectoris involved, there are biases in project selection and thesector is non-transparent. Suggestions for improvingHSAP included promoting good governance and anti-corruption measures through a multi-stakeholderapproach. HSAP was tested in Zambia and Ghana, butthere are problems in Africa regarding the costs of trainingand assessment, as most African utilities are small-scale.

The session also included a presentation on the Inter-American Development Bank’s efforts to addresscorruption in water infrastructure, and the WWF presentedthe ‘seven sins’ of dam building, with an emphasis onenvironmental and safety aspects when choosing a site.The session concluded with a panel discussion whichacknowledged that the problems of hydro projects areprogrammed as soon as the siting is complete. They occurat the very start of a project, despite efforts to minimiseimpact by choosing the right location. This is why the earlystage assessment is very important and its findings needto be shared. Stakeholder involvement is of high interest tothe regulator. The problem lies in the asymmetry betweenconsumer and promoter, making intermediation necessaryto enable communities to understand the issues at stakeand raise the correct questions. Social acceptance ofprojects is a key concern, and is integral to their success.

A joint panel discussion with participants from bothworkstreams concluded with a central recommendation fora more coordinated institutional response from the water,food and energy sectors, instead of each workingindependently to handle water integrity challenges.

“COMPLEX GOVERNANCE STRUCTURES FOR WATER, FOOD, ENERGY AND CLIMATE ALL WORK IN THEIR CLOSED SHELLS, IN TURN INCREASINGOPPORTUNITIES FOR CORRUPTION.”

PRESENTATIONS

SESSION 1A

Governance and integrity in climate change financemechanisms, Case study from Bangladesh ZakirHossain Khan, Transparency International-Bangladesh

Unethical and inimical practices in large-scaleland acquisitions in West Africa Timothy Williams,International Water Management Institute

Forging accountability and transparency inwater governance: lessons from grass-rootsactions in Ecuador and Peru Jaime Hoogesteger,Wageningen University

Social accountability and citizen agency toimprove sector performance – insights fromWater Witness International Nick Hepworth,Water Witness International

Governance and institution dynamics in water-food-energy Detlef Klein, Deutsche Gesellschaft fürInternationale Zusammenarbeit

SESSION 1B

Introduction to the hydro sustainability assessmentprotocol with a focus on project identification(early stage) and on-going activities in AfricaCameron Ironside, International Hydropower Association

How does the hydro sustainability assessmentprotocol address governance and anticorruptionissues? Donal O’ Leary, Transparency International

The role of the Inter-American DevelopmentBank in identifying and ameliorating corruptionrisks in water infrastructure Maria del RosarioNavia Diaz, Inter-American Development Bank

Seven sins of dam building Angela Klauschen,World Wildlife Fund

Power Sector: Applicability of the HydroSustainability Assessment to Africa Israel Phiri,Independent Consultant

10


Key points from this session included:

° Processes in river basin management or IntegratedWater Resources Management (IWRM) should focus oncreating learning communities. River basin organisationscan support members to develop shared visions andlong-term goals. This might help promote transparency.

° More efforts are required to share data and informationin a standardised, coherent and transparent manner.

° River basin management should carefully analyse thetrade-offs between sectors, and aim at optimal andequitable use of water.

° More focus is needed on raising awareness of waterissues among citizens. This promotes integrity byenabling people to hold the authorities accountable andpromoting political will to support transparency andinformation sharing.

° Participants also addressed the issue of scale whenworking in multi-stakeholder settings. Scale needs to fit the issue addressed. Some issues are local andsome international.

The workstream’s main conclusion on how principles ofwater integrity can contribute to efficient trans-boundaryriver basin management is that water integrity starts withbuilding trust. Without trust there is no informationdisclosure, coordination and shared responsibilities.Building trust is a slow process which needs to beaccompanied with the right mechanisms to supportcollaboration and coordination. These can close the gapbetween citizens, users and stakeholders, allowing foreasier participation.

Decision-making in river basin management isdispersed across many institutions, in differentsectors, at different levels (from international to local).These decisions spill over into many implementationagencies, which sometimes lack capacity to carry outand enforce policies and regulations. Large amountsof public and private money flow into the operationand maintenance of river systems. The complexity ofriver basin governance and management makes itsusceptible to corrupt behaviour. This combines witha lack of transparency and accountability ingovernance and management systems to aggravateunsustainable practices. River basin managementfaces many integrity challenges, includingprocurement and contracting of infrastructure,coordinating cooperation between multiple actorsacross several policy levels, and growing demand forscarce water resources. In the absence of effectivemonitoring and accountability systems, corruptioncontinues to hamper the effectiveness of river basinland and water management.

The need for good governance in trans-boundary rivers wasan important focus of this session. Cross-border governancefaces numerous challenges, exemplified in a presentationfrom the Scheldt Basin countries of France, Belgium and theNetherlands. It is important to understand the differenthistorical, cultural, economic and political contexts of the basincountries. Sometimes, policy and legal protocols benefit theprocess, e.g. the European Water Framework Directive.

Another example of the challenges facing river basingovernance concerned illegal sand mining in Sri Lanka.The practice, both legal and illegal, is on the rise due tobooming urbanisation, but sand mining has numerousnegative environmental impacts. In Sri Lanka, where illegalsand mining was curbed in two river basins, participationand cooperation with multiple stakeholders was animportant factor in success. Local communities, trustedleadership from political authorities and the regulatoryauthority all played important roles.

WORKSTREAM 2

INTEGRITY IN RIVER BASIN MANAGEMENT: BUILDING TRUST AMONG STAKEHOLDERS

11


“IN THE ABSENCE OF EFFECTIVE MONITORING AND ACCOUNTABILITYSYSTEMS, CORRUPTION CONTINUES TO HAMPER EFFECTIVENESS OF RIVERBASIN LAND AND WATER MANAGEMENT.”

PRESENTATIONS

Europe-To get transparency in transboudarygovernance Arnould Lefebure, International Sheldt Commission

Asia-Water integrity in action in Sri Lanka KiranPereira, Independent consultant, Water Integrity Network

12


Through a diverse set of six presentations, this sessionexplored two overarching themes: the human rightsperspective of integrity in rural settings, and the need toempower people.

A human rights approach can contribute to promotingintegrity. Repackaging core water integrity issues in termsof legal rights which are already available can help improveintegrity. Transparency, for example, can be easily relatedto the right to access information. People need to be awareof their legal obligations regarding the human right to water.Both centralised and decentralised managementperspectives were also presented, based on theGuatemalan experience. Both approaches come withrisks, and depend on local dynamics and what works well.Either might reduce opportunities for some types ofcorruption, but increase others, or benefit those whoalready benefit from the system even more. The discussionalso covered gender rights – for example, women beingsexually harassed at water provision sites by guards meantto make sure the water is equitably distributed. Thisproblem is a critical issue of integrity. In Ethiopia, a similarissue involving water meter readers in Addis Ababa wasresolved by hiring only female meter readers.

The need to train local communities to monitor theconstruction, operation and maintenance of water systemswas also emphasised. Many integrity and corruption issuesare covered up as technical failures – for example, illegalwater tapping is disguised as leakage. There is a need tokeep seeking simple techniques that can be managed andoperated by local people, and which are less vulnerable tocorruption. The relation between water providers and waterusers needs to be based on rules, rather than personalconnections. The same applies to hiring personnel at waterutilities. This needs to be based strictly on skills.

