i

INFLUENCE OF COMMUNITY CAPACITY BUILDING ON PERFORM ANCE OF

WATER RESOURCE USERS ASSOCIATIONS IN WATER CATCHMEN T

MANAGEMENT IN THARAKA – NITHI COUNTY

BY

FRANCIS KOOME SIMON

A RESEARCH PROJECT REPORT SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULF ILLMENT OF

THE REQUIREMENT FOR THE AWARD OF THE DEGREE OF MAST ER OF ARTS

IN PROJECT PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT OF THE UNIVERSIT Y OF NAIROBI

2012

ii

DECLARATION

This Research Project report is my original work and has not been presented for a degree in any

other university.

Signature ………………………………………… Date: ………………………………

Francis Koome Simon

This Research Project report has been submitted for examination with our approval as the

university supervisors

Signature …………………………………………. Date ………………………………..

Dr. Jamleck Muturi John

Lecturer, Department of Zoological science

Kenyatta University

Signature ………………………………… Date ………………………………………….

Mr. Chandi John Rugendo

Lecturer, School of Continuing and Distance Education,

Department of Extra Mural Studies,

University of Nairobi.

iii

DEDICATION

This work is dedicated to my wife Jacinta Karimi who made sure that my study is a success

through moral support. Also my humble dedication and appreciations goes to my kids Maureen

and Lewis for their encouragement and support.

iv

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

My acknowledgement goes to my supervisors Dr. Jamleck Muturi John and Mr. Chandi John

Rugendo for their guidance, encouragement, moral support while writing this project and also for

supporting me through my study at the University of Nairobi- Meru Extra Mural Centre.

My appreciation also goes to my lecturers for their support, encouragement and their kindness

through the two years of my studies at the University of Nairobi. Special thanks go to my

classmates for their moral support and encouragement and my family for encouragements and

support. Special thanks also go to all working colleagues for supporting me throughout my study.

Special appreciation goes to my Project Manager for allowing me attend studies to the

inconvenience of my work.

May God, bless them abundantly.

v

TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE

DECLARATION …………………………………………………………………………….ii

DEDICATION .............................................................................................................................. iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ........................................................................................................... iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS ………………………………………………………………………v

LIST OF FIGURES …………………………………………………………………… …… ..v

LIST OF TABLES ...................................................................................................................... xii

ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS ................................................................................. xiiii

ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................................. xv

INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Background of the study ........................................................................................................... 1

1.2 Statement of the problem .......................................................................................................... 3

1.3. Purpose of the study ................................................................................................................. 4

1.4 Objectives of the study.............................................................................................................. 4

1.5 Research questions .................................................................................................................... 5

1.6 Assumptions of the study .......................................................................................................... 5

1.7 Significance of the study ........................................................................................................... 6

1.8 Delimitations of the study ......................................................................................................... 6

1.9 Limitation of the study .............................................................................................................. 7

1.10 Definition of significant terms ................................................................................................ 7

1.11 Organization of the study ……………………………………………………..…………….8

CHAPTER TWO ........................................................................................................................ 10

LITERATURE REVIEW .......................................................................................................... 10

2.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 10

2.1.1 Water resource issues ........................................................................................................... 10

vi

2.2 Water Sector Reforms in Kenya ............................................................................................. 12

2.3 Organization of Water Resources Users Associations ............................................................ 13

2.4 Formation of Water Resource Users Associations (WRUAs) ................................................ 14

2.5 Adequate Funding WRUA’s ................................................................................................... 15

2.6 Management of WRUAs ......................................................................................................... 17

2.7 Relationship with Water Resources Management Authority (WRMA) ................................. 18

2.8 Capacity building issues ......................................................................................................... 19

2.9 Community participation challenges ...................................................................................... 22

2.10 Staff quality and involvement ............................................................................................... 23

2.11 Organization adaptability challenges .................................................................................... 24

2.12 Collaboration challenges ....................................................................................................... 24

2.13 Knowledge management and sharing ................................................................................... 26

2.14 Review of Water Users Associations performance Challenges ............................................ 26

2.15 Summary ............................................................................................................................... 28

2.16 Conceptual framework ........................................................................................................ 29

2.17 Research gaps........................................................................................................................ 31

CHAPTER THREE .................................................................................................................... 32

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY .............................................................................................. 32

3.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 32

3.2 Research Design...................................................................................................................... 32

3.3 Target population .................................................................................................................... 32

3.4 Sampling procedure and sampling size................................................................................... 33

3.4.1 Sampling procedures ............................................................................................................ 33

3.4.2 Sample size .......................................................................................................................... 34

3.5 Instruments and Techniques of Data collection .................................................................... 35

vii

3.5.1 Focused –group interviews. ................................................................................................. 36

3.5.2 Interviews ............................................................................................................................. 36

3.5.3 Questionnaire ....................................................................................................................... 36

3.6 Pre-Testing .............................................................................................................................. 36

3.7 Validity ................................................................................................................................... 36

3.8 Reliability ................................................................................................................................ 37

3.9 Operational definition of variables ......................................................................................... 38

3. 10 Methods of data analysis ...................................................................................................... 43

3.11 Ethical Consideration ............................................................................................................ 43

CHAPTER FOUR ....................................................................................................................... 44

DATA ANALYSIS, PRESENTATION AND INTERPRETATION .................................... 44

4.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 44

4.2 Analysis................................................................................................................................... 44

4.2.1 General characteristics of the respondents ........................................................................... 44

4.2.1.1 Gender of the respondents ................................................................................................ 44

4.2.1.2 Age of the respondents...................................................................................................... 45

4.2.1.3 WRUA performance ......................................................................................................... 45

4.2.2 Education and Training ........................................................................................................ 47

4.2.2.1 Education .......................................................................................................................... 47

4.2.2.2 Training ............................................................................................................................. 49

4.2.3 Coordination and management. ........................................................................................... 52

4.2.3.1 Information ....................................................................................................................... 53

4.2.3.2 Communication ................................................................................................................. 55

4.2.3.3 Motivation factors. ............................................................................................................ 56

4.2.3.4 Collaboration of the WRUAs............................................................................................ 59

viii

4.2.3.5 Other coordination and management issues ..................................................................... 60

4.2.4 Accessibility and reliability of resources. ............................................................................ 64

4.2.4.1 Sources of funds ................................................................................................................ 64

4.2.4.2 Quantity and types of resources ........................................................................................ 66

4.2.4.3 Consistency of funds and resources. ................................................................................. 67

4.2.4.4 Management of resource ................................................................................................... 69

4.2.4.4.1 Record keeping .............................................................................................................. 69

CHAPTER FIVE ……………………………………………………………………………….71

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, DISCUSSIONS, CONLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................................................ 71

5.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 71

5.2 Summary ................................................................................................................................. 71

5.2.1 Education and training ......................................................................................................... 71

5.2.1.1 Education .......................................................................................................................... 71

5.2.1.2 Training ............................................................................................................................. 71

5.2.2 Coordination and management ............................................................................................ 72

5.2.3 Accessibility and reliability of resources. ............................................................................ 74

5.3 Discussion ............................................................................................................................... 75

5.4 Conclusions ............................................................................................................................. 80

5.5 Recommendations ................................................................................................................... 81

5.6 Suggestions for further research ............................................................................................. 82

REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................ 83

Appendix I: Introduction letter ……………………………………………...…………………..88

Appendix II: Questionnaire for the WRUA committee ................................................................ 89

Appendix III: Questionnaire for WRUA stakeholders to guide in the interviews ........................ 99

ix

Appendix IV: Questionnaire to WRMA staff ............................................................................. 100

AppendixV:Map of project area ................................................................................................. 102

x

LIST OF FIGURES

Fig 1 Conceptual framework.………………………………………….………………………29

xi

LIST OF TABLES

Table 3.1: WRUAs in Tharaka Nithi county and their membership…………………………….33

Table 3.2: Name of the WRUA, WRUA membership and sample size ………………………...35

Table 3.3: Operational definition of variables…………………………………………………...38

Table 4.1: Gender of the respondents……………………………………………………………44

Table 4.2: Analysis of ages of respondents……………………………………………………...45

Table 4.3: Mean WRUA performance …………………………………………………………..46

Table 4.4: Education background of the respondents …………………………………………...47

Table 4.5: Relationship between percentage of executive committee members education

and performance of WRUAs…………………………………………………………48

Table 4.6: Training attended per WRUA………………………………………………………..49

Table 4.7: Types of trainings and their correlation coefficients…………………………………50

Table 4.8: Relationship between the mean of people who attend trainings and the performance

of the WRUAs ………………………..………………………………………..……51

Table 4.9: Applicability of trainings offered to the WRUA in WRUA management …………..52

Table 4.10: Information storage in respective WRUAs………………………………………….53

Table 4.11: Correlation coefficients of various form of information storage in relation to

performance of the WRUA………………………………………………………….54

Table 4.12: Name of the WRUA against various communication channels…………………….55

Table 4.13: Percentages of various factors that motivates community to be WRUA members…56

xii

Table 4.14: Name of WRUA against motivation factors …………………………………...…...56

Table 4.15: Relationship between WRUA performance and benefits accrued from WRUA…...57

Table 4.16: Relationship between WRUA performance and volunteerism……………………...58

Table 4.17: WRUA collaboration with stakeholders ……………………………………………59

Table 4.18: Coordination and management result in percentages…………………………….....60

Table 4.19: WRUAs and various collaboration support given in percentages…………………..61

Table 4.20: Cross tabulation between consistent implementation of SCMP and WRUA

performance……………………..………………………………………………...62

Table 4.21: Cross tabulation between WRUA performance and WRUA holding meetings

according to by-laws……………………………………………………………..63

Table 4.22: Financial resources from different stakeholders…………………………………….64

Table 4.23: Cross tabulation of WRUAs and different sources of finance……………………...65

Table 4.24: WRUAs and the expenditure requirements…………………...…………………….66

Table 4.25: Correlation coefficient of various resources………………………………………...66

Table 4.26:WRUAs and consistent availability of resources……………………………………67

Table 4.27: Relationship between WRUA performance and consistency in flow of funds……..68

Table 4.28: Number of WRUAs and financial monitoring systems used….…………………….69

Table 4.29: WRUAs and other records kept……………………………………………………..69

Table 4.30: Other aspects of resource management………………………….………………… 70

xiii

ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

CBO : Community Based Organizations

CDF : Community Development Fund

FAO : Food and Agriculture Organization

FGD : Focus Groups Discussions

GOK : Government of Kenya

IDI’s : In-Depth Interviews

IFAD : International Fund for Agricultural Development

IO : Intergovernmental Organization

JMP : Joint Monitoring Programme

MKEPP : Mt. Kenya East Pilot Project

NGO : Non Government Organization

SPSS : Statistical Package for Social sciences

UNDP : United Nation Development Programme

UNEP : United Nation Environmental Programme

WCO : World Customs Organization

WDC : Water Development Cycle

WHO : World Health Organizations

WRMA : Water Resource Management Authority

WRUA : Water Resource Users Association

WSP : Water Service Provider

xiv

WSTF : Water Services Trust Fund

xv

ABSTRACT

This study was set to assess the aspects of capacity building that influence the performance of Water Resource Users Associations in Tharaka-Nithi County. Previous studies carried out in Kenya on management of community projects show that the condition of many of these projects was between poor and pathetic. Poor management and coordination, partnerships, institutional funding, poor project leadership, lack of transparency and accountability, lack of participation and ownership of the WRUA and high illiteracy rate leading to low technology adoption were cited as possible factors that influence performance of community based projects. The purpose of the study was to access how community capacity building influences the performance of water resource users association in water catchment management in Tharaka Nithi County. The objectives of the study were:-to access whether improved education and training of members of Water Resource Users Associations, community coordination and management, and availability and accessibility to resources are related to improved WRUA performance in water catchment management. Descriptive and correlation research method were used in this research. Descriptive design was used to collect data in order to answer questions concerning the current status of the water resources users association. Since this study aimed at clarifying relationships, correlation research was used. The instruments used included the use of structured questionnaires and interviews. Interviews were conducted to give in–depth information which was omitted by the questionnaire. The survey was administered to 115 respondents out of 693 members of the nine WRUAs in Tharaka Nithi County. The data collected was analyzed using statistical package for social sciences (SPSS) and Excel spread sheet. The data output is presented in form of tables and description. The researcher also used the Karl Pearson`s product moment correlation analysis to access the relationship between the variables. The study found out that there were very strong relationships in various aspects of education and training, coordination and management, availability and accessibility of resources with performance of WRUAs in water catchment management. The key ones being high positive relationship between the numbers of executive committees with education levels of at least secondary level and number of WRUA community members trained with the performance of the WRUA. The study also found out that various types of trainings offered to the WRUA have varying influence on performance. There is also a strong positive correlation between accrued WRUA benefits and performances of the WRUA. It was also found out that WRUAs that have high number of volunteers working for them were performing poorly. The study also found out that WRUAs required diversified consistent support e.g. technical, infrastructure and equipments to improve their performance. The study recommends that there is need for WRUAs to be capacity built not only in training but on skills on networking, information and knowledge management. The WRUAs also requires support in technical, infrastructure, equipment and human in the early stages of WRUA operation in order to make them self sustaining.

1

CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background of the study

Among the planet’s renewable resources, fresh water may be the most depleted resource. It is

difficult to purify, expensive to transport and impossible to substitute. Fresh water is essential for

food production, economic development and life itself (Ki-moon, 2012). Its importance to

human health and well-being was underlined in mid 1993 when the United Nations’ new

commission on sustainable Development made improvement on the water quantity and quality as

one of the first priorities for technology transfers from wealthy countries to poorer ones.

According to the World Health Organization (WHO) statistics, it is estimated that about 1.1

billion people in the world do not have access to safe water (WHO&UNISEF, 2010). The United

Nations' states that by 2025, 1.9 billion people will be living in countries or regions with absolute

water scarcity, and two-thirds of the world population could be under stress conditions (UN,

2009).

According to the 1992 National Water Master-plan, the annual renewable fresh water resources

in Kenya is 20.2 billion cubic meters, comprising of surface water of 19.59 billion cubic meters

and ground water of 0.62 billion cubic meters. Assuming that amount of water is still available to

the current population of 40 million people; this translates to 505 cubic meters per capita per

year. In global standards therefore, Kenya is a water scarce country (Government of Kenya,

1992).

Most international development agencies and water managers, such as United Nations (UN)-

Water, Global Water Partnership - an World Water Council now agree that better governance of

water resources, more so than availability, is the key to solving the growing water crisis in

developing countries (WHO&UNISEF, 2010).

Many studies have been carried out on management of water projects by communities; Khwaja’s

(2001) study on projects managed by communities in Kenya suggests that projects managed by

communities are more sustainable than projects managed by local government.

2

This is supported by a study carried out by Belgium Administration for Development

Cooperation, (1999) on assessment of Water Users Associations in Kajiado and concluded that

communities had ability to take over and manage their water projects. Communities were also

willing to pay for their water use. This is further supported by the Kenya water policy review and

strategy formulation (1999) which produced Water Act 2001 and recognized the role of

communities in managing water either has Community Water Service Providers (WSPs) or

Water Resource Users Associations (WRUAs) (GOK,1999). To guide the implementation of the

Act, National Water Services Strategy (NWSS) for the years 2007-2015 was formulated in June

2007. Its mission is to “realize the goals of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs)

declaration and the vision 2030 of the Kenya government concerning access to safe and

affordable water and basic sanitation (GOK, 2007).