Rural areas in developing countries face specificchallenges in achieving water integrity. Illiteracylevels are much higher than in urban areas, andpeople in general have less capacity (e.g. specificknowledge, financial resources) and less access toinformation. Many communities live according totraditional institutions, which are not corrupt perse, but might be in conflict with formal institutions.It is often overlooked that rural communities arenot homogenous entities. There are large varietiesin factors such as wealth, class, gender roles,ethnicity, ability and age. Rural water managementis less formally institutionalised than in urbanareas, therefore there is also less oversight on thestate of the resource. The operation andmaintenance of water and sanitation services oftendepend on voluntary contributions from ordinarypeople. Ownership by rural communities istherefore crucial for the success of whatever waterservice is put in place. Sanitation is a forgottenissue globally, especially in rural areas. Women areaffected more by a lack of safe facilities, as theycan be exposed to dangerous situations whenseeking privacy. There is a range of needs to beaddressed in terms of access to proper sanitationfacilities. A lack of integrity results in a lack ofaccess to safe water and sanitation in rural areas.

WORKSTREAM 3

PROMOTING INTEGRITY IN RURAL WATER, SANITATION AND HYGIENE (WASH): THE RIPPLE EFFECT

13


Positive steps are being taken to strengthen integrity andempower communities. Just as the recruitment of womenmeter readers in Ethiopia presented a solution to sexualharassment, other innovative steps have also helpedimprove water integrity. In Kenya, a Water Dialogue Forumwas created, to allow water users (those with a right towater) and providers (the people who bear a duty) to meet.This has resulted in stronger trust between consumers andproviders, leading to increased revenue collection and ahigher number of connections to the water system.Participants also agreed that rural communities are verycapable of organising procurement and contractingprocesses. Monitoring and evaluation of constructionworks is also best carried out by users themselves.Similarly, projects like Community WASH (COWASH) inEthiopia and initiatives by water sector organisations likethe IRC International Water and Sanitation Centre promoteintegrity in rural settings.

The participants concluded:

° Trust is crucial in the relationship between water users andproviders, and people and the government, in order torealise integrity in water and sanitation systems. However,trust is still violated frequently and in many ways.

° It is possible nowadays to address issues of corruptionand integrity much more openly than previously, butcaution is still required.

° It was recommended that all rural communities joinalliances and empower themselves to increase integrity.They should make use of national holidays or otheropportunities for advocacy to highlight their issues at apolitical level.

“RURAL WATER MANAGEMENT IS LESS FORMALLY INSTITUTIONALISED THANIN URBAN AREAS, THEREFORE THERE IS ALSO LESS OVERSIGHT ON THE STATE OF THE RESOURCES.”

PRESENTATIONS

A human rights based approach totransparency, accountability and participationAline Baillat, WaterLex

Gender and corruption in rural WASH JokeMuylwijk, Gender and Water Alliance

Water integrity issues in rural Mozambique,Guatemala and Nepal Rupa Mukerji, HelvetasSwiss Intercooperation

Community led processes to improvetransparency, accountability and publicparticipation in WASH in India and BangladeshMurali Ramisetty, Fresh Water Action Network forSouth Asia

Fighting corruption or building integrity: reviewand reflection on IRC and partner activities inrural WASH Cor Dietvorst, International Water andSanitation Centre

Community Managed Project (CMP) approach:an opportunity to foster integrity in rural WaSHLinda Annala, Ramboll, COWASH project Ethiopia

14


have to pay such bribes every day – and numbersmultiplied by millions become important given the size ofcities. Water authority employees often extort such fees ontop of the official connection fee, or accept them to falsifymeter readings and grant ‘rights’ to dispose of dangeroussludge without treatment.

The keynote speaker put forward competition as the keyingredient in fighting corruption, as well as customer complaintservices to channel pressure on people accepting bribes. Thejob of fighting corruption needs to be a central role in waterorganisations, supported by legal and accounting expertise.The lack of interaction between water and waste disposalservices in urban settings was also raised, along with thedifficulties of creating schemes that actually pay for theservices needed in densely populated areas.

Awareness-raising campaigns, informing users about theirrights at all levels, and mutual accountability systems aremethods that have been tried in order to involve civilsociety in combating corruption. Examining the role of theprivate sector, French-based utility company SuezEnvironment reported on its efforts to engage withemployees to improve collective and individual integrity. Ata time when the business reported good technical results,it faced strong complaints from outside. It decided to givethe employees facing the criticism the chance to answerstakeholders’ questions directly. This simple actionimproved ethics significantly. Multi-stakeholder processeswere also at the core of the approach taken by the Citiesfor Life Forum, an NGO from 20 cities in Peru. Establishingplatforms representing the domestic sector, business andlocal authorities serves to create shared ownership.

A panel discussion contrasted the views and experiencesof private and public actors at various levels, giving a ‘realitycheck’ to the IUWM framework. Key points emerging fromthe discussion included:

° In many countries, such as Nigeria, basic lawsregulating water management are still missing, creatingunclear responsibilities and ample room for corruption.In such an environment, competition often leads tochaos, not higher integrity.

° The idea of an urban-specific concept for watermanagement is important. In cities, central authorities

By 2025, half the world’s population is expected to livein cities of one million or more, especially in theSouth, raising new integrity issues related to drinkingwater, sanitation services, pollution, over-extractionof surface and ground water, disaster managementand the impacts of climate change. Many big citiesare located on river banks and in coastal zones,where speculative land-grabs and uncontrolled urbansprawl encroach on highly productive ecosystemsand wild buffer zones against natural disasters. Landuse regulations are not easily applicable, often due tothe absence of a coherent land-use plan and urbandevelopment strategies, as well as rapidly expandinginformal settlements resulting from high rates ofrural-urban migration. Technical engineeringsolutions are considered insufficient to fulfil all waterdemands, raising the prospect of distributionconflicts and water inequality. Cities concentratepolitical and economic power and institutions,providing them with great potential either to threatenor promote water integrity.

The fourth workstream introduced the Integrated UrbanWater Management (IUWM) model, with the aim ofanalysing integrity issues specific to the urban water sector.The session highlighted that current models of urban watermanagement have already failed, or are likely to do so,from the perspectives of cost effectiveness, technicalperformance, social equity and environmentalsustainability. The IUWM approach includes consideringthe entire water cycle as one system (the resource),involving all key players (governance) and designingadaptive or decentralised systems (the service).

Corruption in the urban water context was discussed inconnection with procurement and service payments, but itis also present where the poor pay more for a lesserservice, and where regulations protecting resources arecircumvented. For example, the Karachi Water Partnership(an initiative by the Hisaar Foundation in Pakistan, whichseeks solutions relevant for the water-food-livelihoodnexus), found that poor people were paying 12 times morefor drinking water than the affluent. Petty corruptioninvolves only a few dollars per bribe, but millions of people

WORKSTREAM 4

INTEGRATED URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT: INNOVATION IN A RAPIDLY URBANISING WORLD

15


and ministries are often in charge of water, and thepopulation does not feel the ownership and need forinvolvement that communities usually do.