JICA’s (2003) study on sustainable community based irrigation and drainage schemes in Kenya

identified several constraints to development of community managed irrigation and drainage

projects: weak and ineffective water user’s organizations, lack of adequate skills and knowledge

by the irrigation farmers, lack of skill and knowledge on irrigation by irrigation personnel and

low funding of small scale irrigation development. This study is supported by Kleemter (2000)

who studied Malawi rural water supplies and found out that half of water projects were

performing poorly. The researcher argues that this stems largely from lack of institutional

support from external agencies after project implementation.

It is in above context that the government of Kenya with assistance of International Fund for

Agricultural Development formulated a pilot project called Mt. Kenya East pilot project for

Natural resource management based in the eastern side of Mt. Kenya catchment to ensure that

the communities participate effectively in natural resources management for poverty reduction

and food security.

The design of MKEPP is based on a conceptual framework in which, poverty is clearly

identified as the core driving force to environmental degradation, which ultimately generates

more poverty. The project approach is through river basin approach where Water Resource Users

Associations were formed, capacity built and supported so that they can perform their role of

water catchment management.

3

As of June 2011, the total numbers of WRUAs formed in Kenya were 440; Tana water

catchment has 130 WRUAs (WRMA, 2011). So far fifteen WRUAs have been formed in the

MKEPP project area. In Tharaka –Nithi County 9 WRUAs have been formed (MKEPP, 2010).

1.2 Statement of the problem

The Water Act 2002 mandated public participation in the management and utilization of water

resource (Water Act 2002). Before that, management and utilization of water resources fell

solely on the Government and communities were not involved in the management of the water

resources in any way. Therefore communities had no ownership of the water resource which lead

to over abstraction, degradation of water catchment and water pollution.

Community participation is institutionalized through formation of Water Users Associations

(WUAs) for water resource management and Water Service Providers for water utilization. This

is supported by studies carried out on management of water projects in Kenya; Khwaja’s (2001)

study on projects managed by communities in Kenya suggests that projects managed by

communities are more sustainable than projects managed by local government. However, studies

carried out on these water institutions and projects concluded that they were not performing to

their expectations due multiple challenges and constraints they experience.

Studies carried out by Belgium Administration for Development Cooperation (1999), on

assessment of Water Users Associations (WUAs) in Kajiado District concluded the general

condition of the WUAs managed projects was between poor and pathetic. Out of the WUAs

studied, 60% were poorly managed, 63% of the WUAs projects required major rehabilitation,

88% of the WUAs had no skills and expertise to handle financial issues and 90% of the WUAs

did not consistently contribute to water user fees. This is supported by a study carried out by

Water Services Board in Kisumu, Nairobi and Mombasa on Water Service Providers which

concluded that only 9 out of 55 Water Service Providers (WSPs) provide continuous water

supply to their clients. Consumers complained of underperformance of their service providers in

terms of inaccurate billing and metering, pipe bursts, illegal connections, poor workmanship on

installations, Vandalism, over changing and corruption (WASREB, 2009).

4

Studies carried out by JICA (2003) on sustainable community based irrigation and drainage

schemes in 11 Districts in three Provinces of Kenya namely; Rift-valley, Central and Eastern

also agree with the above findings in that they indicated that community based irrigation

schemes were not performing as expected due to varies challenges which included; management

and coordination conflicts of WUAs, poor project leadership, lack of transparency and

accountability, poor extension services, lack of participation and ownership of the WUA, weak

commitment and low morale of Ministerial staff, lack of adequate credit and access to credit

facilities and high illiteracy rate leading to low technology adoption.

Studies also carried out by World Bank (2004) on River Water Users Association (RWUAs) in

arid and semi-arid areas of Kenya found out that the associations faced constraints such as; lack

of resources including technical capacity, no clear relationship with Water Resources

Management Authority(WRMA) and no capacity building programmes in place. This is

supported by studies done by Nele F. (2008) on Integrated Water Resources Management- a case

study of Bwathonaro Water Resource Users Association in Meru North which found out that

although indicators reflect a positive impact of its work, the WRUA faced several operational

challenges including lack of enabling environment that facilitates not only establishment but also

the operationalization of the WRUA, external support with regard to capacity building and

guidance by WRMA, Membership commitment to WRUA and WRUA representativeness.

However there have been little studies on how the above challenges and constraints influence the

performance of WRUAs and specifically on how capacity building factors influence WRUA

performance. To strengthen community participation and involvement in the management of

natural resources and especially water resources this study was carried out to critically assess the

capacity building factors that influence the performance of WRUAs..

1.3. Purpose of the study

The purpose of this study was to critically assess how community capacity building influences

the performance of Water Resource Users Associations in water catchment management in

Tharaka-Nithi country.

1.4 Objectives of the study

The objectives of the study were:

5

i. To assess whether improved education and training of members of water resource

users associations (WRUA) is related to the improved performance of Water

Resource Users Associations in water catchment management.

ii. To assess whether improved community Coordination and management of

WRUA’s is related to improved performance of Water Resource Users Associations

in water catchment management.

iii. To investigate whether improved availability and accessibility to resources for

WRUA’s is related to their improved performance in water catchment management.

1.5 Research questions

i. Is improved education and training of members of Water Resource Users

Associations related to improved performance of Water Resources Users

Associations in water catchment management?

ii. To what extent is improved community coordination and management of

WRUAs related to performance of Water Resources Users Associations in

water catchment management?

iii. How does improved accessibility and availability of resources relate to

performance of Water Resources Users Associations in water catchment

management?

1.6 Assumptions of the study

The researcher made the assumption that the respondents answered the questions to their best of

knowledge and correctly. It is also assumed that the sample selected represents the general

population. The data collection instruments are valid. The researcher also assumes that the

procedures for data analysis will be appropriate. The researcher also assumes that the results of

this study will provide a guide to both the community, government and other stakeholders in the

management of water catchment areas.

6

1.7 Significance of the study

Studies done by other researchers agree that community participation in Community

development project is the key to sustainability of these projects. ( Khwaja’s, 2001 and Belgium

Administration for Development Co-operation, 1999). Other studies also agree that capacity

building of communities influences their performance (UNDP, 2004). Studies done by other

researchers also contradict these findings and states communities have adequate, complete and

reliable information to undertake their own development (Mwangi, 2006).

This study is significant since it will add knowledge to the earlier studies carried out on capacity

building. It will give an in-depth analysis on the capacity building factors that influence

performance of community –based projects. This might prompt further researches.

The study is of significance to the communities in that they will benefit by having prior

knowledge on how capacity building influences the performance of their Water Resource Users

Associations and hence the need for capacity building. This study will also give policy makers a

base on the relevant issues affecting performance of Water Resource Users Associations and will

serve as a scientific guide on community involvement in management of natural resource

especially water. The study will be of significance to the developing partners in preparing and

funding community based natural resource management projects especially water resource.

Indeed most of the practitioners of community development might adopt capacity building,

community participation and involvement on their development projects on experimental basis.

1.8 Delimitations of the study

The study was delimited to the Water Resource Users Associations (WRUAs) based in Tharaka

–Nithi County which is made of the following Districts; Meru South, Maara, Tharaka South and

Tharaka North. It is important to note here that many WRUAs do not follow the administrative

boundaries and might cut across two or more Districts or counties. The population was sampled

to get a representative sample. The study was also delimited to three specific areas of study.

These areas were:- education and training, coordination and management, availability and

accessibility of resources and how they influence the performance of WRUAs in water

catchment management.

7

1.9 Limitation of the study

This study used descriptive and correlation design. As a result, the study shows relationships and

not the causes. The study design also used questionnaires and focused group interviews to collect

data. Literacy levels of the sample population were not uniform in the area of study and some

had difficulties in filling the questionnaire. This was overcome by use of the local language and

the researcher interpreting every question when requested. The interviews also took time to be

done.

Time and resources constraint could not allow an extensive coverage of all the factors. Three

factors only were considered; education and training, coordination and management and resource

availability and accessibility.

The time and financial resources available also means that the study covered a small

geographical area and the duplication of the findings to other areas may require piloting before

full scale implementation.

1.10 Definition of significant terms

Capacity building - Capacity building is the approach to community development that raises

people’s knowledge, awareness and skills to use their own capacity and

that from available support systems to resolve the more underlying causes

of mal –development.

In this study education and training, coordination and management and

accessibility and availability of resources are the capacity building factors

which were considered.

Community - Members of a Water Resource Users Association.

Coordination - The act of organizing and collaborating with stakeholders in river basin to

achieve the WRUA objectives in water catchment management.

Education - It refers to various levels of formal schooling to acquire knowledge.

Management - The act of getting people together to accomplish desired goals and

objectives using the available resources efficiently and effectively.

8

Performance - In this study performance is the accomplishment of water catchment

management which will lead to reduced water related conflicts as per the

water resource management guidelines.

Training - This is the method of acquiring skills to perform specific tasks

Water Users Association –A group of people who have come together for the purpose of

abstracting and utilizing a water resource.

Water Resource Users Associations - In this study, Water resource users association

(WRUA) is an association of water users, riparian

land owners, non-consumptive users, or other

stakeholders who have formally and voluntarily

associated for the purpose of cooperatively sharing,

managing and conserving a common water resource

Resources - These are materials, assets, finances and human

who are transformed by the WRUA to produce the

desired benefits.

1.11 Organization of the study

The study is organized into five chapters, each chapter containing specific information. Chapter

one contains the introduction of the study. It gives background of the study , statement of the

problem, objectives of the study both the purpose and specific objectives of the study, research

questions, significance of the study, limitations of the study, delimitations of the study, basic

assumption of the study and definition of key terms. Chapter two reviews the literature based on

the objectives of the study. It further looked at the conceptual framework and describes the

research gaps. Chapter three covers the research methodology, describes the research design,

target population, sampling procedure, instruments and techniques of data collection, pre-testing,

operational definition of variables, methods of data analysis and ethical considerations. Chapter

four this gives the results of the data analysis, the presentation in tables and the interpretation.

The variables considered were education and training, coordination and management and

accessibility and availability of resources. Chapter five gives the summary of the research

9

findings, discussion on the findings, conclusions made and recommendations on each the three

variables namely; education and training, coordination and management and accessibility and

availability of resources.

10

CHAPTER TWO

LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Introduction

This chapter includes a desk review of similar studies done by other scholars on factors that

affect the performance of community –based groups with a focus on global and local trends. This

includes: - the process of water sector reforms in Kenya, formation and functions of water users

associations and performance of Water Resource Users Associations. Other areas covered in the

literature review include capacity building issues, staff quality involvement, organizational

adaptability, collaboration challenges and knowledge management as documented by other

scholars other researchers. This chapter also contains the conceptual framework and research

gaps.

2.1.1 Water resource issues

Of all the planet’s renewable resources, fresh water may be the most critically depleted resource.

Difficult to purify, expensive to transport and impossible to substitute, fresh water is essential to

food production, to economic development and to life itself (Ki-moon 2012). Its importance to

human health and well-being was underlined in mid 1993 when the United Nations’ new

commission on sustainable Development made improvement of the water quality as one of the

first priorities for technology transfers from wealthy countries to poorer ones.

According to the World Health Organization (WHO) statistics, it is estimated that about 1.1

billion people in the world do not have access to safe water (WHO, 2010). The United Nations'

states that by 2025, 1.9 billion people will be living in countries or regions with absolute water

scarcity, and two-thirds of the world population could be under stress conditions (UN, 2009).

According to the 1992 National Water Master-plan, the annual renewable fresh water resources

in Kenya is 20.2 billion cubic meters, comprising of surface water of 19.59 billion cubic meters

and ground water of 0.62 billion cubic meters. Assuming that amount of water is still available to

the current population of 40 million people; this translates to 505 cubic meters per capita per

11

year. In global standards therefore, Kenya is a water scarce country (Government of Kenya,

1992).

The concept of a “water stress index” was pioneered based on an approximate minimum level of

water required per capita to maintain an adequate quality of life in a moderately developed

country in an arid zone. Falkenmark began with the calculation that 100 litres per day (36.5 cubic

metres per year) is a rough minimum per capita requirement for basic household needs to

maintain good health. The experience even of water-efficient countries shows that roughly five

to 20 times this amount tends to be needed to satisfy the requirements of agriculture, industry

and energy production. Based upon these findings, Falkenmark suggested the specific thresholds

of water stress and water scarce countries, (Falkenmark and Lindh, 1976).

A country whose renewable fresh water availability, on an annual per capita basis, exceeds about

1700 cubic meters will suffer only occasional or local water problems. Below this threshold

countries begin to experience periodic or regular water stress. When fresh water availability falls

below 1,000 cubic meters per person per year, countries will experience chronic water scarcity,

in which the lack of water begins to hamper economic development and human health and well-

being. When a country renewable fresh water supplies fall below 500 cubic meters per person,

countries began to experience absolute scarcity. The 1,000 cubic meter benchmark has been

accepted as a general indicator of water scarcity by the World Bank and other analysts (UN,

2009).

According to the 1992 National Water Master-plan, the annual renewable fresh water resources

in Kenya was 20.2 billion cubic meters, comprising of surface water of 19.59 billion cubic

meters and ground water of 0.62 billion cubic meters. Assuming that amount of water is still

available to the current population of 40 million people; this translates to 505 cubic meters per

capita per year. In global standards therefore, Kenya is a water scarce country (Government of

Kenya, 1992).

12

2.2 Water Sector Reforms in Kenya

Kenya being a water scarce country it faces serious challenges with regard to protection of

resources, provision of water supply and sanitation services. The country having a population of

about 40 million (2010 population census), it faces an enormous challenge of providing water

and sewerage services to the increasing population. Studies on water services in Kenya from the

Joint Monitoring Programme for Water Supply and Sanitation (JMP) show that in 2008, 59% of

Kenyans (83% in urban areas and 52% in rural areas) had access to improved drinking water

sources. According to JMP, 19% of Kenyans (44% in urban areas and 12% in rural areas) are

reported as having access to piped water through a house or yard connection. According to the

JMP estimates, access to improved water sources in urban areas decreased from 91% in 1990 to

83% in 2008. In rural areas, however, access increased from 32% to 52% during the same period.

Estimates from the Water Impact Report (2009) approximates that in 2006-2007 only 37% of

Kenyans had access to sufficient and safe drinking water close to their homes at an affordable

price ((WHO/UNISEF,2008) .

The water sector is now under radical transformation driven by the national policy on separating

water resources management and development from water services delivery. This conforms to

the Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper, the Economic Strategy for Wealth and Employment

Creation and backed up by the Water Act 2002 in an attempt to meet the Millennium

Development Goals. The main thrust of the reforms was to separate water resources management

and development from water services delivery and focusing the Ministry’s role on policy ( GOK

2002).

In 2002, the present Water Act (“the Act”) was enacted “to provide for the Management,

conservation, use and control of water resources and for the acquisition and regulation of the

rights to use water”. In September 2007 the long-awaited Water Resources Management Rules

(“the Rules”) were promulgated, helping to fill some of the gaps in the Act. The Act is notable in

general terms for devolving the management (not supply) of Kenya’s water resources to the

Water Resources Management Authority (WRMA). This in turn is mandated by S (15) to

formulate a catchment management strategy for the management, use, development,

conservation, protection and control of water resources within each catchment area”. Kenya is

13

divided into six Catchment areas namely: Tana catchment area, Athi catchment area, Rift valley

catchment area, Lake Victoria North Catchment area, Lake Victoria South Catchment area and

Ewaso Nyiro catchment area (Ministry of Water and Irrigation, 2007).

One of the statutory ways to promote an effective catchment management strategy is for WRMA

to “provide mechanisms and facilities for enabling the public and communities to participate in

managing the water resources within each catchment area” (Water Act 2002 (S 15(3) (e))).

(S 15(5)) of the Water Act 2002 and then goes on to say that “… the catchment management

strategy shall encourage and facilitate the establishment and operation of Water Resource Users

Associations (WRUAs) as fora for conflict resolution and co-operative management of water

resources in catchment areas.”

Most importantly, the Water Act (2002) enacts on the principle of local users taking

responsibility for the guardianship of their own resource. This represents a complete change in

water resource management strategy, which in turn will require a major reassessment in thinking

on the part of both consumers and managers. It is now widely understood that community

participation in local resource management is desirable, and indeed the only way to solve social,

as opposed to technical problems. This is supported by Khwaja`s (2001) study on project

managed by communities in Kenya which suggest that projects managed by communities are

more sustainable than projects managed by local government. Although formation and

registration of WRUAs is well detailed in the WRMA rules, the need for capacity building is not

well defined.

2.3 Organization of Water Resource Users Associations

According to Cole (1995), an organization exists when two or more persons agree to collaborate

over a period of time in order to achieve certain common goals. He further notes that a work

organization consists of a group or groups of people who collaborate in a structured and

permanent relatively way in order to achieve one or more goals which they share in common,

and which they could not achieve by acting on their own.

Mintzberg (1979) defines an organizational structure as an intangible web of relationships

between people, their shared purposes and the tasks they set themselves in order to achieve those

purposes. The prime purpose of structure is to achieve an effective balance between the division

14

of labour tasks and responsibilities on the other hand, and the need coordinate individuals efforts

and roles on the other. He further continues to say that ‘ The understanding that members of an

organization acquire about their own ‘structure’ may be as much based on unwritten evidence

and informal arrangements as any formal statement of rules, procedures and role descriptions’.

According to Cole (1995), there are many organizations that go to great lengths to prescribe their

organization structures and there are countless others that have informal arrangements, where the

sense of structure is tacit and flexible. Most organizations embrace a range of structures within

their boundaries.

The water Act 2002 is silent as to how WRUAs should be structured. This leaves them to be set

up outside it, probably deliberately, thereby enabling WRUAs to act as checks on the

performance of WRMA. It effectively encourages ownership of the association by its members,

who are united in their interest of conserving a natural resource; and it also renders WRUA

management free from official interference and control, at least by the water authorities.

The Water Resources Management Authority rules define a WRUA as “An association of water

users, riparian land owners, non-consumptive users or other stakeholders who have formally and

voluntarily associated for the purposes of cooperatively sharing, managing and conserving a

common water resource”. Rule 10 of WRMA covers the registration of WRUAs with WRMA

and certainly clarifies some of the uncertainties existing as a result of the scanty reference to

them in the Water Act(Ministry of Water and Irrigation,2007).

However it says little more about the preferred entity of a WRUA other than to prescribe that

“for a WRUA to be considered for registration by the Authority, it should be legally registered,

have a constitution” “Legally registered entity” is itself defined in the Rules as “an organization,

corporate body or person that has legal status”.

2.4 Formation of Water Resource Users Associations (WRUAs)

WRUAs are not easy to set up due combination of the need for a lengthy constitution and

bureaucratic paranoia in the Registry of Societies. According to WRUA development cycle

(WDC) developed by WRMA, WRUAs often start life as Self-Help Groups or Community

Based Organizations (CBO) registered with the Department of Social Services. CBOs are easily

established and very little documentation needs submitting before a registration certificate is

15

issued, which itself is enough to facilitate opening a bank account. WRMA Sub-region office in

Meru accepts CBOs as WRUAs and indeed some WRUAs seem reluctant to tackle the next step

of association formation.

The upper reaches of many of the rivers round the northern slopes of Mt Kenya are tapped by

large commercial flower farms. With relative wealth, an office infrastructure, transport and some

worldliness, one of these often drives both the formation of a WRUA, and its continuing

administration. This is generally a benefit, although cultural differences may mean the pre-

formation sensitization process is unduly hastened, and the association is born with insufficient

consultation of those who will ultimately be expected to join, manage and contribute to it.

Similarly, cultural differences may manifest themselves in the conduct of meetings and other

association activities. These differences might certainly be less apparent if WRUA management

was in the hands of indigenous Kenyans, but generally they are far outweighed by the advantages

of different cultural groups each bringing contrasting strengths to the table. At the outset, a

prospective WRUA may comprise no more than a few interested individuals determined to band

together for the better management of their resource. Even if the group gets no further than this,

failing to achieve formal recognition or registration, many of its objectives may still have been

achieved. Arguably, the process of establishing a WRUA is just as important as the end result,

and going though this will give users the opportunity to meet and respect the views of each other,

and hopefully unite them in a common goal (WRMA, 2011).

According to MKEPP annual report, (2010), the enthusiasm with which users embrace the idea

of a WRUA varies enormously from those who have experienced no real water shortages so far

and have dispute over the resource’s allocation and those who have not experienced any water

shortages. There is also no doubt that attendance at WRUA meetings is far higher when water is

scarce.

2.5 Adequate Funding WRUA’s

Adequate funding is a factor of performance. Mancini cites that planning for future needs should

be in place early and needs to be continually developed during the life of the project. Late release

of funds, insufficient amounts, poor timelines in releasing the funds, are some of the challenges

faced by community based projects as noted by Mancini (2003).

16

Two basic issues dominate the funding of any WRUA; how much does it need – which depends

generally on its ambitions - and how is going to raise this. All WRUAs levy a joining fee, and

then an annual membership fee, which varies according to membership category. In practice,

many large farms already make additional contributions in cash or kind (e.g. provision of office

infrastructure or transport to meetings), in order to help the WRUA function effectively,

community consumers may contribute time and labour.

If the majority of the funds to run a WRUA are provided by one or two members of the WRUA,

there is inevitably a risk of these starting to wield a disproportionate degree of power and

influence in the WRUA’s affairs. More democratic contributions are therefore preferable, but

this may not always be practical (Ministry of Water and Irrigation, 2004).

Some WRUAs have received Donor funding for one-off projects such as weir construction or the

installation of reticulation systems. However, core office support is dependent on subscriptions

and such other income as the WRUA can rise. Water sales to road builders, and visitor fees to

see how WRUA’s work, have brought in additional income. Several WRUAs are contemplating

stocking their waters with fish to attract sport fishermen, who may even stay in WRUA facilities

or use its appointed guides. Others are hoping additional revenue will come from commercial

tree nurseries or bee-keeping projects. Sales of borehole water may bring in future revenue for

WRUAs, either for agriculture or even in bottles for personal consumption ( Ministry of Water

and Irrigation,2004).

Being mandated through the catchment management strategy to “encourage and facilitate the

establishment and operation of WRUAs” (water act 2002) ,WRMA could easily divert some of

any money it ultimately raises from water charges back to help the formation of new WRUAs or

to fund existing ones. It would certainly be good for consumers who pay for water to see some of

their money being recycled back into the system. This is supported by a study done by Nele

(2008) on Bwathonaro Water Resources Users Association in Imenti North, which found out that

to guarantee a certain level of financial and logistic independence, WRMA has to support the

WRUAs in finding sources of funding and development of a realistic financial backing. One

such source would be The Water Services Trust Fund which was established under S 83 of the

Water Act 2002 to “assist in financing the provision of water services to areas in Kenya which

17

are without adequate water services”. Initially confined to funding water supply, it is now

permitted to fund water resource management and WRUAs could also apply to it for financing.

These sources of funding are supported by Adhikari, (2005), and GEF, (2003) who say that

organization can enhance funding of the activities through raising local funds and the

diversification of funding sources. It is further supported by Mulwa (2008) studies on

communities in Kenya which found out that fundraising strategies for community based

organizations in Kenya varies from Merry-go-round, micro-credit, consultancy services ,fanfare,

and small special events, harambees to endowment fund. Other sources are public-private sector

partnerships, the corporate social responsibility, and Government funding and donor support.

Mulwa (2008) further notes that different sources of funds will influence directly or indirectly,

the implementation of community based water projects due to the conditions that go with them

as well as the volume each strategy is likely to earn.

Studies also carried out by World Bank (2004) on River Water Users Association (RWUAs) in

arid and semi-arid areas of Kenya found out that the associations faced constraints such; lack of

resources including technical capacity, no clear relationship with Water Resources Management

Authority(WRMA) and no capacity building programmes in place.

According to studies carried out by Nyoroka (2009) on challenges facing the sustainability of

community based projects in Meru concluded that other factors not studied in the researcher`s

study like funding and community participation may account to some of the challenges

influencing sustainability and performance of community based projects.

2.6 Management of WRUAs

Membership and management of WRUAs is detailed in their constitution, the contents of which

are largely governed by their legal status. The constitution of an Association, registered under the

Societies Act, is often based upon the specimen provided by the Registrar, as modified to suit

individual requirements. More detailed management provisions may be contained in bye-laws

made subsidiary to the constitution.

The potentially complex issue of WRUA membership seems efficiently managed by the creation

of different categories of membership, this ensuring that all water users are represented, either

directly or indirectly, on the Association. Riparian landowners are all usually entitled to

18

membership, while community water projects with their own off-take either elect one or more

representatives to membership of the Association or automatically nominate one or two of their

office-bearers. The responsibilities of membership of the WRUA often take time to absorb, and

project representatives may be lax in reporting back decisions made at meetings, as well as the

rationale behind them, to their project members (WRMA, 2008). Large-scale users like large

irrigation schemes or Chuka Water & Sewage Co Ltd are represented on their Association as

individual or commercial members, and pay a higher Membership fee.

To ease administration some associations also divide their river into geophysical sections,

perhaps three; upper, middle and lower, or in the case of the Mutonga in to five sections; and

each of these sections may have the right to elect an area Member. Finally, to help distinguish

between primary and secondary stakeholders, there may be an observer Member category for

those who are not water users but have an interest in the activities of the WRUA and the

conservation of the resource it (Ministry of Water and Irrigation, 2004).

Management of the WRUA devolves upon an executive committee, usually made up of the

Association’s office bearers, and also perhaps of others either from different sections of the river,

or varying interest groups. The frequency of both committee and general members’ meetings

varies, but members seem to meet on average about once a quarter, with the committee meetings

being called in response to specific problems. One of the members’ meetings will be the Annual

General Meeting. Meetings of the Tungu WRUA are hosted by different members in rotation,

enabling members to experience a different part of the river, and the problems associated with it,

each time they meet (MKEPP Report, 2011). Studies done by Nele (2008) on Bwathonaro

WRUA suggest that representativeness is crucial in determining the community’s respect of and

support for any WRUA.

2.7 Relationship with Water Resources Management Authority (WRMA)

While the fact of WRUAs being set up outside the Water Act 2002 makes them fully

autonomous, operating beyond any influence of WRMA can make for an awkward relationship

between the two. While WRMA suggests that its duty is to provide an enabling environment for

the establishment of WRUAs, it may use the eventual autonomy of a WRUA as an excuse to

deny it assistance.

19

Once established, a WRUA can be registered with WRMA. Rule 10(6) of WRMA rules provides

the procedure for registration by completion and submission of Form 18, and Rule 10(5) requires

WRMA to maintain a register of all WRUAs. There are also provisions enabling WRMA to

cancel registration, although not of course to disband the WRUA (Ministry of Water and

Irrigation, 2007).

The WRUA also supplies WRMA with details of its river, catchment area, legal registration,

bank account and other relevant information. In furtherance of a two-way relationship WRMA

agrees in the Memorandum to send representatives to WRUA meetings, conduct abstraction

surveys, monitor water quality and generally assist the WRUA in revenue collection, proposal

writing, project management and water resource Management (WRMA rules, 2007). The

devolutionary process may be taking some time to absorb, both for users and administrators.

WRMA staffs also worked in the old centralized system and are taking time to adapt.

2.8 Capacity building issues

According to Wikipedia, Capacity building also referred to as capacity development is a

conceptual approach to development that focuses on understanding the obstacles that inhibit

people, governments, international organizations and non-governmental organizations from

realizing their developmental goals while enhancing the abilities that will allow them to achieve

measurable and sustainable results.

‘Capacity building can also be characterized as the approach to community development that

raises people’s knowledge, awareness and skills to use their own capacity and that from available

support systems to resolve the more underlying causes of mal –development. Capacity building

helps us better understand the decision-making process; to communicate more effectively at

different levels; and make more decisions, eventually instilling in them a sense of confidence to

manage their own destinies. Capacity building strengthens the assessment of analysis –action

process in the community and, therefore leads to higher performance (Wikipedia).

The UNDP (2004) defines capacity building as a long-term continual process of development

that involves all stakeholders; including ministries, local authorities, non-governmental

organizations, professionals, community members, academics and more. Capacity building uses

20

a country’s human, scientific, technological, organizational, and institutional and resource

capabilities. The goal of capacity building is to tackle problems related to policy and methods of

development, while considering the potential, limits and needs of the people of the country

concerned. The UNDP outlines that capacity building takes place on an individual level, an

institutional level and the societal level.

The World Customs Organization-an intergovernmental organization (IO) that develops

standards for governing the movement of people and commodities, defines capacity building as

"activities which strengthen the knowledge, abilities, skills and behaviour of individuals and

improve institutional structures and processes such that the organization can efficiently meet its

mission and goals in a sustainable way."

Capacity building for development, therefore not only meets concrete needs for skills or

resources, but responds to the feelings that come from people’s experiences of poverty or

oppression. It is necessarily concerned with along investment in people (Deborah, 1997).

Capacity building should go behold training and bring wider issues into the picture; applied

research and demonstration, technology transfer, community participation ,effective governance

,technical assistance and institutional development ( World bank 2003).It continues to say that

water sector reforms is a process which requires investment of time, political capital and

financial resources (for studies, capacity building and institutional development).

Alaerts, (1996) reminds that never to forget that vision and innovations are ultimately the most

important ingredient of capacity building and empowerment.

The UNDP (2004) assessments found out that institutions are inefficient because of bad or weak

policies, procedures, resource management, organization, leadership, frameworks, and

communication.

The UNDP (2004) believes knowledge is the foundation of capacity. They believe greater

investments should be made in establishing strong education systems and opportunities for

continued learning and the development of professional skills. They support the engagement in

post-secondary education reforms, continued learning and domestic knowledge services.

21

The implementation of accountability measures facilitates better performance and efficiency.

Lack of accountability measures in institutions allows for the proliferation of corruption. The

UNDP promotes the strengthening of accountability frameworks that monitor and evaluate

institutions. They also promote independent organizations that oversee, monitor and evaluate

institutions. They promote the development of capacities such as literacy and language skills in

civil societies that will allow for increased engagement in monitoring institutions (UNDP, 2004).