° Local monopolies are a frequent source of corruption,especially if the regulator’s competency and capacitylag too far behind the companies it supervises. Thisalso limits the potential benefit of public-privatepartnerships, and highlights the importance of objectivebenchmarks and performance indicators.

° Dutch water supply company Vitens Evides shared itsexperience from Ghana where, with 3,000 staff and 5million customers, the utility performed badly. Thisraised the question of why customers did not stand upfor a better, more affordable service. Accountabilitymechanisms mean nothing if nobody holds providers toaccount. The company found activation of thecustomer base essential. Improving operations was nota technical issue, but a matter of staff incentives thatgenerate a willingness to change. Transparency provedto be the core tool, especially the creation of ‘responsenumbers’ for customer complaints that were generatedso fast that bad results could not be explained away.

° Business communities do not consider engagement inwater governance a critical issue, even though manyrely on water resources for production. However, theyare slowly waking up to the issues and realising thatcorrupt behaviour is bad for businesses, causingfinancial losses and a poor image. This is bringing agenuine interest in stable institutions.

° Ideas about good governance involve cultural normsthat are not easily imported. One person’s bribe mightbe another person’s tip. Legalising certain paymentpractices can be a solution, but it is crucial tounderstand why and under which circumstancesindividuals accept bribes. Local courts are increasinglyactive in protecting communities, but they are not ableto penalise multinational companies that cause thedegradation of local water systems.

The final discussion showed that a framework forIntegrated Water Management specifically targeting urbanareas will need further clarification. Cities are livingorganisms, and existing administrative and jurisdictional

boundaries often clash with the needs of user groups onthe ground. Spatial information about a city is important, asis awareness of the integrity challenges posed by zoningdecisions and other ‘lines on maps’ that invite corruption inorder to circumvent regulations. Cities suffer from the factthat people feel less responsible for public property inurban environments, so successful models tested insmaller communities will not work, and the chances ofwhistleblowers exposing corruption are much lower. Somesolutions are seen as highly controversial. But thediscussion also highlighted that the topic of corruption inthe water sector has become easier to discuss: just a fewyears ago, organisations with projects and partners in thepublic sector would not have been able to participate insuch an event without political problems.

“CITIES CONCENTRATE POLITICAL AND ECONOMIC POWER ANDINSTITUTIONS, PROVIDING THEM WITH GREAT POTENTIAL EITHER TO THREATEN OR PROMOTE WATER INTEGRITY.”

PRESENTATIONS

The Integrated Urban Water ManagementApproach Francois Brikké, Global Water Partnership

Transparency - a Water Integrity Challenge atall Levels Bernard Collignon, Hydro-Conseil

Lessons learned from the managementcontract Ghana Water Company Cor Livers,Vitens Evides International

Capacity Development for Water Integrity at LocalLevel in Subsaharan Africa Abibou Ciss, InternationalInstitute for Water & Environmental Engineering

eThekwini (Durban): Integrity needs transparencyMichaela Hordijk, University of Amsterdam

How to engage with employees to improvecollective and individual integrity JoannieLeclerc, Suez Environnement

Knowledge building in adaptationmanagement: concertacion processes intransforming Lima water and climate changegovernance Liliana Miranda, Cities for Life Forum

16


decisions, and enforcement mechanisms. A crucial findingwas the identification of elements in need of external oversight.

The role of civil society in assessing water governance wasexplored through an example from Uganda. This alsosuggested that there is need to assess the effectiveness ofthe tools used, which takes time. In Uganda, results areemerging after six years. They suggest that the watersector is affected by governmental reforms such as thecreation of new regions. Opportunities offered by moderninformation and communications technology (ICT) toassess integrity were also presented, such as sharinginformation concerning water online, or informing peoplethrough text messages about events such as the closureof wells. The use of ICT to make government moretransparent is seen as crucial for water integrity, forexample, by putting information about funding flows online.

The second session under this workstream, Assessingintegrity using social accountability approaches, outlinedthe social accountability mechanisms needed to advanceintegrity in water providers. Accountability entails threecomponents: information, justification and enforceability.Accountability mechanisms can be horizontal (political, fiscal,legal), vertical (elections) or diagonal/hybrid. Socialaccountability relies on civic engagement, i.e. ordinarycitizens and/or civil society organisations participatingdirectly or indirectly in exacting accountability from serviceproviders. Such approaches change the incentivessurrounding the local public sector. They seek to increasethe probabilities of being caught in corrupt acts and toempower citizens to reject corruption. They also contributeto the diagnosis of corruption, trigger ‘fire alarm’ mechanismsand reduce an official’s discretion. There are three differentcategories of social accountability mechanisms:

° those that promote transparency (citizens charters, rightto information legislation and asset declarations)

° monitoring and evaluation mechanisms (expendituretracking, report cards (see below), social auditing andcontract monitoring)

° participatory mechanisms (participatory budgeting andplanning, community-led procurement).

Examples were shared from Viet Nam and Nepal on ‘citizenreport card’ approaches, a tool that collects feedback on the

Though it is impossible to quantify corruption, toolshave been developed for the purposes ofassessment, diagnostics, risk mitigation andcapacity development in relation to corruption andintegrity. These tools are designed to assess integrityand corruption in both the private and public sectors.

Several organisations shared their experiences and bestpractices, collected through projects and case studies. Inthe first session, Assessing risks and opportunities, avariety of tools and their usage were explored, with examplesand anecdotes. Tools such as the Annotated Water IntegrityScan (AWIS) were presented, using experience in Kenya asan example. AWIS is essentially a concept for a workshopconducted with the staff and stakeholders of waterorganisations, departments or agencies. It identifies asystem’s strengths and weaknesses, exposing areas mostresilient or vulnerable to corruption. The assessment canserve to start a constructive dialogue about integrity.

An example of a hydropower integrity risk assessment fromIndia highlighted the processes of a benefits-sharingmechanism established by a hydropower company with localcommunities who are affected by the project. Workshopsheld throughout the region of Sikkim revealed many problemscreated by a lack of transparency, accountability andparticipation. Procurement procedures allowed thegovernment to start 28 projects, even though a study onlyrecommended five. Anti-corruption measures existed, butcitizens had no information about these measures, makingmobilisation efforts critical. A key lesson learned was that ananalysis of benefits sharing enabled the project to addressintegrity issues while avoiding a confrontational approach.

The multiple dimensions of accountability in Latin Americawere the focus of a UNDP assessment. While investigatingdemocratic governance for human development, theassessment found inequality and high levels of perceivedcorruption as two major issues, as a rising middle class isdemanding better services. The importance of integrity isbeing recognised through the ratification of international anti-corruption conventions. The assessment tool incorporatedseveral conceptual aspects of integrity, including distinguishingthe need for accountability in both duty bearers andperformance evaluators, the provision of information about

TOOLS AND SCALING UP

DAY TWO:

WORKSTREAM 5TOOLS TO ASSESS INTEGRITY: QUANTIFYING THE IMMEASURABLE

17


quality and adequacy of public services from users, and thechallenges they face. In Viet Nam, which has almost noNGOs (only small local charities), the common perception isthat standing up against corruption will have seriousconsequences for the person doing so. Corruption in waterprovision is therefore addressed only in studies, but notdiscussed. In Nepal, six water supply schemes were chosenfor the report card approach. The study found high levels ofdissatisfaction in all schemes regarding water supply timing,but high satisfaction with the simplicity of paying the tariff.