In Ministry of water and irrigation strategic plan 2009-2012 (Ministry of Water and irrigation,

2008) key emphasis is laid on the need to capacity build WRUAs to collect records and monitor

data acquisition instrument. Water Resources Management authority (2009) in preparing its Tana

water catchment area management strategy plans to support Water Resource Users Associations

–to facilitate formation and capacity build them to undertake water resource management, and

support the development and implementation of sub catchment management plans for those

WRUAs.

The above is supported by World Bank (2004), who states that community water organization

can be capacity build in support to hydrological services for long term (planning) and short term

operational purposes in the following areas: Infrastructure to measure hydrological data, Local

institutional capacity to analyze hydrological data, Facilities to disseminate information to

planners, managers and operators.

Studies carried out by World Bank (2004) on River Water Users Association (RWUAs) in arid

and semi-arid areas of Kenya found out that the associations faced constraints such; lack of

resources including technical capacity, no clear relationship with Water Resources Management

Authority(WRMA) and no capacity building programmes in place. This is supported by studies

done by Nele (2008) on Integrated Water Resources Management- a case study of Bwathonaro

Water Resources Users Associations in Meru North which found out that although indicators

reflect a positive impact of its work, the WRUA faced several operational challenges including

enabling environment that facilitates not only establishment but also the operationalization of the

WRUA, external support with regard to capacity building and guidance by WRMA, Membership

commitment to WRUA and WRUA representativeness.

22

2.9 Community participation challenges

Community participation is the taking part in formation, implementation and management of

initiatives (Mwangi, 2007). Community Participation is the process by which community

member’s opinions and views affects decision making at community level (Grishvilli, 2003).

Participation approaches have been popularized by Rapid Rural Appraisal (RRA) and

Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA) approaches to community development and research which

Chambers (1994) refers to as family of approaches and methods to enable rural people to

share/enhance and analyze their knowledge of life and conditions to plan and act.

Decision making by project implementing communities is reported to be a challenge resulting

from inadequate skills and knowledge, Grishvilli, (2003), Mwangi, (2006) noted that

communities have adequate, complete reliable information to support objective rational

decisions. He noted that such decisions once made have to be acceptable. World Bank, (2003)

indicated that the focus for decision making lies in how community projects are identified,

selected and implemented. Mwangi, (2007) noted that low community participation leads to

reduced to low project performance. The project implementation team plays an important role in

the participation process, bridging the gap between the communities and project team (UNEP

2006).

Activities to enhance performance include creating a reserve fund, registration, federations and

saving and credit funds. Active participation of communities improves the march between

community needs and what it obtains. Through participation, the community develops

ownership and skills for collective action (Adhikari and Risal, (2006).

Studies carried out by Belgium administration for development cooperation (1999) on

assessment of Water Users Associations (WUAs) in Kajiado District concluded the general

condition of the WUAs managed projects was between poor and pathetic. Out of the WUAs

studied, 60% were poorly managed, 63% of the WUAs projects required major rehabilitation,

88% of the WUAs had no the skills and expertise to handle financial issues and 90% of the

WUAs did not consistently contribute to water user fees.

23

This is supported by MKirigia`s ( 2010) study on factors affecting the performance private water

firms in delivery of water services and found out that there was inadequate community

involvement in making decisions in terms of how best to run their projects.

2.10 Staff quality and involvement

Having adequate competent staff is an important factor for implementing and performance of

sustaining community –based projects (Mancini, 2003). A major factor to community

organization success is centered on lack or inadequate staff that is well trained and educated

(Mancini, 2003).

A shortage of skilled and experienced managers, technicians, supervisors and field monitoring

staff is significantly hindering reaching and assisting local communities (Michael, 2004) and

continues to cite that mobility and effectiveness of various government partners is also

inadequate to meet the demands for assistance. A shortage of essential field equipment for

monitoring /extension activities (vehicles, radios, GPS, water levels/quality measurement

equipment) along with a lack of funds for fuel ,vehicle maintenance and travel allowances places

further constraints on carrying out essential capacity building activities, (Michael, 2004)

Community projects which are insufficiently coordinated may lead to confusion of different

approaches; communities could lose focus of long term development goals and duplication of

institutional efforts (The 4C`s working group, 2003); World Bank (2003); in its studies noted

that the recognized advantage of greater inter-agency collaboration/coordination unfortunately is

often overshadowed by the reality of competition for resources and operational rivalry. This

according to World Bank (2003) can be reduced by working under the government which can

facilitate inter-agency coordination and enhanced communication.

Studies carried out by JICA’s (2003) on sustainable community based irrigation and drainage

schemes in 11 Districts in three Provinces of Kenya namely; Rift-valley, Central and Eastern

also agree with the above findings in that they indicated that community based irrigation

schemes were not performing as expected due to varies challenges which included: management

and coordination of conflicts of WUAs and low morale of Ministerial staff. This is also

supported by studies done by Nyoroka (2009) on community –based groups in Meru which

found out that community based projects required a lot of external support to sustain themselves

24

in terms of external supervision, monitoring and evaluation, infrastructure development, market

linkages, management of sales and capacity building support services.

2.11 Organization adaptability challenges

An organization ability to adapt to community needs/members needs and contextual changes

strongly influences its ability to continuously provide services that make a difference in quality

of life (Mancini, 2003). Many researchers have found maintaining flexibility and adaptability

strongly influence performance, Holder & Moore, (2000): LaFond, 1995: Lefevre, 1990:

Shediac-Rizkallah & Boni, (1998) cites Mancini, (2003). Typically, change is the hallmark of

community life and consequently, of necessity organization must respond to change to remain

viable. Adaptations may range from changes in goal, to reduction in programming, to increasing

and deceasing sites, participants, collaboration.

World Bank (2003) observed that organization can adjust for its future. This flexible

management can be hampered by antiquated internal administrative structure. An effective

feedback system allows an organization to identify adjustment needs early and specify the

appropriate responses.

Project adaptability challenges may result from constraints imposed by failure to respond to

inherent challenges, redundancy and duplication of services, poor timeliness, irrelevance and

failure to assess and account for changes in the community project (Mancini, 2003).

Studies carried out by JICA (2003) on sustainable community based irrigation and drainage

schemes in 11 Districts in three Provinces of Kenya namely; Rift-valley, Central and Eastern

also agree with the above findings in that they indicated that community based irrigation

schemes were not performing as expected due to varies challenges including high illiteracy rate

in the WUA leading to low technology adoption.

2.12 Collaboration challenges

Effective collaboration is essential for long term survival and performance of community based

projects (Mancini el al, 2003). According to (Mancini el al., 2003) many researchers (Bamberger

and Cheema, 1990); (LaFord, 1995); (Glaser, 1982), have found that out that an atmosphere that

values collaboration contributes to projects success and sustainability.

25

Collaboration and partnership are more effective when they include all relevant community

leaders, key agencies, organization in a community project are critical elements in success and

performance. Ineffective and inadequate networks, reduce projects effectiveness, reduce

resources contributed and brought to the project, reduces breadth and depth of their involvement

.Partnership relationship must be about supportive behavior to success and sustainability

(Mulwa, 2007). Good collaboration is founded on relationships of trust and familiarity. Sound

relationships require time to develop. Frequent changes of managers, local staff and community

leaders may lead to discontinues in agency support for community based efforts according to

4C`s working group, (2003).

World Bank, (2003) noted that the community projects effectiveness can be improved through

sharing, cooperating in the same planning processes, conducting joint assessment and using

incentives to support collaborative project design and supporting inter-agency interacting at all

stages of the projects cycle. But this usually limited by differences in funding, project cycles

differences, economic benefits and incentives , changes in local situation policy changes,

methodological differences and the continued contention over the lead agency issue.

According to Mwangi, (2006) having regular contact with other institutions, projects and groups

with strategic importance to the project can result to healthy exchange of approaches and

resources (knowledge, expertise). The culture of staff embedded in traditional construction and

procurement, often is unprepared to respond innovatively and positively to partnerships

arrangements and requirements. Delays in process may stall or discourage local collaboration

while rules and policies may not be designed for many partnerships (4C`s working group, 2003).

Nele, (2008) in his study on Bwathonaro WRUA found out that for the WRUA to facilitate

change it must be supported by the majority stakeholders.

A study carried out by Nyoroka (2009) concluded that coordination was quite poor in community

based projects in Meru and these projects may seek alternative ways for coordinating their

projects well even if it means hiring competent people.

26

2.13 Knowledge management and sharing

Communities believe that good information supply and public awareness is the foremost

prerequisite for the active community performance in programmes. Lack of or inaccessibility to

information regarding the project, their application in practice on ground, options for applying

them under variable circumstance, barriers to their use and other information as it pertains to the

purpose and support activities of the projects initiative is primary challenge to the initiatives,

implementation and performance of the projects ( The 4C`s working group, 2003).

Bridging of barriers to maximize access to needed information benefits through avoiding costly

duplication. Aim of media and communication development in projects is to increase awareness

and knowledge of local communities (UNEP, 2005 and Mulwa, 2007). Exchange of information

(vertical and horizontal) contributes towards the resolution of problem in a community project.

In community development the kind of useful communication is not the traditional linear

communication flowing from high levels to lower ones with passive audience. It has to be

dynamic and in favour of two or more parties. Nele (2008) in his study on Bwathonaro WRUA

found out that there is a strong relationship between awareness creation and level of resistance to

change. The researcher notes that resentment is created by the lack of information and

misinformation in Bwathonaro WRUA.

2.14 Review of Water Users Associations performance Challenges

Studies carried out by Belgium administration for development cooperation, (1999) on

assessment of Water Users Associations (WUAs) in Kajiado District concluded the general

condition of the WUAs managed projects was between poor and pathetic. Out of the WUAs

studied, 60% were poorly managed, 63% of the WUAs projects required major rehabilitation,

88% of the WUAs had no skills and expertise to manage financial resources.

Studies carried out by JICA (2003) on sustainable community based irrigation and drainage

schemes in 11 Districts in three Provinces of Kenya namely; Rift-valley, Central and Eastern

also agree with the above findings in that they indicated that community based irrigation

schemes were not performing as expected due to varies challenges which included; management

and coordination of conflicts of WUAs, poor project leadership, lack of transparency and

accountability, poor extension services, lack of participation and ownership of the WUA, weak

27

commitment and low morale of Ministerial staff, lack of adequate credit and access to credit

facilities and high illiteracy rate leading to low technology adoption.

Studies also carried out by World Bank (2004) on River Water Users Associations (RWUAs) in

arid and semi-arid areas of Kenya found out that the associations faced constraints such; lack of

resources including technical capacity, no clear relationship with Water Resources Management

Authority(WRMA) and no capacity building programmes in place. This is supported by studies

done by Nele (2008) on Integrated Water Resources Management- a case study of Bwathonaro

Water Resources Users Associations in Meru North which found out that although indicators

reflect a positive impact of its work, the WRUA faced several operational challenges including;

lack of enabling environment that facilitates not only establishment but also the

operationalization of the WRUA, external support with regard to capacity building and guidance

by WRMA, Membership commitment to WRUA and WRUA representativeness.

A study carried out by Nyoroka (2009) concluded that coordination was quite poor in community

based projects in Meru and these projects may seek alternative ways for coordinating their

projects well even if it means hiring competent people. She further found out that projects also

required a lot of external support to improve their performance.

According MKEPP Annual Report, (2011) and WRMA annual report, (2010), of the nine

WRUAs formed in Tharaka –Nithi County only one has been able to assess funding with WSTF

to start the implementation of their respective Sub –Catchment Management Plan (SCMP). Only

two WRUAs of the fifteen formed by WRMA with assistance of MKEPP in the last eight years

have so far been able to write proposals to development partners for funding. In the Tana

catchment area, out of the 130 WRUAs formed only 12 have developed the capacity to write

proposals to WSTF and received funding. Only one WRUA out of the nine formed in Tharaka –

Nithi County has internal mechanism of generating revenue.

There is a general feeling that WRMA should make more use of WRUAs than it does. Being so

newly created WRMA has little experience of dealing direct with water users, and if sensitively

used, WRUAs could be a huge help in bridging the gap between WRMA and the public,

(WRMA, 2009).

Research from other community projects, the reviewed literature indicated the following project

performance challenges ; inadequate funding to help in sustaining the project, Human resource

28

inadequacy in terms of inadequate numbers and inadequate relevant trainings , poor team spirit,

low motivation, limited knowledge management and sharing skills required , staff mindset, high

staff turnover/low continuity, lack of community involvement in decision making, inadequate

collaboration support, which benefits the project implementation and performance through

brought in resources, (in kind or expertise ) and participation. Inadequate adaptability /flexibility

which occurs when projects are late in changing as community needs change; Leadership in

competencies leading to inadequacies in continuous planning for improved performance,

accountability, poor involvement of community institutions, lack of clear project mission and

vision ; poor coordination and inadequate information and communication .

2.15 Summary

From the above discussions the following are the possible performance challenge areas;

community coordination and management, institution inadequate accessibility and availability of

resources, quantity and quality of human resource, inadequate information and communication

channels and inadequate collaboration support.

29

2.16 Conceptual framework

Moderating variable

Independent variables

Dependent variable

Fig 1 Conceptual framework

Improved Education and training of community members

- Academic qualification - Type of training - Number of people trained - Relevance of the training

Improved coordination and management

- Information - Communication - Coordination - Engagement of volunteers - Collaborators - Regular meeting - Members concerns - Regular planning - Supervision - Monitoring evaluation - Infrastructure development - Technical support

Improved WRUAs performance in water catchment management

- Proper record keeping

- Fair implementation of the constitution/by-laws

- Consistency in implementation of sub-catchment management plans

- Reduced water use conflict.

Government policies and weather conditions

Improved accessibility and availability of resources

- Sources of resources

- Quantity of resources - Consistency of resources - Management of resources

30

The frame work shows three independent variables in the study. The researcher will assess the

expected performance of the water resources users associations in water catchment management

as the dependent variable through independent variable of the Education and training,

coordination and management and accessibility and availability of resources. Government

policies and weather conditions were some of the moderating variables of varying magnitudes.

The study will assess the education and training challenges through responses in level of

education, types of trainings impacted, frequency of trainings, number of trainings and the

relevance of those trainings to performance of WRUAs.

Coordination and management will be assessed through responses to WRUAs information

management, communication, co-ordination, engagement of volunteers, regular meetings are

held, presence of mechanisms to capture members concerns and holding of regular planning

sessions. The study will try to assess the collaboration support through responses from what the

members felt were their major needs which they were unlikely to meet on their own. The support

will be in form of supervision, monitoring and evaluation, infrastructure development, and

technical support services. The study will also assess how the WRUAs leadership manages its

resources to achieve its objectives.

These are some of the factors outside the WRUA control which may have influenced

performance. Under the WRUAs the major ones may include Government policies and weather

conditions.

Government policies may have influenced the environment in which the WRUAs are working

e.g. the new constitution places a lot of weight on the county Governments which might affect

the performance of WRUAs. Weather conditions may have influenced the river base flows and

which would have further affect the performance of WRUAs.

The performance process means continued benefits to the project beneficiaries’ for a long time

.The major objective of WRUAs according to water Act 2002 is to act as a fora for conflict

resolution and co-operative management of water resources in catchment areas through

implementation of sub-catchment management plans. Performance entailed doing all

tasks/activities to ensure that the water related conflicts are minimized in the WRUA’s

31

jurisdiction area. Performance therefore will be assessed through; proper record keeping, Fair

implementation of the constitution/bye-laws, consistency in implementation of the sub-

catchment management plans and reduction in water related conflicts.