The social auditing of infrastructure contracts was examinedthrough an example from Rwanda, where the water supplyand sanitation sector faces challenges. A social auditconducted at district level found that procurement staff ingeneral have insufficient knowledge of infrastructure. Thestudy suggested that there is political will to reduce corruptionand promote integrity, but more transparency is needed, viapublic access to relevant information, as well as independentthird-party monitoring and involvement by civil societyorganisations, the government and private companies.

In the water sector in Oaxaca, Mexico, an approach known as‘Action Learning’ has been employed to improve civicengagement in multi-stakeholder coalitions to addresscorruption risks. The approach facilitates the creation of pro-reform coalitions, and is not a fixed methodology, but is flexibleand can be adapted to the needs of the various stakeholders.It has been successfully applied in areas from water toprocurement procedures and even domestic violence, andhas led to the initiation of a capacity-building programme.

Through several case studies, a number of issues were identifiedas key to assessing water integrity successfully. Access toinformation was a critical bottleneck across the case studies, withreporting often ineffective and data kept confidential and notdigitised. The establishment of standards and results frameworkswas also recognised as an important component. Withoutbenchmarks, more data does not automatically securetransparency. Political will is considered essential to improveintegrity, but multi-stakeholder groups and coalitions can mustersubstantial strength and push for reforms much more effectivelythan single actors. Users want to have options available, and theybecome interested in governance when they feel their opinionswill have impact. Participants also emphasised that the impact ofprojects can only be assessed over several years.

“THE [ASSESSMENT] TOOLS ARE DESIGNED TO ASSESS INTEGRITY ANDCORRUPTION IN BOTH THE PRIVATE AND PUBLIC SECTORS.”

PRESENTATIONS

Annotated Water Integrity Scan (AWIS) JanekHermann Friede and Sareen Malik, Water IntegrityNetwork and Transparency International – Kenya

Assessing integrity risks in hydropower- Benefitsharing mechanism in hydropower projects inSikkim, India Neena Rao, CapNet UNDP, SaciWATERs

Assessing the multiple dimensions ofaccountability in Latin America Gerardo Berthin,UNDP Regional Service Centre for Latin America andthe Caribbean

Assessing opportunities; Water integritymapping in Latin America and the SADC regionDamian Indij, WETnet

Assessing governance and Integrity in Uganda’sWater Supply and Sanitation subsectorincluding the role of civil society Gilbert Kimanzi,Ministry of Water Resources Government of Uganda

Using ICT to assess integrity Frodo Oosterveen, AKVO

Social accountability mechanisms to advanceIntegrity in water providers Jose Maria MarinAguirre, Transparency International

Citizen engagement in tackling systemiccorruption in Vietnam’s water sector Per Ljung,East Meets West

Use of citizen’s report card to assessaccountability in Nepal’s water sector BalkrishnaPrasai World Bank /CECI Project/ Jalsrat Vikas Sanstha

Social auditing of infrastructure contractsincluding water sector projects Albert RwegoKataviri, Transparency International-Rwanda

Civic engagement in multistakeholdercoalitions in addressing corruption risks inwater sector, Oaxaca, Mexico Marcelo Buitron,Public Sector & Governance Unit, Poverty Reduction& Economic Management Department Latin America& Caribbean Region, World Bank

18


Participants agreed that most cases of corruption arecomplex, ambiguous and vague. The role of agenciessuch as UNDP and GIZ, as well as other bilateral andinternational organisations, is to facilitate dialogue amongdifferent stakeholders – specifically government, civilsociety and the public at large – and try to bridge differentapproaches to improve service delivery and decreasecorruption risks.

The second parallel session focused on practical lessonsregarding weak points in water systems and how toimprove these in order to improve integrity. Trust againemerged as one of the keys to a functioning society orsystem, as well as knowledge and an institutionalframework. Control and trust need to be carefullybalanced. Moreover, people are not willing to changeunless they experience the benefits of higher integrity andof working together. It therefore takes time to move from avicious circle to a virtuous circle. The characteristics ofhuman nature remained a focus in the session.

Besides corruption, conflicts of interest can also lead to sub-optimal ways of working, or opportunism. A highlytransparent governance model can circumvent this,preventing individuals (driven by need and opportunism)from favouring their own community. The human factor isalways very important when it comes to accepting orresisting bribes. The source of corruption is subjective, i.e.making choices for all based on personal preference.Monopolies in the water sector make it difficult to find anaggregated indicator which measures performance. Thesession also focused on public participation and stakeholderinvolvement, where it is important to bring engineers, socialmobilisers and public officials together. Connecting trainingexperience with project reality is crucial. It was noted thatmany tools exist, but what is often missing in water integrityinitiatives is the monitoring of progress against action plans.

The discussions from the parallel sessions were broughttogether in the plenary session, through presentations anddiscussions about various tools. These included the toolboxon Integrity Management developed by the InternationalCentre for Water Management Services (CEWAS), WIN andGIZ; the code of conduct of consultancy firm RoyalHaskoning DHV; information systems for transparency, andUNDP experiences from regional training programmes.

There are tools to support the public and civilsociety in raising their voices and supportingcitizen action, and tools that help people put inplace risk mitigation measures. Workstreams 5 and6 focused on sharing of a wide array of tools.

The session was divided into three parts, one focusing onthe programmes of large organisations such as the UnitedNations Development Programme (UNDP) and the GermanInternational Cooperation Agency (GIZ), one on practicaltools and the last sharing these diverse experiences duringa plenary session.

The first parallel session looked at institutional interventions,with both UNDP and GIZ explaining their approach to goodgovernance, transparency and corruption, andshowcasing experiences from the field. Key messagesfocused on the link between governance and waterintegrity. Weak governance provides room for corruptpractices, but where governance is good, the delivery ofservices has been seen to improve. However, effectiveintervention mechanisms vary from case to case. It wasalso noted that corruption and governance issues arelooked at as a process rather than as an end inthemselves, for instance by focusing interventions alongthe lines in which government works through sectors. Thedevelopment of programmes to mitigate poor integrity andgovernance remains a challenge, despite adequate riskassessment and the development of various tools.

In order to address this challenge, interventions on integrityand good governance should be introduced not in parallelto existing governmental structures, but so as to beintegrated into those structures. Using the existingstructures is a must, rather than starting new processesand frameworks, and knowing the right entry points is a keyfactor. Institutional commitment is important for scaling upintegrity interventions and working with local partners.When supporting governance interventions with partnerinstitutions, it is important to maintain and build trust byplaying the role of broker between stakeholders.

WORKSTREAM 6

TOOLS TO IMPROVE, BUILD AND MONITOR INTEGRITY: TAKING A HOLISTIC VIEW

19


The plenary discussion presented different interventionsimplemented by organisations that aim to improve waterintegrity. The GIZ toolbox on Integrity Managementunderlined that water sector reform in Kenya was conduciveto promoting improved water governance. A presentationby Royal Haskoning reinforced the idea that the privatesector should first of all look into integrity issues within itscorporations, and then strive for integrity outside. The issueof corporate social responsibility was also raised as aprerequisite for promoting integrity. The Office Internationalde l’Eau (OIEAU) underlined the importance of informationsystems that can promote transparency. Without data, it is

not possible to analyse situations objectively and devisestrategies to promote integrity. The UNDP presentation onthe outcomes of regional training in water integrityunderlined the importance of continued capacity building fordifferent stakeholders involved in water governance.