2.17 Research gaps

Before the water Act 2002, a water resource was managed centrally by the government without

the involvement of the local users. In the development of Water Act 2002, the Government

recognized the need for public and communities participation in managing the resource, (Water

Act, 2002). The water Act 2002 does not spell out clearly on how the public and communities

will participate in managing the water resource in their catchment areas. It leaves to the

interpretation of the implementers of the act. A research gap exists to study on the ways in which

the public and communities can best be involved in the management of natural resources

especially water.

Since the enactment of the water Act 2002 and its subsequent implementation, 440 WRUAs have

been formed and strengthened in Kenya, but there has been no assessment so far been done on

the performance of these WRUAs, although the activity has consumed a substantial about of

resources.

The management of WRUAs devolves upon an executive committee which is elected from the

WRUAs members. This committee is supposed to work on voluntary basis (balancing household

needs and community engagement). According to studies carried out by Nyoroka, (2009) on

challenges facing sustainability of community based in Meru found out that volunteerism did not

seem to work in community based projects and the management of these projects were doing

nothing about it. The researcher recommends a further research on volunteerism as it relates to

performance of community based projects.

Grishvilli, (2003), notes that decision making by communities is a challenge resulting from

inadequate skills and knowledge, but Mwangi, (2006), notes that communities have adequate,

complete reliable information to implement their activities in order to meet their objectives.The

two findings contract each other and it is important to have an in-depth analysis of the capacity

building factors that influence WRUAs performance.

32

CHAPTER THREE

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

3.1 Introduction

This chapter covers the research methodology. The methodology include: research design, the

target population, sampling procedures, data collection procedures, tools and techniques of data

collection, pre-testing, validity, reliability, data analysis and ethical considerations.

3.2 Research Design

Descriptive and Correlation research methods were used in this study. Descriptive design was

used to collect data in order to answer questions concerning the current status of the subject of

study. It is the most appropriate in collecting data about characteristics of a large population of

this study in terms of cost effectiveness and time constraints. Descriptive design’s findings can

also be generalized which this study was aimed to achieve. Techniques of correlational design

research are particularly useful in social and behavioural investigations. Since this study aimed at

clarifying relationships correlational research was used. The tools used included the use of

structured questionnaires. The questionnaires were self administered to ensure a high return rate.

Interviews were also conducted to give in-depth information which might have been omitted by

the questionnaire. A quantitative method of data analysis was used in order to establish and

describe the degree of relationship between the independent variables and dependent variables.

The researcher determined how the following variables influenced the performance of WRUAs

in water catchment management; Education and training, coordination and management, and

availability and accessibility of resources. The survey was administered to 115 members out of

693 members of the 9 WRUAs in Tharaka – Nithi County.

3.3 Target population

The target population was the 693 members of the 9 WRUAs in Tharaka-County. The WRUAs

are geographically well spread within the study area. Purposive sampling was used to select four

employees of Water Resources Management Authority, five Mt. Kenya East Pilot Project for

Natural resources, two CDF Officers and four Ministry of water officers in the region and four

other staff of any other stakeholder working in the region were also be interviewed.

33

Table 3.1 WRUAs in Tharaka – Nithi County and their membership

WRUA NAME MEMBERSHIP

Gaki 40

Imema 78

Kagaka 45

Kamatha 30

Kiamuga 60

Kithino 170

Mutonga K.K. 55

Thaimeka 80

Tungu 135

TOTAL 693

Source: WRMA sub regional office Meru

3.4 Sampling procedure and sampling size.

This section covers sampling procedures and how sampling size was arrived at.

3.4.1 Sampling procedures

Sampling is the process of choosing the research units of target population which are to be

included in the study. Sampling was done because a complete coverage of the population is not

practically possible.

In this study, the researcher used both probability and non-probability sampling methods. The

non-probability techniques which were used were purposive. The researcher used purposive

sampling to deliberately select government and other stakeholder staff to be interviewed.

34

The researcher used stratified sampling method to make sure that all the 9 WRUAs are included

in the study then systematic random sampling procedure was used. This was achieved through

listing all the registered WRUAs committee members to get sampling frame which was later

subjected to sampling.

3.4.2 Sample size

The study used the Fischer`s formula in calculating the sample size which is based on the sample

for proportions, where by:

Z2*P*Q

n =

E2

Where:

n=the desired sample size

Z=the value corresponding to the level of confidence required (in this case 1.96

Corresponding to 95% Level of confidence)

P=Estimated level of an attribute that is present in the population (0.1 variability)

Q%= estimated level of the attribute that is not present in the population.

E%=desired level of precision (in this case 5%)

The adjusted minimum sample size was collaborated by use of the following formula for

correction for finite population

n0

n1 =

1+ (n0/N)

Where:

n1=adjusted minimum sample size

n0=minimum sample size as arrived at using the previous formula

35

N=the total known population.

The minimum sample size from the groups will be 115. A list of all 693 WRUA members will

be prepared. A systematic random sampling technique was used to identify the respondents.

Table 3.2 shows the name of the WRUA, membership and sample size. Sampling frame derived

from listing the WRUA members was done and then the members were allocated corresponding

numbers which was used to get respondents. The researcher used purposive sampling to select

five WRMA staff members, five Ministry of Water staff, five MKEPP staff, four CDF staff and

four other staff to represent other water stakeholders in the area for interviews.

Table 3.2 showing the name of the WRUA, WRUA membership and sample size

WRUA NAME MEMBERSHIP SAMPLE SIZE

Gaki 40 7

Imema 78 13

Kagaka 45 8

Kamatha 30 5

Kiamuga 60 10

Kithino 170 28

Mutonga K.K. 55 9

Thaimeka 80 13

Tungu 135 22

TOTAL 693 115

3.5 Instruments and Techniques of Data collection

The following are the tools and techniques which were used for data collection.

36

3.5.1 Focused –group interviews.

Focused –group interviews were used to explore and understand people's beliefs, experiences,

attitudes, behavior and interactions. It generated both non- numerical data and numerical data,

e.g. a beneficiary’s description, rather than a measure of their feeling and thereafter interpreted

accordingly for the purpose of assessing WRUAs performance. The discussions were

unstructured and free flowing and thus yield in-depth information. The approach was to bring

out target groups’ valuable insights being gained regarding people’s subjective perceptions; their

deep rooted beliefs and feelings. This targeted other stakeholders other rather than WRMA. One

group discussion was conducted for each of the following stakeholders MKEPP Staff, Ministry

of Water and Irrigation (MOW&I)staff, nine WRUA management committee members in all the

river basins; other stakeholder prominent group in each of the WRUA area of jurisdiction.

3.5.2 Interviews

These were conducted on one on one individual interview to explore their perspective on specific

topics. Interviews were done with five WRMA Staff through a guiding questionnaire.

3.5.3: Questionnaire

Questionnaires were administered to the 115 respondents selected randomly from the 693

members of the WRUA.

3.6 Pre-Testing

Before the research instruments were finally administered to participants, pre –testing for clarity

and flow using mock interviews were conducted. A pilot study was undertaken to further test

whether or not the questionnaire adequately captured all the information required in the study.

12 sample sizes were used for pre-testing representing about 10% of the sample size.

3.7 Validity

Validity as noted by Robinson, (2002) is the degree to which result obtained from analysis of the

data actually represents the phenomenon under study. Care was taken in constructing the

questionnaire and the pre-testing was done to identify and change any ambiguous, awkward, or

offensive questions as emphasized by Cooper and Schindler (2003). Expert opinion was

37

requested to comment on the representativeness and suitability of questions and give suggestions

on the structure of the tools. This helped in the improvement of the content validity of the data

that was collected.

3.8 Reliability

Reliability on the other hand refers to a measure of the degree to which research instruments

yield consistent results (Mugenda and Mugenda, 2003). The pre-testing aims at determining the

reliability of the research tools including the wording, structure and sequence of the questions.

The purpose of the pre-testing was to refine the research tools so that respondents in the major

study did not have problem in answering the questions. After pre-testing, the responses were

scored. The two parts of the instrument were treated as parts of the instruments. The scores of the

two parts were then mathematically correlated through the use of the spearman’s correlation

coefficient. It was found to be 0.85 for the questionnaire for the WRUA members, 0.9 for the

questionnaire for WRUA stakeholders and 0.93 or the questionnaire for WRMA staff, hence the

instruments used were reliable.

38

Table 3.3: Operationalization of variables

Research objectives Type of variable

Indicator Measuring of indicator

Data collection method

Level of scale

Tools of analysis

Type of analysis

1.Improved Education and training

- Academic qualification

- Types of training

- people trained

- Relevance of the training

Performance of WRUAs

Independent

Dependent

Level of education

Trainings conducted

people trained in each type of training

relevant trainings

Effectiveness of the WRUAs to achieve their objectives

No in each level

Categories of trainings

No trained

Level of relevance of trainings

Frequency of water resource conflicts

No of conflicts resolved

No of activities in the Sub-

Questionnaire

interview

documentary analysis

Ordinal

Ratio

Mean

percentage

Descriptive

Content

correlation

3.9 Operational definition of variables

39

catchment management plan implemented

-No of WRUA record keeping books well kept

2.Improved Coordination and management

- Information

- Communication

- Regular meeting

- Members concerns

Independent

Types of information

Channels of communication

Members meetings

concerns resolved

No

No

No

Level of satisfaction of

Ordinal

Ratio

Mean

percentage

Descriptive

Content

correlation

40

members

- Supervision

- Monitoring and evaluation

- Infrastructure development

- Technical

Performance of WRUAs

Dependent

Supervision visits

Visits

Infrastructures developed

Technical trainings

Effectiveness of the WRUAs to achieve their objectives

Frequency

Frequency

No

No trained

Frequency of water resource conflicts

No of conflicts resolved

No of activities in the Sub-

Questionnaire

interview

documentary analysis

Ordinal

Ratio

Mean

percentage

Descriptive

Content

correlation

41

catchment management plan implemented

-No of WRUA record keeping books well kept

3.improved accessibility and availability of Resources

- Sources of resources

- Quantity of resources

- Consistency of resources

- Management of resources

Independent

resources

resources

resources

management tools

Types and amounts

Types and amounts

Type and frequency

Types of records

No and types financial management trainings conducted

No

No

Level of consistence

No

Frequency

Questionnaire

interview

documentary analysis

Ordinal

Ratio

Mean

percentage

Descriptive

Content

Correlation

42

Performance of WRUAs

Dependent

Effectiveness of the WRUAs to achieve their objectives

Frequency of water resource conflicts

No of conflicts resolved

No of activities in the Sub-catchment management plan implemented

No of WRUA record keeping books well kept

Questionnaire

Interview

Documentary analysis

Ordinal

ratio

Mean

percentage

Descriptive

Content correlation

43

3. 10 Methods of data analysis

Data analysis is the critical examination of the coded data and making inferences. The collected

data was edited, coded and analyzed using statistical package for social sciences (SPSS). The

analysis output was presented in terms of tables. The qualitative data took an

exploratory/conceptual content analysis process. The researcher also used the Karl Pearson’s

product moment correlation analysis to assess the relationships between the independent and the

dependent variables.

3.11 Ethical Consideration

Ethical considerations in research can be defined as ensuring that the researcher conforms to the

standards of conduct of the authorities in the area of research. Examples of ethical issues that

may arise are voluntary participation of respondents, deception to participants, anonymity and

confidentiality of information given, analysis and reporting, harm or danger to participants and

any other professional code of ethics expected. To ensure that the research is done in an ethical

manner according to the expectations of all authorities, a letter from the university was obtained.

The researcher informed the respondents that the instruments being administered were for

research purpose only and the respondent’s identity was kept confidential. The researcher also

obtained an introductory letter from the university to collect data from the organization. Also,

due to sensitivity of some information collected, the researcher holds a moral obligation to treat

the information with utmost propriety. Further, since the respondents might be reluctant to

disclose some information, the researcher reassured the respondents of use of the information

and the confidentiality of identity of the informants.

44

CHAPTER FOUR

DATA ANALYSIS, PRESENTATION AND INTERPRETATION

4.1 Introduction

This chapter covers analysis of data and presentation of results on an assessment of how capacity

building factors influence the performance of water resource users associations in the

management of water catchment in Tharaka –Nithi County. The focus was on education and

training of community members, coordination and management and accessibility and availability

of resources. Both qualitative and quantitative data analysis results are presented.

4.2 Analysis

The survey fieldwork was conducted in the months of June and July 2012.The questionnaire was

administered by the researcher on 115 respondents and 115 respondents replied and therefore the

return rate was 100%. The researcher read and interpreted to the respondents each of the

questionnaire items when requested. The questionnaire provided a list of potential areas of

challenges facing the performance of water resource users associations which the respondent

rated.

4.2.1 General characteristics of the respondents

The general characteristics accessed in this section are gender and age of the respondents and the mean performance of the WRUAs under study.

4.2.1.1 Gender of the respondents

The results of the gender representation are shown on the table 4.1.

Table 4.1 Gender of the respondents

Gender Frequency Percentage

______________________________________________________________________________

Male 62 53.9

Female 53 46.1

Total 115 100.0

45

Table 4.1 shows that out of total of one hundred and fifteen (115) respondents who were

interviewed, sixty two (62) representing 53.9% were males and fifty three (53) representing

46.1% were females. This shows that both genders were active in the Water Resource Users

Association and in the management of the water catchment.

4.2.1.2 Age of the respondents

This section shows the age distribution of the respondents.

Table 4.2 Analysis of the ages of the respondents

Age Frequency Percentage _____________________________________________________________________________

26-30 22 19.1

31-45 39 33.9

46-55 32 27.8

56-Above 22 19.1

Total 115 100.0

______________________________________________________________________________

The table 4.2 shows most o the respondents are in the ages of 31-55 which is the most productive

ages in any society. There is little presentation of the youth (only 19.1%) who are 30 years and

below which could be interpreted to mean that the youth are in schools or colleges or working

elsewhere. The presentation of the population follows a normal distribution curve in a rural

setting in Kenya and specifically in the project area.

4.2.1.3 WRUA performance

The performance of the WRUAs was based on the questionnaire where the respondents were

asked to gauge the performance of their WRUA on a five grade scale:-very good, good, fairly

good, poor and very poor. The grades were then assigned numbers as follows: - very good-5,

good-4, fairly good-3, poor -2 and very poor -1.The marks were then used to get the mean

46

performance of each WRUA. The results obtained were then compared with the documentation

analysis in the WRMA office in Meru town. The documentary data analysis from WRMA

offices agreed with the primary data analysis of the WRUA performance.

Table 4.3 shows the mean performance of respective WRUAs.

Table 4.3 Mean WRUA Performance ________________________________________________________ Name of the WRUA Mean performance Tungu 3.74

Kagaka 4.25

Kamatha 3.40

Mutonga KK 4.11

Kiamuga 4.00

Imema 3.92

Kithino 3.91

Gaki 4.14

Thaimeka 4.15

Table 4.3 shows the Kagaka WRUA is the highest performing WRUA with mean performance

of 4.25 ,followed by Thaimeka with mean performance of 4.15 and the lowest performing

WRUA is Kamatha with a mean performance of 3.40. All the WRUAs lie between 3.4 and 4.25

which between the performance rating of between very good to fairly good.