The plenary concluded that water integrity should be viewedin a holistic way, with the availability of tools and methodologies, capacity-building initiatives, data analysis,and the integrity of governments and the private sector ascritical components for promoting integrity in different contexts.

“THE DEVELOPMENT OF PROGRAMMES TO MITIGATE POOR INTEGRITY ANDGOVERNANCE REMAINS A CHALLENGE, DESPITE ADEQUATE RISKASSESSMENT AND THE DEVELOPMENT OF VARIOUS TOOLS.”

PRESENTATIONS

A rights-based approach to improve waterintegrity; Experiences from The NetherlandsHerman Havekes / Maarten Hofstra, WaterGovernance Centre

Presentation of the Dutch water safetyprogramme - a case study Aline te Linde,Twynstra Gudde Consultants and Managers

Tools for mitigating corruption-billing formats,public posting of water flow & salesinformation, water quality testing, open accesstours of facilities, market tools David Zetland,Wageningen University

Diagnostic tools and methodologies-trainingcurriculum on community engagement for smallscale agricultural water managementFloriane Clement, International Water Management Institute

The application of scorecard as a tool to peer-review and/or monitor progress of action plans– the case of the West Africa experience DanielYawson, International Union for Conservation of Nature

PACDE’s sectorial approach to fightingcorruption in sectors Phil Matsheza, PACDEUnited Nations Development Program

Transparency and accountability of ruraladministrative associations of aqueducts inCosta Rica Rolando Castro, CEDARENA

Building integrity and mitigating corruption inlocal water governance through participatorypublic finance Pamela Grafilo, United NationsDevelopment Programme

Overview of good governance approaches inthe GIZ water portfolio in Sub-Saharan AfricaLotte Feuerstein, Deutsche Gesellschaft fürInternationale Zusammenarbeit

Fostering integrity through regulation DanielNordmann, Competence Centre Water, GIZ

Integrity Management Toolbox for waterservice providers in Kenya Rose Makenzi/Johannes Hee/ Michael Kropac/ Janek HermannFriede, Deutsche Gesellschaft für InternationaleZusammenarbeit/ International Centre for WaterManagement Services/ Water Integrity Network

Code of Conduct on Integrity or CorporateSocial Responsibility Gerrit Jan Schraa, RoyalHaskoning/DHV

Gerrit Jan Schraa, Royal Haskoning/DHV Codeof Conduct on Integrity or Co

Information System for Transparency DanielValensuela, Office International de l’Eau

Outcome and lessons learned on regionaltrainings on water integrity (SADC, WA, EAregions) Rennie Chioreso Munyayi , WaterNet &UNDP Water Governance Facility

20


Four separate coffee-table discussions then explored thequestion: Scaling up integrity: what does it take? Each hada specific focus question:

1. ‘What is needed to reach out to differentsubsectors?’ Salient discussion points included:

° There is agreement on the fact that different solutionsare needed for different subsectors.

° National-level regulators play an important role andshould be included in the discussions moresystematically. Consumer interests should also bebetter represented.

° Bottom-up approaches are good, but they are notrealistic in all countries. In some regions, nothing can beachieved without tackling the issues from the very top.

° The judicial system’s role is important, as it can besubject to pressures from some stakeholders.

° There is a need to reach out to sectors outside thewater sector and to include opinion leaders.

2. ‘What factors need to be considered for scaling upcapacity development?’ Key discussion points included:

° There is a need for flexibility and adaptability. Trainingmaterials should be adapted to meet local needs anddemands. Capacity needs are context-specific – forexample, some languages might not have wordsreferring to certain concepts.

° Not only does capacity have to be built, it also has tobe maintained and transferred. Finding the relevantlocal partners is crucial.

° Capacity building is not only about training. There is aneed to embrace a more comprehensive definition thatincludes building people and institutions.

To scale up integrity, it must be institutionalised atall levels of society (local to international) andacross all water sub-sectors. Curbing corruptionrequires efforts that cannot be undertaken by asingle organisation or group of organisations. Toput a stop to corruption in the water sector, actionmust be scaled up through partnerships, andintegrity anchored in all relevant policies andorganisations with a stake in the sector. Only ifintegrity is considered a core responsibility by theentire sector will stakeholders be able to preventcorruption effectively.

The presentations shared ideas for scaling up integrity.Outside organisations can facilitate improvements inintegrity, but the driving force of the process needs tocome from inside the water sector itself. The possibility oflinking to other thematic areas was also highlighted:opportunities should be explored for promoting bestpractices in river basin management, water security andclimate change programmes. Existing platforms, such asriver basin committees, should be tapped into fordialogues on issues of integrity.

An important presentation highlighted the need to leveragethe post-2015 agenda to promote integrity. Nurturingpolitical will is important, and picking the right path or model is crucial. It is essential to network with thoseinvolved in integrity and transparency issues, and there is aneed to find entry points. These can be globalcommitments and conventions, or people or groups activein their respective sectors who are willing to take theagenda further. Sometimes it is not the anti-corruption card that is best played, but instead themes such as taxevasion or transparency.

WORKSTREAM 7

SCALING UP WATER INTEGRITY: INCREASE THE PACE AND EXTEND THE BASE

21


° There is a gap between the short-term timeframe ofprojects and the long-term scale of capacitydevelopment. It is important to ensure that expectationsare not set and then not met.

° Investing in capacity building for regulators should be a priority.

3. ‘What can you and your organisation do topromote integrity?’ Salient discussion points included:

° There is a need for champions of water integrity whocan influence the system at policy level.

° Evidence-based assessment is needed for effectiveadvocacy.

° Include integrity in water governance mechanisms.

° There is a role for awards and incentives to promoteintegrity and transparency among stakeholders.

° Monitoring and evaluation systems need to beestablished, to measure progress and prove the impactof water integrity.

° People’s right to information must be fulfilled in order foreffective monitoring to take place.

° Performance indicators for companies should be established.

° A code of conduct should be introduced systematicallywithin each organisation.

4. ‘What needs to happen to trigger scaling-up?’Key conclusions included:

° All potential opportunities to increase water integrity inthe coming years should be mapped out.

° The role of regulators is critical. Different types ofincentives should be provided to promote integrity.

° Subsector platforms should be established, to facilitatecollaboration, networking and alliances.

° A real sense of urgency must be introduced into sectormanagement, especially for areas overlooked in the past.

° Working on other related subsectors is important, e.g.land-use planning. There is a clear need to go beyond thewater sector and work as a system with other sectors.

A plenary discussion touched several issues that cutacross all four areas:

° The link between human rights, water and sanitation,and integrity issues is important.

° There is also the need to work more with parliaments.Water and sanitation should be a service to the people,available to everyone for generations, and corruption ispreventing the world from reaching that goal.

° Providing new data and tools can have an impact onthe way governments plan activities.

° Looking for new partners not usually involved can bevery successful.

° Companies need access to water and want to ensurethey have their fair share of the resource. Manycompanies already subscribe to codes of conduct andbasic principles.

° The issue of a fair price for water is not always the right one.

° Political will is one single issue that is cross-cutting.With a lack of political will, it is difficult to build integrity.