47

4.2.2 Education and Training

This section covers the data analysis on education and training.

4.2.2.1 Education

Table 4.4 shows the education background of the respondents

Table 4.4 Education Background

Level of Education Frequency Percentage

______________________________________________________________________________ Primary 34 29.6

Secondary 59 51.3

Above secondary 22 19.1

_____________________________________________________________________________

Total 115 100

______________________________________________________________________________

Table 4.4 reveals that the majority of the WRUA members were primary school or secondary

school leavers. These were 34 and 59 respondents respectively representing a total of 29.6 and

51.3 % respectively. Only 19.1% had college or university education. The interpretation was that

those who had advanced education were not WRUA members since they were engaged

elsewhere. This would impact negatively on the performance of WRUAs.

48

Table 4.5 shows the relationship between the percentage of executive committee members who

have at least secondary education and performance of WRUAs.

Table 4.5 Relationship between the percentage of executive committee members with at

least secondary education and performance of WRUAs

_____________________________________________________________________________WRUA Name Mean %

performance Executive committee

with at least sec.

education

(X) ( Y) (X2 ) (Y2 ) ( XY)

Tungu 3.74 57.2 14.0 3271.8 213.9

Kagaka 4.25 62.5 18.1 3906.3 265.6

Kamatha 3.40 53.2 11.56 2830.2 180.9

Mutonga K.K 4.11 57.5 16.9 3306.3 236.3

Kiamuga 4.00 56.0 16.0 3136.0 224

Imema 3.92 55.4 15.3 3069.16 217.2

Kithino 3.91 54.5 15.2 2970.3 213.1

Gaki 4.14 58.2 17.1 3387.24 240.9

Thaimeka 4.15 62.2 17.2 3868.84 258

Totals 35.62 516.7 141.5 29746.1 2050.1

Correlation coefficient (r) = (NΣXY - (ΣX)(ΣY) ) / Sqrt([NΣX2 - (ΣX)2][NΣY2 - (ΣY)2]).

Table 4.5 has the details of the figures used in the formula and (r) the correlation coefficient is

0.768 showing that there is a strong positive relationship between the percentage of the executive

committee of the WRUA with education levels of at least secondary level and performance of

the WRUA. The higher the percentage of people with secondary education and above in the

49

executive committee the higher is the performance of the WRUA. The calculation of the

coefficient of determination (r2) and multiplying by 100 enables us to clearly interpret the linear

relationship between variables. The r2 in this case became (0.768*0.768= 0.59 or 59% after

multiplying by 100.

The results indicate that there is a moderately high positive linear (correlation coefficient of

0.768 and a coefficient of determination of 59%) relationship between the percentage of the

Executive of the WRUA with education levels of at least secondary education and mean

performance of the WRUA. It is in 59% of the cases where an increase in percentage of number

of executive committee with education levels of at least secondary level resulted in an increase

mean performance of the WRUA.

4.2.2.2 Training

Table 4.6 shows the types of trainings attended by the respondents in percentages per WRUA Table 4.6 Trainings attended per WRUA WRUA WDC SCMP By-laws and Group dynamics Proposal writing Training Training Constitution

Tungu 86.2 69 13.8 69 3.4

Kagaka 75 100 62.5 25 0

Kamatha 40 83 20.0 40 0

Mutonga K.K 88.9 66.7 66.7 22.2 33.3

Kiamuga 77.8 77.8 55.7 22.2 0

Imema 63.6 53 72.7 27.3 9.1

Kithino 71.4 28.6 85.7 14.3 28.6

Gaki 0 63.3 42.9 100 14.3

Thaimeka 46.2 61.5 46.2 92.3 0

__________________________________________________________________________________ Table 4.6 shows the most attended trainings in all WRUAs in descending order are WDC, SCMP and by-laws, constitution formulation and proposal writing.

50

Table 4.7 shows the correlation coefficients of the respective percentages of respondents who

attended WDC Training, SCMP training, by-laws and constitution formulation, group dynamics,

and proposal writing to the members of the WRUA and performance of the respective WRUA.

Table 4.7 Types of trainings and their correlation coefficient on performance of WRUAs

______________________________________________________________________________

Type of training Correlation coefficient(r) Coefficient of determination (r2 ) as %

WDC 0.01 0 .01

SCMP 0.03 0.09

By-laws and constitution 0.54 29

Group dynamics 0.13 1.69

Proposal writing 0.19 3.61

Table 4.7 shows that training by-laws and constitution formulation had comparatively highest

positive correlation coefficient (0.54) and coefficient of determination of 24%, followed by

proposal writing (0.19) and coefficient of determination of 3.61%, then group dynamics (0.13)

and coefficient of determination of 1.69%, then SCMP with correlation coefficient of 0 .03 and

coefficient of determination of 0.9% and lastly WDC with coefficient of determination of (.01)

and coefficient of determination of 0.01% .The interpretation was that for a WRUA to perform

properly it must have a strong bidding constitution and by-laws. This can only be achieved if all

the members of the WRUA have been trained on by-laws and constitution formulation. Proposal

writing is also a key factor of performance since for the WRUA to access external funding it

must apply for the funding through proposal writing. Training on group dynamics is also another

factor of performance since WRUAs are supposed to act as a forum for conflict resolution which

is taught in group dynamics.

51

Table 4.8 shows the relationship between the mean number of people who attend training and the performance of their respective WRUA.

Table 4.8 Relationship between the mean number of people who attend training and performance of WRUA

______________________________________________________________________________

Name of WRUA Mean

performance indicator ( X)

( X2)

Average members who attend trainings ( Y)

( Y2)

( XY)

Tungu 3.74 13.9876 32.8 1075.84 122.672

Kagaka 4.25 18.0625 51 2601 216.75

kamatha 3.4 11.56 25 625 85

Mutonga K.K 4.11 16.8921 41.23 1699.913 169.455

Kiamuga 4 16 25.6 655.36 102.4

Imema 3.92 15.3664 25 625 98

Kithino 3.91 15.2881 29 841 113.39

Gaki 4.14 17.1396 41.25 1701.563 170.775

Thaimeka 4.15 17.2225 34.6 1197.16 143.59

Totals 35.62 141.5188 305.48 11021.84 1222.032

Correlation coefficient (r) = (NΣXY - (ΣX)(ΣY) ) / Sqrt([NΣX2 - (ΣX)2][NΣY2 - (ΣY)2]).

Table 4.8 has the details of the figures used in the formula and the result is a Correlation

coefficient of 0.69 and the coefficient of determination of 47.6 % showing that there is a strong

positive relationship between the mean of the numbers of the WRUA who attend trainings and

performance of the WRUA. The higher the mean of people who attend trainings the higher is the

mean performance of the WRUA. The results imply that 47.6% of the cases, an increase in mean

52

number of WRUA members who attend trainings results in improved mean performance of the

WRUA. This can be interpreted to mean that the higher the number of people in the WRUA who

have been impacted the skills to manage the WRUA, the higher the performance of that WRUA.

Table 4.9 shows the applicability of the trainings in WRUA Management.

Table 4.9 Applicability of Training in WRUA Management

Frequency Percentage ____________________________________________________________ Very 95 82.6

important

Important 20 17.4

Total 115 100

Table 4.9 shows that 95 respondents corresponding to 82.6% felt that the trainings acquired were very important to WRUA management while 20 respondents corresponding to 17.4% felt that the trainings were important to the management of their WRUAs. The interpretation of the responses is that trainings acquired are related to performance of WRUAs.

4.2.3 Coordination and management.

This section will analyze the coordination and management factors that influence the

performance of WRUAs in water catchment management.

53

4.2.3.1 Information

Table 4.10 shows how information is stored in the respective WRUA.

Table 4.10 Information storage in the respective WRUAs

Head Folders Computers

Tungu 15.4 89.7 2.6

Kagaka 12 87.5 0

Kamatha 0 10 0

Mutonga KK 11.1 100 0

Kiamuga 14.3 100 0

Imema 0 100 0

Kithino 0 11 0

Gaki 0 100 0

Thaimeka 7.7 84.6 7.7

Table 4.10 shows that all the WRUAs used folders for the information storage. Only two

WRUAs (Tungu and Thaimeka) are using a computer for the information storage. The

interpretation of the finding is that most of the WRUAs are in the impact stage in information

technology and this might affect their performance.

54

Table 4.11 shows the correlation co-efficient of form of information storage in relation to performance of WRUAs

Table 4.11 Correlation co-efficient of form of information storage and performance of WRUAs

Correlation co-efficient Coefficient of determination

______________________________________________________________________________

Use of head -0.0776 -0.6

Use of folders 0.3 9

Use of computers 0.16 2.5

Table 4.11 shows that there is weak negative correlation between increased in uses of head as a

tool for information storage with mean performance of the WRUA. The higher the percentage

use of head as a tool for information storage the lower the performance. Uses of both folders and

computers have a positive weak correlation with performance. The use of computers has a very

low correlation with performance since most of the WRUAs had recently bought them at the

time the study was being carried out and hence little impact on performance. It is only in 2.5% of

the cases where an increase computer use resulted in an increase in performance of WRUAs.

55

4.2.3.2 Communication

Table 4.12 shows the percentages of communication channels used by various WRUAs.

Table 4.12 Name of WRUA Vs percentage of various communication channels

Communication channel

Name of WRUA Word of mouth Letters Telephone Email ______________________________________________________________________

Tungu 28.2 61.5 79.5 0

Kagaka 50 11.25 50 0

Kamatha 0 40 60 0

Mutonga KK 37.5 87.5 62.5 12.5

Kiamuga 0 22.2 100 0

Imema 16.7 25 83.3 0

Kithino 9.1 45.5 90.1 0

Gaki 0 42.9 57.1 0

Thaimeka 0 23.1 76.9 0

Table 4.12 shows that only one WRUA (Mutonga K.K) use email as a communication channel.

All the WRUAs used letters and telephone as a means of communication with varying

percentages. The interpretation of table 14 is that the low usage of internet as a channel for

communication might have a negative effect on performance of the WRUAs since most

development partners presently use internet as the preferred means of communication.

56

4.2.3.3 Motivation factors

Table 4.13 shows the percentages of various factors that motivate community to be WRUA

members.

Table 4.13 percentages of various factors that motivate community members to be WRUA

members

What motivates WRUA Legality of the Benefit from the WRUA Volunteerism

Members WRUA

Percentage 0.8 45.4 53.8

______________________________________________________________________________

Table 4.13 shows that most of the community members were motivated by volunteerism

(53.8%), benefit accrued from the WRUA (45.4%) and legality of the WRUA (0.8%). Most of

the community members therefore voluntarily joined the WRUA.

Table 4.14 shows motivation factors cross tabulated against respective WRUAs.

Table 4.14 Name of the WRUA against motivation factors

WRUA Name WRUA legality WRUA benefit Volunteerism

Tungu 0 30.3 75.8

Kagaka 0 87.5 50

Kamatha 0 25 75

Mutonga KK 11.1 66.7 55.6

Kiamuga 0 25 75

Imema 0 75 66.7

Kithino 0 40 60

Gaki 0 100 0

Thaimeka 0 61.5 53.8

57

Table 4.14 shows that only one WRUA whose members are motivated by its legality to join the

WRUA. The other WRUAs their members were motivated by the benefits of the WRUA and

volunteerism.

Table 4.15 shows the relationship between WRUA performance and benefits accrued from the WRUA

Table 4.15 Relationship between WRUA performance and benefits accrued from the WRUA.

WRUA name Mean Benefit accrued

Performance from WRUA

______________________________________________________________________________

(X) (Y) (X2) (Y2) (XY)

Tungu 3.74 30.3 14 918.1 113.3

Kagaka 4.25 87.5 18.1 7656.3 371.9

Kamatha 3.4 25 11 625 85

Mutonga KK 4.11 66.7 16.9 4448.9 274.1

Kiamuga 4 25 16 625 100

Imema 3.9 75 15.4 5626 294

Kithino 3.9 40 15.3 1600 156.4

Gaki 3.14 100 17.1 10000 414

Thaimeka 4.15 61.5 17.2 3782.25 255.2

______________________________________________________________________________

Totals 35.60 511 141.52 35280.48 2064.0

58

Correlation coefficient (r) = (NΣXY - (ΣX)(ΣY) ) / Sqrt([NΣX2 - (ΣX)2][NΣY2 - (ΣY)2]).

Table 4.15 has the details of the figures used in the formula and the result is a Correlation

coefficient of 0.712 with a coefficient of determination of 51%. This shows there is a strong

positive correlation between mean of WRUA performance and the benefit accrued from the

WRUA. The results mean that in 51% of the cases an increase benefit accrued from the WRUA

results in improved mean performance of the WRUA.

Table 4.16 shows the relationship between WRUA performance and volunteerism. Table 4.16 Relationship between WRUA performance and volunteerism

WRUA name Mean Volunteerism

Performance

(X) (Y) (X2) (Y2) (XY)

Tungu 3.74 75.8 14 5745.6 283.5

Kagaka 4.25 50 18.1 2500 212.5

Kamatha 3.4 75 11. 5 625 255

Mutonga KK 4.11 55.6 16.9 3091.4 228.5

Kiamuga 4 75 16 5625 300

Imema 3.9 66.7 15.4 4448.9 261.5

Kithino 3.9 60 15.3 3600 234.6

Gaki 3.14 0 17.1 0 0

Thaimeka 4.15 53.8 17.2 2894.44 223.3

______________________________________________________________________________

Total 35.60 511.9 141.52 33530.33 1998.8

______________________________________________________________________________

59

Correlation coefficient (r) = (NΣXY - (ΣX) (ΣY) / Sqrt([NΣX2 - (ΣX)2][NΣY2 - (ΣY)2]).

Table 4.16 has the details of the figures used in the formula and the result is a Correlation

coefficient of -0.554 with a coefficient of determination of 30.8%. This shows there is a negative

correlation between mean of WRUA performance and increase in the members of the WRUA

who joined the WRUA voluntarily. The results mean that in 30.8% of the cases an increase in

members of the WRUA who volunteered to join results in a decrease in mean performance of the

WRUA.

4.2.3.4 Collaboration of the WRUAs

Table 4.17 shows how WRUAs collaborate with stakeholders.

Table 4.17 WRUA collaboration with stakeholders

WRUA Name WRMA WSTF MKEPP CDF

______________________________________________________________________________

Tungu 89.5 46.2 87.2 0

Kagaka 75 12.5 100 0

Kamatha 20 0 100 0

Mutonga KK 100 0 100 0

Kiamuga 80 0 90 0

Imema 54.9 0 93.3 0

Kithino 90.1 0 100 0

Gaki 14.3 0 100 0

Thaimeka 46.2 15.4 100 7.7

______________________________________________________________________________

Table 4.17 shows that only two stakeholders (WRMA and MKEPP) are active in all the

WRUAs. WSTF is active in three WRUAs although it has low impact. CDF is only active in one

WRUA (Thaimeka) out of the nine studied WRUAs. The above table shows that there are very

few collaborators in WRUA activities. This may affect negatively the performance of the

60

WRUAs since they have at initial stages of implementing the activities and they require external

assistance noting that MKEPP which is highly felt in the study area is ending in September 2012.