° Partnership is crucial and there is a need for platformsthat bring together many stakeholders, each withstrengths and weaknesses, to avoid situations wherestakeholders accuse each other of weak integrity.

° Delays in projects, sometimes for years, are a bigproblem in the procurement chain that includesministries and procurement offices.

“TO PUT A STOP TO CORRUPTION, IT MUST BE SCALED UP THROUGHPARTNERSHIPS, AND INTEGRITY ANCHORED IN ALL RELEVANT POLICIESAND ORGANISATIONS WITH A STAKE IN THE SECTOR.”

22


KEY RECOMMENDATIONS AND OUTCOMES

° There is a need to start with small, local and tangibleaction whenever possible.

° Be positive, and use other words and concepts than‘corruption’. Language matters.

° Embrace a more comprehensive definition of capacitybuilding.

° Find allies everywhere, build entry points and coalitions.

° Map the issues, to assess what needs to be done, where.

° Cross-sectoral cooperation and cross-cuttingdiagnosis are important. Evidence-based assessmentof progress in integrity-building is needed.

° Networking requires platforms bringing together manystakeholders, to avoid situations where they are not partof the process and later on blame each other for poorwater governance.

° Learning about integrity should be fun and not tootechnical.

° Include integrity and governance in multi-stakeholdergatherings. Moral development is as important as networking.

° Shared vision across the sector and in subsectors isalso necessary. Everybody should have fair access towater, at a fair price.

° Stay alert for political opportunities.

° Use existing platforms of dialogue, such as river basinorganisations, to discuss issues of integrity.

° Work more with parliaments, and groups andindividuals who are influential trend-setters.

° Find those individuals willing to take the agenda furtherwithin their own group or sector.

° Take advantage of local, internal driving forces.

° Build many different bridges and play cards other thanthe ‘anti-corruption’ one (e.g. promoting transparency).

WORKSTREAM 7CONTINUED

RISING STAKES

Water-food-energy

° 70 per cent of the world’s fresh water is used forfood and biofuel

° Global food demand is forecast to double in 20 years

Climate change

° US $100 billion will be at stake by 2020, post -Copenhagen Accord 2009

Water & land grabbing

° Between 445 million and 1.7 billion hectares ofland have been identified for agriculturalinvestments (World Bank 2010)

Water Security, conflicts & disasters

° 276 major trans-boundary watersheds cross 145countries (UN Water, 2013)

° 90 per cent of deaths from natural disasters,1990-2000, were water-related (UN Water, 2013)

PRESENTATIONS

Achievements and requirements for capacitydevelopment: Introducing integrity in WaterUtilities in the MENA Region Thomas Petermann,Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit

Linking to thematic areas in the water sectorFrancois Brikké, Global Water Partnership

Linking to the political process Craig Fagan,Transparency International

23


“CURBING CORRUPTION REQUIRES EFFORT THAT CANNOT BE UNDERTAKENBY A SINGLE ORGANISATION OR GROUP OF ORGANISATIONS.”

24


SUMMARY

OF THE OPEN SPACE SESSIONS

° Music as a tool to bring youth and elders intoanti-corruption work, and optimal use of theinternet Ramesh Kumar Sharma, member of the WINInternational Steering Committee

This session showed how music can be usedeffectively by water users themselves to promoteintegrity messages at the community level. It can be arelatively low-cost and accessible tool, but there areconstraints, including the will and ability to use it. Thesession also covered using videos and promoting themonline, via channels such as YouTube, for wideroutreach. These can be efficient tools, but videoproduction can be costly.

° Water contamination in Costa Rica and the stateobligation to protect the human right to water AnnaBuzzoni (WIN), Soledad Castro, Centre for EnvironmentalRights and Natural Resources (CEDARENA)

In 2004 the construction of a pineapple plantation in acommunity in Costa Rica caused water pollution. In2007 the ministry responsible took action by providingdrinking water by truck, but access remains difficult anddelivery is not frequent, meaning that the communitydoes not have proper access to clean drinking water.This is complicated by the fact that there is no regulationon water quality in Costa Rica. The community receivedlegal and advocacy support from CEDARENA.

° How to organise similar events in your homecountry? David Zetland

This session began with a list of countries suggestedby the group, and these countries’ problems withtransparency and corruption, as well as the actionneeded. The group listed Canada, Cote d’Ivoire,Ethiopia, India, Indonesia, Kenya and Nigeria. Thediscussion focused on how to organise small-scaleevents or meetings to address these needs. To getstakeholders together and decision-makers talking,suggestions included making time for the participantsto meet for a few days, including food and drinks for amore informal setting, and ensuring the presence of allstakeholders (or their representatives), to prevent

These one-hour sessions encouraged furtherdiscussion and reflection in a more casual format,to promote interaction between participants.

° How can the media make access to water andsanitation safer? Babalobi Babatope, EdmundSmith-Asante and Alexandra Malmqvist (WIN)

Two journalists presented their experiences and viewson the role of the media in promoting water integrity.Edmund Smith-Asante (Ghana Business News)presented the Ghana WatSan Journalist Network(www.gwjn.org ), launched in 2009, now with 70members. One of its focal points is building capacity.Edmund stressed that it is important that journalistsunderstand the core issues in the water and sanitationsector so they can report on it constructively. BabalobiBabatope (Nigeria WASH Network for Journalists) isChair of the Water and Sanitation Media Network inWest Africa. The network’s goal is to increase qualityand quantity of reporting on water, sanitation andhygiene (WASH). Babalobi presented initiatives thenetwork has set up: monitoring commitments by thegovernment, a radio programme, WASH reporting,water integrity stories, WASH photos and videos, andeWASH. The network also has a blog and hasproduced a media handbook to inform journalists onWASH issues. This includes the main stakeholders, keycontact details and information on WASH topics.

° Improving Transparency and Accountability inthe WASH Sector Peter Matthews, ConstructionSector Transparency Initiative (CoST)

This session provided an opportunity to discuss issuesraised elsewhere in the conference in more depth. Thepanellists addressed a variety of questions, including aclaim that there isn’t much evidence that disclosedinformation is being used, and whether or not efforts topromote water integrity should focus on improvingtransparency and accountability among individuals orinstitutions. Participants highlighted that transparency is ameans to an end, and that while working with institutionscan have a bigger impact, if they fail, the misseddevelopment opportunities are much more significant.

25


° How development organisations can promoteintegrity and avoid being part of the problemAlphons Klomberg, Umutama Consult

This session was an opportunity to discuss andunderstand the problems that NGOs can face when itcomes to corruption. Participants shared uncomfortablesituations that they had experienced or heard about. Arethe means always justified as a way to an end? How farcan one go to get the project done? What are thealternatives to corruption to motivate people? The groupacknowledged that reality is messier than project designallows. Solutions include transparency of information,context-specific procurement processes and morecarefully targeted projects.