4.2.3.5 Other coordination and management issues

The respondents rated other aspects of coordination and management as raised in the questionnaire and the results based on the frequency distribution on each item are shown in table 4.18.

Table 4.18 Other Coordination and management results in percentage

No. Question Agree not Dis- highly Cum %

decided agree disagree

1. WRUA holds meeting 97.4 2.6 0 0 100 100

According to –by laws

2. Coordination ensures 97.6 2.6 0 0 100

Collaboration is part of

Joint planning sections.

3. WRUAs need infrastructure 99.1 0.9 0 0 100

development support

4. Currently WRUA needs 98.3 1.7 0 0 100

equipment to function optimally

5. WRUA needs technical support 98.3 1,7 0 0 100

6. Training slots are fairly shared 95.6 2.6 1.7 0 100

7. The WRUA members have 95.6 2.6 1.8 0 100

Mechanism to capture member

concerns

8. Consistent implementation 94.7 3.5 1.8 0 100

Of SCMP

61

Coordination was assessed through:- holding of regular meeting according to by-laws where

97.4% agreed, collaboration where 97.6% agreed, training distributed uniformly where 95.6%

agreed , WRUA members have a mechanism to capture members concerns where 95.6 % agreed

and whether WRUA is implementing SCMP with 94.7 agreeing. The presented results indicated

good coordination and management. All the above points towards good coordination and

management which may be a possible source of good mean performance of the WRUAs which

were rated in the range of 3-5 which was between fairly good and very good.

On the questions on whether the WRUA required any external support to function optimally the

assessment found out that 99.1% agreed on infrastructure development, 98.3% agreed on

equipment support and 98.3 % agreed on technical support. The interpretation of these results is

that the WRUAs are not yet self –sustaining and that collaboration with external development

partners is a factor of WRUA performance.

Table 4.19 shows various collaboration support given to different WRUAs

Table 4.19 WRUAs and various collaboration support given in percentage.

WRUA Name Supervision Monitoring Evaluation Infrastructure Technical support

Development

Tungu 48.7 51.3 2.6 41 56.4

Tagaka 25 62.5 25 0 62.5

Kamatha 0 0 0 0 100

Mutonga KK 11.1 56.6 0 0 88.9

Kiamuga 0 0 0 0 100

Imema 0 63.6 0 0 45.5

Kithino 0 0 0 0 100

Gaki 0 0 0 0 100

Thaimeka 0 0 0 0 92.3

62

Table 4.19 shows that all the WRUAs get technical support, four WRUAs get monitoring support, three WRUAs get supervision support, two WRUAs get evaluation support and one WRUA gets infrastructure development support. This table supports table 4.18 where majority of the respondents agreed that WRUAs required an external support to function optimally.

Table 4.20 shows the cross tabulation between consistent implementation of SCMP and WRUA performance.

Table 4.20 Cross tabulation between consistent implementation of SCMP and WRUA performance

Consistent implementation of WRUA performance

SCMP Very good Good Fairly good Cumulative

______________________________________________________________________________

1 highly agree 0 83.3 16.7 100

Agree 8 75 14 100

Not decided 0 75 25 100

Disagree 0 50 50 100

______________________________________________________________________________

The table 4.20 shows that of those who highly agreed that their WRUA was implementing

SCMP consistently, 83.3% also rated their WRUA as good, of those who agreed that their

WRUA was implementing SCMP consistently 83% rated their WRUA as good, of those not

decided on whether their WRUA is implementing SCMP consistently, 75% rated their WRUA as

good and those who disagreed that their WRUA was implementing their SCMP consistently 50%

agreed their WRUA was performance was good.

Table 4.20 shows that that the higher the respondents agreed that the WRUA was implementing

the SCMP consistently the higher they also agreed that the performance of their WRUA was

good. This shows that there is a positive relationship between consistent implementation of

SCMP and performance of WRUAs.

63

Table 4.21 shows the cross tabulation between WRUA Performance and WRUA holding

meetings according to the by-laws.

Table 4.21 Cross tabulation between WRUA performance and WRUA holding meetings

according to by-laws

WRUA Performance WRUA holding meetings according to by-laws

Highly agree Agree

Very good 33.3 66.7

Good 24.1 74.7

Fairly good 16.1 77.8

______________________________________________________________________________

Table 4.21 shows that of the respondents who rated their WRUA as very good 33.3% highly

agreed that their WRUA holds meetings according to by-laws, respondents who rated their

WRUA has good 24.1% highly agreed that their WRUA held meetings according to their by-

laws, of the respondents who rated their WRUA fairly good, 16.1% highly agreed that the

WRUA was holding meetings according to their by-laws.

Table 4.21 therefore shows that the higher the rating of performance of the WRUA higher the

respondents highly agreed that the WRUA was holding meetings according to their by-laws. This

shows that there is a high positive relationship between WRUA performance and WRUA

holding meetings according to their by-laws.

64

4.2.4 Accessibility and reliability of resources.

This section accesses the accessibility and reliability factors that influence performance of WRUAs.

4.2.4.1 Sources of funds

Table 4.22 shows financial resources from different stakeholders.

Table 4.22 Financial resources from different stakeholders.

Source Percentage

_____________________________________________________________________________

Members subscription fee 70

Income generating activities 22

Others stakeholders (external sources) 8

Total 100

Table 4.22 shows that most of the funding of the WRUA activities comes from members

subscription fees (70%), followed by income generating activities (22%) and the external sources

of funding accounts for only 8%. This low external funding might affect the performance

WRUAs negatively since most of their WRUA activities require higher heavy funding which is

beyond the reach of WRUA members.

65

Table 4.23 shows the cross tabulation of various WRUAs and sources of finance.

Table 4.23 Cross tabulation of various WRUAs and Their sources of finances

WRUA Name Source of finance

Members subscription fee Income generating activities Others

Tungu 100 56.4 25.6

Kagaka 37.5 87.5 0

Kamatha 100 0 0

Mutonga KK 100 33.3 11.1

Kiamuga 100 11.1 0

Imema 100 0 0

Kithino 100 0 0

Gaki 85.7 0 14.3

Thaimeka 100 0 0

Table 4.23 shows that all of the WRUAs fund their income generating activities from members

subscription, whereas 0nly four WRUAs get funding from income generating activities and only

3 of the WRUAs said they get external funding. This agrees with table 20 which indicated that

only 8% of the funding comes from external sources. Table for 4.22 and 4.23 therefore points to

the fact that the WRUAs get little funding from external sources which might mean that

implementation of WRUA activities might take longer than planned and hence affect the

performance of the WRUA.

66

4.2.4.2 Quantity and types of resources

Table 4.24 shows the assessment of whether WRUAs has adequate resources to meet the expenditure needs.

Table 4.24 WRUAS and their expenditure requirements

Adequate resources to meet WRUA expenditure needs

WRUA Name Yes No

______________________________________________________________________________

Tungu 0 100

Kagaka 0 100

Kamatha 0 100

Mutonga KK 0 100

Kiamuga 10 90

Imema 7.7 92.3

Kithino 0 100

Gaki 0 100

Thaimeka 0 100

______________________________________________________________________________

Table 4.24 shows that only two WRUAs (Kiamuga and Imema) said that they have adequate resources to meet WRUA expenditure needs; otherwise all other WRUAs require extra funding. This shows that inadequate funding of WRUAs affects their performance.

Table 4.25 shows the various correlation coefficient and coefficient of determination for various types of resources received by the WRUAs and WRUA Performance.

67

Table 4.25 Correlation coefficient and Coefficient of determination for various types of resources received by the WRUA and WRUA performance.

Source of resources Correlation co-efficient Coefficient of determination as %

Materials 0.81 66

Funds 0.7 49

Human resource 0.33 11

Table 4.25 shows that material resource has the highest positive correlation coefficient (0.81)

comparatively with coefficient of determination of 66% followed by funds resource (0.7) with

coefficient of determination of 49% and lastly human resource (0.33) with coefficient of

determination of 11%. The interpretation of this table is that stakeholders prefer to assist

WRUAs in material form and hence the high positive correlation coefficient of material resource

to performance of WRUAs.

4.2.4.3 Consistency of funds and resources.

Table 4.26 shows the cross tabulation of WRUAs and consistency in receipt of resources.

Table 4.26 WRUAs and consistency of resources

Very consistency Average consistency not consistency

Tungu 23.1 71.8 5.1

Kagaka 37.5 50 12.5

Kamatha 0 80 20

Mutonga KK 0 100 0

Kiamuga 0 30 50

Imema 0 61.5 30.8

Kithino 0 27.3 72.7

Gaki 0 85.7 14.3

Thaimeka 0 84.6 15.4

68

Table 4.27 only two WRUA have indicated that they have very consistency flow of funds.

Table 4.27 shows the relationship between WRUA performance and consistency in flow of funds

WRUA name Mean Flow of funds

Performance

(X) (Y) (X2) (Y2) (XY)

______________________________________________________________________________

Tungu 3.74 87.5 14 7656.25 327.25

Kagaka 4.25 94.9 18.1 9006.01 403.33

Kamatha 3.4 60 11 3600 204

Mutonga KK 4.11 83 16.9 6889 341.13

Kiamuga 4 64 16 4096 256

Imema 3.9 69.2 15.4 4788.64 271.26

Kithino 3.9 67.3 15.3 4489 261.97

Gaki 3.14 85.7 17.1 7344.49 354.80

Thaimeka 4.15 84.6 17.2 7157.16 351.09

______________________________________________________________________________

Total 35.60 695.9 141.52 55026.55 2770.83

______________________________________________________________________________Correlation coefficient (r) = (NΣXY - (ΣX)(ΣY) ) / Sqrt([NΣX2 - (ΣX)2][NΣY2 - (ΣY)2]).

Table 4.27 has the details of the figures used in the formula and the result is a Correlation

coefficient of 0.65 with coefficient of determination of 42% showing a strong positive

correlation between mean WRUA performance and consistency in flow of funds. The results

69

mean that in 42% of the cases, an increase in consistency of flow of funds result in increase

mean performance of the WRUA.

4.2.4.4 Management of resource

4.2.4.4.1 Record keeping

Table 4.28 shows cross tabulation of the WRUA and financial monitoring system used.

Table 4.28 Number of WRUA and financial monitoring system used

Financial monitoring

Systems used No of WRUAs Percentages

______________________________________________________________________________

Receipts 9 100

Cash books 6 67

Ledger books 7 78

Bank statement 7 78

______________________________________________________________________________

Table 4.28 shows that all the 9 WRUAs representing 100% use receipts,7 WRUAs (78%) use

ledger books, then 7 use bank statement and 6 (67) use cash books. This shows some of the

WRUAs have not yet opened bank accounts which might affect the WRUA performance.

Table 4.29 shows the cross tabulation between WRUAs and other records kept.

Table 4.29 No of WRUAs and other records kept. ______________________________________________________________________________ Other records No of WRUAs Percentages ___________________________________________________________________________ Attendance register 8 89

Minute book 9 100

Asset register 7 78

70

Table 4.29 shows that 100% of the WRUAs use minute book, 89% of the WRUAs use

attendance register and 78% of the WRUAs use asset register. This shows that most of the

WRUAs have the required necessary financial records to manage the WRUA.

The respondents rated other aspects of resource management as raised in the questionnaire and

the results based on the frequency distribution on each item are shown in table 4.31

Table 4.30 shows other aspects of resource management

Question Agree Not Dis- Highly cumulative %

decided agree Disagree

1. WRUA keeps

Records properly 93 6.9 0 0 100

2. Minimal complain 90 6 2.6 1.7 100

From WRUA Members

On management of

Resources

3. WRUA members 99.1 0.9 0 0 100

needs external support e.g. financial

Management and book keeping

Table 4.30 shows that proper record keeping was indicated by 93% of the respondents, 90%

indicated there was minimal complain on WRUA management of the resources. This indicates

that the WRUA members had confidence on the way their financial resources are managed.

Good management of resources is therefore positively related to good performance of the

WRUAs since the WRUAs performance was rated between fairly good and very good. There is

therefore good indication that improvement in resource management leads to improved

performance of WRUAs. However 99.1% said that they still require external support in

management of their financial resource.

71

CHAPTER FIVE

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, DISCUSSIONS, CONLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1 Introduction

This chapter contains summary of findings in three areas namely education and training,

coordination and management and availability and accessibility of resources, discussions,

conclusions and recommendations derived from the resource.

5.2 Summary

Below are the summary of the findings on education and training, coordination and management

and availability and accessibility of resources.

5.2.1 Education and training

This section gives the summary of findings on education and training

5.2.1.1 Education Descriptive statistics revealed that the majority of the WRUA members (80.9%) were in primary

school or secondary school leavers. Only 19.1% had college and university educations.

There is a moderately high positive linear (correlation coefficient of 0.768 and a coefficient of

determination of 0.59) relationship between the percentage of the Executive committee of the

WRUA with education levels of at least secondary education and mean performance of the

WRUA. It is in 60% of the cases where an increase in percentage of number of executive

committee with education levels of at least secondary level resulted in an increase mean

performance of the WRUA. This means that the higher the number of the executive committee

with at least secondary education resulted in an increase in mean performance of the WRUA.

5.2.1.2 Training

Assessment of various types of trainings of offered showed that training by-laws and constitution

formulation had comparatively highest positive correlation coefficient of (0.54) and coefficient

of determination of 24%, followed by proposal writing (0.19) and coefficient of determination of

3.61%, then group dynamics (0.13) and coefficient of determination of 1.69%, then SCMP with

correlation coefficient of (0 .03) and coefficient of determination of 0.09% and lastly WDC with

72

coefficient of determination of (0.01) and coefficient of determination of 0.01%. This means that

different types of trainings have varying impact on performance of the WRUA.

There is a positive correlation between the mean numbers of the WRUA members who attendant

training and WRUA performance with correlation coefficient of 0.69 and the coefficient of

determination of 47.6 %. The higher the mean of people who attend trainings the higher is the

mean performance of the WRUA. The results mean that in 47.6% of the cases an increase in

mean number of WRUA members who attend trainings results in improved mean performance of

the WRUA. This means the higher the number of people who attend trainings in a given WRUA

the higher the performance.

5.2.2 Coordination and management

Descriptive statistics on information flow indicated that 100% of the respondent from seven

WRUAs representing 78% agreed or highly agreed that information flow upwards and

downwards was good.

On information storage it was found out that there is weak negative correlation between

increases in the use of head as a tool for information storage with mean performance of the

WRUA. The higher the percentage use of head as a tool for information storage the lower the

performance. The analysis shows that use of head as a information storage is not reliable and can

easily be lost hence leading to poor performance. Use of both folders and computers has a

positive weak correlation with performance. It is only in 2.5% of the cases where an increase

computer use resulted in an increase in performance of WRUAs.

On communication channels used by the WRUAs it was found out that only one WRUA used

email as a communication channel representing 11% of the WRUAs. All the WRUAs used

letters and telephone as a means of communication with varying percentages. This shows that

WRUA are not up to date with the recent communication technologies.

On motivation it was found that most of the community members were motivated by

volunteerism (53.8%), benefit accrued from the WRUA (45.4%) and legality of the WRUA

(0.8%). Most of the community members therefore voluntarily joined the WRUA.