° Promoting integrity in urban contexts: the mayoralinitiative Susanne Weber-Mosdorf, Francoise Ndoume(WIN), 2IE, ONEA, the African Development Bank

In the challenging context of rapid urban growth, goodgovernance and improved integrity in the water sectorcan considerably increase sustainability and equity indelivery of water supply and sanitation services. Ascustodians for public goods in their cities, mayors canplay a key role in promoting integrity, so in 2012 WINdeveloped an initiative for mayors. The Mayors’ IntegrityNetwork is intended to be a platform owned by mayorsand facilitated by WIN. The session highlighted theimportance of putting integrity onto mayors’ agendas.They have the power to address the problem of waterintegrity, and so must take up the issue anddemonstrate political will. The network aims to buildmayoral capacities to increase water integrity, and toenable members to share experiences and seek expertstrategic advice. It also provides opportunities toconnect to funders for programme development.

claims of non-representation, as well as improve ideasand solutions. The group also discussed methods offacilitating dialogue, which included defining agendasand/or discussion topics via anonymous polls,maintaining multiple communication channels andincluding local authorities so they support the process.

° Integrity is more than fighting financial corruption:scientific corruption through unverifiableinformation and positions Henk van Schaik

This session focused on the importance of informationin water integrity and its influence on transparency,accountability and participation. It also looked at howWIN can contribute to supporting integrity and buildingstrong networks in the water sector. Perceivedchallenges include the problem of manipulation ofinformation, its reliability, the struggle for some people toaccess it, and uncertainties in forecasting (for example,climate change models). The group also identifiedpositives, including the fact that more information isavailable through open-source platforms and that socialmedia is changing the world of information.

° Tangible tools to promote integrity at the serviceprovider level: The Water Integrity ManagementToolbox Janek Hermann-Friede (WIN), GIZ and theInternational Centre for Water Management Services(CEWAS)

This session examined a tool that helps introduceintegrity into organisations and improve their performance– in particular, water utility organisations. The IntegrityManagement Toolbox for Kenyan Water ServiceProviders is a systematic bottom-up approach to tacklingintegrity issues facing service providers in Kenya. Itfocuses on how their management and boards ofdirectors can benefit from a business point of view, byimplementing integrity management tools systematically.The presenters also explained how participants areselected, how to get the process started and how to winbuy-in from major stakeholders. They emphasised thatalthough specifically developed for Kenya, this toolboxcan be adapted to different contexts.

26


HIGHLIGHTS

The closing session of the first Water IntegrityForum was an opportunity to capitalise on theexperiences and knowledge shared over the pastdays, as well as to create a momentum for scalingup water integrity work. The participants wereinspired and encouraged by the Water IntegrityForum. The forum brought a mix of participants withdiverse backgrounds, including young professions,which the participants perceived as very positive,and gave many opportunities for participants todiscuss integrity with each other. There was a lot ofmotivation from the participants to build alliancesand to work together to scale up the work needed toimprove integrity in the water sector.

During the first part of the closing session, the open spacesand the workstreams were summarised with the help theaudience. The participants explained that both types ofsessions, the many open spaces and seven workstreams,were great opportunities to bring new ideas and to shareexperiences and lessons learned from a variety ofperspectives. Another main highlight for many participantswas the fact that they were presented with so many differenttools and cases that will inspire and help them. Bothassessment tools, to diagnose and understand the problem(an important first step) and tools to improve integrity in thewater sector. Both complement each other. Moreover thesetools need to be part of on-going processes to ensure moresuccess. Many explained that they will bring back theknowledge that they have gained back.

It was acknowledged that the water crisis is worldwide, andthat it is linked to other challenges such as climate changeand food security, which have to be faced by increasingefforts within and beyond the water sector. It was a forumthat focused on practical solutions and cases, which gavea clear overview of tools that can be used. They wereencouraged by the fact that it’s not only WIN tackling theissues of integrity in the water sector, but that all theparticipants were somehow involved in the work to improve

integrity. There is a gradual increase of the involvement oforganisations and actors that are not necessarily experts inwater integrity but that have the experience and motivationto work on improving integrity in the sector. Buildingalliances, connecting, is a key outcome of this conference.

Finally, the first Water Integrity Forum came to a successfuland strong conclusion with the presentation of the WaterIntegrity Statement, which was created in consultation withthe participants of the forum, and with a high-level paneldiscussion with Her Excellency, Betty Oyella Bigombe,Minister of State for Water, Ministry of Water andEnvironment, Uganda, Kitty van der Heijden, Director ofthe Department for Climate, Environment, Energy andWater (DME) at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, TheNetherlands, András Szöllösi-Nagy, Rector of theUNESCO-IHE Institute for Water Education, TeunBastemeijer, Director of the Water Integrity Network, andJack Moss, Senior Advisor at Aquafed. Together theyagreed to continue building momentum at political level forincreased attention to integrity in the water sector. Theywere very encouraged by the motivation and experiencesthat they were able to witness throughout the forum andcommitted to take the lead in putting water integrity in theglobal development agenda. During the closing session,the Forum statement was shared with the participants.Finally, Ravi Narayanan, Chair of WIN’s SteeringCommittee closed the event by saying that the Forumsucceeding in bringing the problem of corruption out of thecloset into the open and raising the stakes to address thischallenge. A lot of progress has been made, but there isstill a lot that needs to be done.

FROM THE CLOSING SESSION

27


“THE FORUM SUCCEEDED IN BRINGING THE PROBLEM OF CORRUPTION OUT OF THE CLOSETINTO THE OPEN AND RAISING THE STAKES TO ADDRESS THIS CHALLENGE.”

The first Water Integrity Forum came to asuccessful conclusion with the Ugandan Ministerof State for Water Resources, Ms Betty Bigombe,announcing that she will jointly take the lead inraising water integrity onto the global developmentagenda. Together with Ms Kitty van der Heijden,Director of the Department for Climate,Environment, Energy and Water and theAmbassador for Sustainable Development at theDutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Ms Bigombe willin particular push forward the issue in ongoingprocesses such as the post-2015 sustainabledevelopment agenda.

The forum succeeded in taking stock of progress made inaddressing integrity challenges, and helped forgecoalitions for expanding the base and increasing the paceof building water integrity. After intense consultation withparticipants, the forum also released a draft statement.One of its key messages called for moves towards auniversal code of conduct for individuals and institutions inthe water sector. The statement also cautioned that thecosts of inaction are too high for stakeholders to remainpassive. The forum and its partners called ongovernments, the UN and other international organisations,the corporate sector and civil society to promote waterintegrity throughout their policies and actions.

CONTINUINGTHEMOMENTUM

THE WATER INTEGRITY STATEMENT

28


STATEMENT

To take action on promoting water integrity, the WaterIntegrity Network (WIN), UNESCO-IHE Institute for WaterEducation and the Water Governance Centre (WGC)joined forces to organise the first International WaterIntegrity Forum in the Netherlands from 5 – 7 June 2013. Itwas attended by more than 100 water and integrity expertsfrom over 75 organizations across the world.

Taking stock of water-related integrity issues, theconference finds that

° Water Integrity includes, but extends beyond, control ofcorruption. It encompasses the integrity of waterresources, as well as the integrity of people andinstitutions. Integrity challenges come in many forms,involving financial transactions, manipulation ofknowledge and information, discrimination in all forms,illegal or irresponsible water abstraction and wastedischarge, as well as biased rules and processes thatfavour power and short-term interests over equity,fairness, societal welfare and long-term sustainability.

° Building integrity and overcoming corruption are globalconcerns. Water management is complex, capital-intense and often involves monopolies, providingsystemic incentives for abuses of power. Decisionmaking is dispersed across policy domains andjurisdictions, allowing rampant exploitation of loopholes.These characteristics create the need to activelypromote integrity on all levels, from local to global, fornational and transboundary water systems. Clear andcomprehensive results frameworks, combined withtransparency, form the basis of accountability andstakeholder participation. Free and easy public accessto relevant, reliable and consistent data andinformation, including legal documents, is recognizedas a key requirement.

Water is a fundamental resource for sustainabledevelopment. It is essential to eradicate poverty, tosecure water, food and energy for a rapidly growingpopulation and to maintain life-sustainingecosystems for future generations. In mostcountries water crises are not due to resourcescarcity but primarily to governance failures.Fragmented institutions obstruct accountability ina sector with high investment and aid flows,making it particularly vulnerable to corruption.Lack of water- related integrity incurs huge cost forsocieties, in lost lives, stalling development,wasted talent and degraded resources.

The importance of water and good governance has beenrecognized in preparations on the SustainableDevelopment Goals (SDGs), as well as in numerousdeclarations and conventions.1 The Report of the High-Level Panel of Eminent Persons on the Post-2015Development Agenda and the 6th World Water Forum bothlinked effective governance to integrity and control ofcorruption. Water Integrity embodies the transformativeshifts identified by the High Level Panel, by incorporating aglobal partnership for the equitable, sustainable, andaccountable management of water resources and theservices these provide to all societies. It is part and parcelof the illustrative goals on Water, Good Governance,Natural Resource Management and Food Security.Eliminating corruption across water-related sectors andbuilding integrity into policies and action plans will beessential to these ambitions.

DELFT STATEMENT ON WATER INTEGRITY

1 Including amongst others the UN Millennium Declaration, the UN Conventions on Rights of the Child (CRC), onElimination of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), as well as the UN Convention against Corruption(UNCAC), the OECD Convention on Combating Bribery in International Business Transactions and severalregional anti-corruption conventions.

29


Working towards water integrity requires concrete actions,including to

° use and expand existing networks and build newalliances between sectors to develop a broadconsensus on water integrity, and use multiplecommunication channels to raise awareness for issuesand available solutions;

° encourage organizations, including our own, toconsider water integrity in the development oforganizational policies, strategies and action plans;

° invest in inclusive multi-stakeholder processes thatfoster collaboration beyond the water sector, engaginguser organisations, investors, planning authorities andcore governance institutions at country level to joinreform agendas;

° incorporate issues of water integrity, including standardsto effectively manage integrity2, into capacitydevelopment, professional training and teaching;

° advocate in international and regional fora, including theBudapest Water Summit 2013 and the 7th World WaterForum, for the incorporation of water integrity into post-2015development goals related to water access, water use,good governance and natural resources management;

° make more data available in the public domain, freelyaccessible and easy to understand so as to promoteinformed engagement in decision-making by citizens;

° move decisively towards a universal code of conductfor individual and institutional behaviour based onethical principles, values and competence.

Delft, July 2013

° Promoting water integrity requires expanding the base,recognizing the fundamental interconnectedness betweenwater, food production and energy supply; between water,sanitation and human health; and between poverty,informal settlements and vulnerability to corruption.Expanding the base also refers to more inclusive watermanagement. Multi- stakeholder approaches are crucial toensuring water integrity. Such approaches have to bringthe debate to weak stakeholders including the poor, to thestrong but often disengaged business community, andinclude the environment and future generations as the‘silent’ stakeholders.

° Promoting water integrity also requires increasing thepace, recognizing that complex new challenges posedby fast population growth, urbanization, rapiddestruction of productive aquatic ecosystems andclimate change all threaten to overwhelm existingstructures. Large-scale funding becoming available topay for climate change adaptation and ecosystemservices creates additional integrity challenges.Increasing the pace includes efforts to scale up systemsto provide data and evidence on water-related integrity,establishing effective regulatory bodies and overcominginstitutional fragmentation. It also requires building trustbetween stakeholders, raising awareness throughcredible information and developing professionalcapacity based on clear codes of conduct.

The costs of inaction are too high to remain passive. TheForum and its partners call on governments, UN andinternational organizations, the corporate sector and civilsociety to promote water integrity. Fighting corruption is anessential first step, but not sufficient. We need to facilitatethe recommended transformational shifts, and startchanging personal and institutional attitudes and behaviour.

2 Building on the established ISO standards 9000 for quality management, 14000 for environmental managementand 21500 for project management

“WATER IS A FUNDAMENTAL RESOURCE FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT.”

30


CONTRIBUTORS

African Development Bank

AKVO Foundation

Cap-Net

Center for Women’s Advocacy Studies

Centre for Environmental Rights and Natural Resources(CEDARENA)

Construction Sector Transparency Initiative (CoST)

Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit(GIZ)

Earth System Governance Project

East Meets West Foundation

Fresh Water Action Network South Asia

Fundación Botín

Gender and Water Alliance (GWA)

Global Water Partnership (GWP)

Helvetas Swiss Intercooperation (HSI)

Hydro-Conseil

Institut International de l’Ingénierie de l’Eau et de l’Environnement (2iE)

Inter-American Development Bank (IDB)

International Centre for Water Management Services(CEWAS)

International Hydropower Association (IHA)

International Sheldt Commission (ISC-CIE)

International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN)

IRC International Water and Sanitation Centre (IRC)

International Water Management Institute (IWMI)

Jalsrot Vikas Sanstha (Nepal Water Partnership)

Karachi Water Partnership

Latin America Water Education and Training Network (LAWETnet)

Ministry of Water and Environment, Republic of Uganda,also representing African Ministers Council on Water(AMCOW)

Office International de l’Eau (OIEAU)

Organisation pour la Mise en Valeur du fleuve Sénégal(OMVS)

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development(OECD)

Office National de l’Eau et de l’Assainissement (ONEA)

Royal Haskoning DHV

South Asia Consortium for Interdisciplinary WaterResources Studies (SaciWaters)

Sri Lanka Water Partnership (SLWP)

Suez Environment

Swiss Water Partnership

TheWaterChannel

Transparency International (TI)

Transparency International Bangladesh (TI-B)

Transparency International Kenya (TI-K)

Twynstra Gudde Consultants and Managers

UNDP Water Governance Facility (WGF) SIWI

UNESCO-International Hydrological Programme(UNESCO-IHP)

UNESCO-IHE Institute for Water Education

United Nations Development Programme (UNDP)

University of Amsterdam

Vitens Evidens International

Wageningen University

TO THE WATER INTEGRITY FORUM

31


WASH Network for Journalists in West Africa (WASH-JN)

Water Governance Centre (WGC)

Water Integrity Network (WIN)

Water Utility Partnership Africa

Water Witness International

WaterLex

WaterNet

World Bank

World Business Council for Sustainable Development(WBCSD)

World Wildlife Fund for Nature (WWF)

WIN

www.waterintegrityforum.com

UNESCO-IHE Westvest 7, 2611 AX Delft, The Netherlandswww.unesco-ihe.org

Water Governance Centre (WGC) Koningskade 40, Postbox 932182509 AE Den Haag, The Netherlandswww.watergovernancecentre.nl

Water Integrity Network (WIN) c/o Transparency InternationalAlt Moabit 96, 10559 Berlin, Germanywww.waterintegritynetwork.net

Economy & Finance

Final report for 2013 Water Integrity Forum at delft, The Netherlands