73

A correlation between WRUA mean performance and volunteerism and benefits accrued from

the WRUA was done and the result revealed that there is a strong positive correlation between

mean of WRUA performance and the benefit accrued from the WRUA with a correlation

coefficient of 0.712 and a coefficient of determination of 51%. The results mean that in 51% of

the cases an increase benefit accrued from the WRUA results in improved mean performance of

the WRUA. On other hand correlation between WRUA performance and volunteerism showed a

negative correlation of -0.554 with a coefficient of determination of 30.8%. This shows there is

a negative correlation between mean of WRUA performance and increase in the members of the

WRUA who joined the WRUA voluntarily. The results mean that in 30.8% of the cases an

increase in members of the WRUA who volunteered to join results in a decrease in mean

performance of the WRUA.

On WRUA collaboration with stakeholders it was discovered that only two stakeholders

(WRMA and MKEPP) are active in all the WRUAs. This implies that there are few stakeholders

in the study area who have shown interest in supporting WRUA activities. WSTF is active in

three WRUAs although it has low impact. CDF is only active in one WRUA out of the nine

studied WRUAs representing 11%of all the WRUAs.

Coordination and management was also assessed through various aspects and descriptive

statistics indicated that:-holding of regular meeting according to by-laws where 97.4% agreed,

collaboration where 97.6% agreed, training distributed uniformly where 95.6% agreed, WRUA

members have a mechanism to capture members concerns where 95.6 % agreed and whether

WRUA is implementing SCMP with 94.7 agreeing. The presented results indicated good

coordination and management. All the above indicators points towards good coordination and

management which may be a possible source of good mean performance of the WRUAs which

were rated between fairly good to very good.

On whether the WRUA required any external support to function optimally the assessment found

out that 99.1% agreed on infrastructure development, 98.3% agreed on equipment support and

98.3 % agreed on technical support. This shows that there is a strong positive relationship

between external support and performance of the WRUA.

74

Descriptive statistics found out that those who highly agreed that their WRUA was implementing

SCMP consistently, 83.3% also rated their WRUA as good, those not decided on their WRUA

implementing SCMP consistently 75% rated their WRUA as good and those who disagreed that

their WRUA was implementing their SCMP consistently 50% agreed their WRUA was

performance was good. This shows that there is a positive relationship between consistent

implementation of SCMP and performance of WRUAs.

Descriptive statistics also revealed that of the respondents who rated their WRUA as very good

33.3% highly agreed that their WRUA was holding meetings according to their by-laws,

respondents who rated their WRUA has good 24.1% highly agreed that their WRUA held

meetings according to their by-laws, respondents who rated their WRUA fairly good 16.1%

highly agreed that the WRUA was holding meetings according to their by-laws. This shows that

the higher the rating of performance of the WRUA higher the respondents highly agreed that the

WRUA was holding meetings according to their by-laws. This shows that there is a high positive

relationship between WRUA performance and WRUA holding meetings according to their by-

laws.

5.2.3 Accessibility and reliability of resources.

Descriptive statistics revealed that most of the funding of the WRUA activities comes from

members subscription fees (70%), followed by income generating activities (22%). External

sources of funding accounts for only 8%. This low external funding of WRUAs might affect the

performance WRUAs negatively since most of their WRUA activities require higher heavy

funding which is beyond the reach of WRUA members presently.

Descriptive statistics also revealed that only two WRUAs (12%) whose members (10% for

Kiamuga and 7.7% for Imema) said that they have adequate resources to meet WRUA

expenditure needs, otherwise all other WRUAs require external funding. This shows that

inadequate funding of WRUAs affects their performance.

When different types of resources which the WRUAs get was correlated it was found out that

material resource has the highest positive correlation coefficient (0.81) comparatively with

coefficient of determination of 66%, followed by funds resource (0.7) with coefficient of

determination of 49% and lastly human resource (0.33) with coefficient of determination of 11%.

75

This can be interpreted to mean that WRUAs get more material support than other types of

support.

The correlation coefficient between mean WRUA performance and consistency in flow of funds

by the WRUAs is 0.65 with coefficient of determination of 42% showing a strong positive

correlation between mean WRUA performance and consistency in flow of funds. The results

mean that in 42% of the cases, an increase in consistency of flow of funds result in increase

mean performance of the WRUA.

Descriptive statistics revealed that 100% of the WRUA used receipts, 77% of the WRUAs use

ledger books, then 77% use bank statement and 66% use cash flow. This shows some of the

WRUAs have not yet opened bank accounts which might affect the WRUA performance.

Descriptive statistics also revealed that proper record keeping was indicated by 93% of the

respondents,90% indicated there was minimal complain on WRUA management of the

resources. This indicates that the WRUA members had confidence in the management of their

financial resource. Good management of resources is therefore positively related to good

performance of the WRUAs since the WRUAs performance was rated between fairly good and

very good. There is therefore good indication that improvement on resource management leads

to improved performance of WRUAs. However 99.1% said that they still require external

support in financial resource management.

5.3 Discussion

The results of the study have clearly answered the research objectives and research questions

since the effects of education and training, coordination and management, availability and

accessibility to resources on performance of WRUAs in water catchment management have been

quantified by descriptive statistics and the coefficients of determination.

The results on the effect of education on management of community groups especially WRUAs

is contrary to the popular belief that education is not a factor of leadership and once elected any

leader can lead successfully. The study found out that in 60% of the cases where an increase in

percentage of number of executive committee with education levels of at least secondary level

resulted in an increase mean performance of the WRUA. The findings agrees with JICA (2003)

76

studies on sustainable community water projects in 11 Districts in three provinces of Kenya

namely; rift-valley, Central and Eastern which indicated that community based water projects

were not performing as expected due to varies challenges including high illiteracy rate in the

WUA leading to low technology adoption. This is also supported by studies done by UNDP

(2004) on empowerment and poverty reduction in Kathmandu, Nepal which found out there is a

strong positive relationship between knowledge and capacity building. UNDP concluded that

greater investments should be made in establishing greater education systems and opportunities

for continued learning and greater support post –secondary education reforms, continued

learning and domestic knowledge services.

There is a positive correlation between the mean numbers of the WRUA members who attendant

training and WRUA performance. The results indicate that in 47.6% of the cases increase in

mean number of WRUA members who attend trainings results in improved mean performance of

the WRUA. This is supported by Grishvilli (2003) studies on situation analysis of community

based organization in Georgia, USA which found out that inadequate skills and knowledge were

the challenges which affect decision making by project implementing communities. Having

adequate and competent community leaders is an important factor of performance of community

based projects (Mancini, 2003). Adequate trained community leaders are important for effective

performance: Mancini, 2003 quotes Glazer (1981), Marek, Mancini and Brock, 1999. Mancini,

(2003) on studies done on sustaining community based programmes in Virginia, USA indicated

that good performance is related to continuity issues of community leaders in influencing

performance which include education qualification and adequate training.

Assessment of various types of trainings offered to the WRUA showed training on by-laws and

constitution formulation had comparatively highest positive impact on performance followed by

proposal writing, then group dynamics, then SCMP and lastly WDC. This is supported by Water

Act 2002 and WRMA rules (2007). According to WRMA rules (2007) management of WRUAs

is enshrined in their constitution and a more detailed management provisions are contained in by-

laws made subsidiary to the constitution. For a WRUA to be registered as a legal entity it must

be able to formulate a constitution and by-laws which are submitted to Attorney General’s

Chamber for approval. The water Act 2002 recognized the formation of WRUAs as a fora

conflict resolution and co-operative management of water resources in the catchment areas. The

77

WRUAs can only be effective in conflict resolution if is trained on group dynamics which

includes conflict resolution.

On information storage it was found out that there is weak negative correlation between

increased in uses of head as a tool for information storage with mean performance of the WRUA.

On communication channels used by the WRUAs it was found out that only one WRUA used

email as a communication channel representing 11% of the WRUAs. The higher the percentage

use of head as a tool for information storage and low use of technology lowers the performance

of WRUAs. This is supported by studies carried out by Nele (2008) on Bwathonaro WRUA in

Meru North on integrated water resources management – a case study of Bwathonaro Water

Resource Users Association which found out that there is a strong relationship between

knowledge management and sharing and level of resistance to change.

On motivation it was found that most of the community members were motivated by

volunteerism (53.8%), benefit accrued from the WRUA (45.4%) and legality of the WRUA

(0.8%). Most of the community members therefore voluntarily joined the WRUA.

A correlation between WRUA mean performance and volunteerism and benefits accrued from

the WRUA was done and the result revealed that there is a strong positive correlation between

mean of WRUA performance and benefit accrued by the members. The results found out that in

51% of the cases an increase benefit accrued from the WRUA results in improved mean

performance of the WRUA. On other hand correlation between WRUA performance and

volunteerism showed there is a negative correlation between mean of WRUA performance and

increase in the members of the WRUA who joined the WRUA voluntarily. The results mean that

in 30.8% of the cases increase in members of the WRUA who volunteered to join results in a

decrease in mean performance of the WRUA. This is supported Mancini (2003) studies on

sustaining community based programmes for families program development in Virginia, USA

which found out that an organization ability to adapt to community needs/members needs

strongly influence its ability to continuously provide services that make a difference in quality of

life. On the other hand studies carried out by Belgium administration cooperation (1999) on

assessment of Water Users Associations in Kajiando, Kenya found that WUAs managed projects

78

was between poor and pathetic because they were electing their leaders on voluntary basis. The

study found out that the elected volunteers had no skills or expertise to handle financial issues.

On WRUA collaboration with stakeholders it was discovered that only two stakeholders

(WRMA and MKEPP) are active in all the WRUAs. WSTF is active in three WRUAs although it

has low impact. CDF is only active in one WRUA out of the nine studied WRUAs representing

11%of all the WRUAs. This shows that there is low collaboration of the WRUAs with

stakeholder hence influencing negatively on the performance of WRUA. This is supported by

projects done by Nele (2008) on integrated water resource management – a case study of the

Bwathanaro Water Resource Users Association in Meru North which found out that although

indicators reflect a positive impact of its work, WRUAs faced several operational challenges

including enabling environment that facilitates not only establishment but also the

operationalization of the WRUA in terms of external support. These operational challenges

influence the performance of the WRUA. On whether the WRUA required any external support

to function optimally the assessment found out that 99.1% agreed on infrastructure development,

98.3% agreed on equipment support and 98.3 % agreed on technical support. This shows that

there is a strong positive relationship between external support and performance of the WRUA.

Mwangi (2007) on studies carried out on community organization and action with special

reference to Kenya, found out that having contact with other institutions, projects and groups

with strategic importance to the project can result healthy exchange of approaches and resources.

This is supported by studies carried out by Nyoroka (2009) on community projects in Meru

which found out that community based projects required a lot external support to sustain

themselves.

Descriptive statistics revealed that most of the funding of the WRUA activities comes from

members subscription fees (70%), followed by income generating activities (22%).External

sources of funding accounts for only 8%. This low external funding might affect the performance

WRUAs negatively since most of their WRUA activities requires higher heavy funding which is

beyond the reach of WRUA members presently.

Descriptive statistics also revealed that only two WRUAs (12%) whose members (10% for

Kiamuga and 7.7% for Imema) said that they have adequate resources to meet WRUA

79

expenditure needs, otherwise all other WRUAs require extra funding. This shows that inadequate

funding of WRUAs affects their performance.

The correlation coefficient between mean WRUA performance and consistency in flow of funds

by the WRUAs is 0.65 with coefficient of determination of 42% showing a strong positive

correlation between mean WRUA performance and consistency in flow of funds. The results

mean that in 42% of the cases an increase in consistency of flow of funds result in increase mean

performance of the WRUA.

The above findings are supported by many researchers; Mancini, (2003) studies on sustaining

community based programmes for families program development implication from longitudinal

research, Virginia States University found out that adequate funding is a factor of performance.

Mulwa (2008) studies on quality impacts assessment of community projects found out that

different sources of funding will influence directly or indirectly, the implementation of

community based projects due to the conditions that go with them as well as the volume each

strategy is likely to earn.

Descriptive statistics also revealed that proper record keeping was indicated by 93% of the

respondents,90% indicated there was minimal complain on WRUA management of the

resources. This indicates that the WRUA members had confidence in the management of their

financial resource. Good management of resources is therefore positively related to good

performance of the WRUAs since the WRUAs performance was rated between fairly good and

very good. There is therefore good indication that improvement on resource management leads

to improved performance of WRUAs. This is supported by study by UNDP (2004) on

empowerment and poverty reduction, Kathmandu, Nepal which states that accountability

measures facilitate better performance and efficiency. Lack of accountability measures in

organization allows for the proliferation of corruption which lowers performance of the

organizations.

80

5.4 Conclusions

From the analysis on education and training, coordination and management and accessibility and

availability the study found out that an increase in percentage of number of executive committee

with education levels of at least secondary level resulted in an increase in performance of the

WRUA. In practice education is rarely considered when electing officials of WRUAs. Once

WRUA officials are elected they undergo a lot of training in order for them to carry-out the

mandate of the WRUA. The trainings are carried out in English and Kiswahili languages. The

implications of electing officials who have never gone to school or of primary level education is

that they might not fully understand the trainings which they will undertake hence the

performance of that specific WRUA where that official comes from will reduced.

There is a high positive relationship between number of WRUA members training and WRUA

performance. In practice when WRUA trainings are being conducted only WRUA executive

committee members are trained leaving out the other WRUA members. This implies that for

WRUA to function properly, the trainers should try to cover all the WRUA members in their

trainings since the leadership of the WRUA is based on election and any member of the WRUA

can be elected a leader. It also implies that for the WRUA activities to be owned and accepted by

all the WRUA members a lot of awareness creation and training is necessary to all the WRUA

members.

The analysis found out that various types of trainings conducted have varying influence on

performance. Training on constitution and by-laws formulation and group dynamics led in the

trainings which have the highest positive impact on WRUA performance. This implies that the

constitution and by-law formulation is the cornerstone of WRUAs. Any WRUA which is not

well trained on constitutional making implies that it will form a very weak constitution. Since

constitution is a management and governance tool that WRUA with weak constitution will not

perform has expected.

There is a strong positive correlation between the benefits the WRUAs get and performance of

the WRUA. This implies that adaptability of the WRUA on members needs is an important

element of performance.

81

The analysis also found out those WRUAs that have high number of volunteers working for the

WRUA have lower performance. The relationship between volunteerism and performance is

therefore negative. This implies that the since volunteerism is affecting the performance of

WRUAs negatively then all stakeholders in water management should look the issue and design

alternatives.

Analysis also found that there are few collaborators in WRUA activities in the study area. This is

influencing the performance of the WRUA negatively since the WRUAs have not developed

internal mechanisms to sustain themselves presently. This implies that if the WRUAs are left on

their own in the current state they will not sustain themselves and might collapse in the long run.

This therefore means that the WRUAs require diversified consistent external support to improve

their performance until they reach sustainability stage. The support should be in terms of

technical, infrastructure, equipment and human resources.

5.5 Recommendations

In practice WRUA members rarely consider education as criteria for electing WRUA officials. A

new criteria of getting effective WRUA officials who apart from attaining at least secondary

education are willing to acquire knowledge and skills and willingness to serve the community

well.

It is important to carry out training needs assessment before carrying out any training on WRUA

members. Since various types of training have varying influence over performance it is always

important to rank trainings in order of influence and concentrate more on those trainings that

have the highest performance impact.

When assisting the WRUAs to develop the Sub Catchment Management Plan it is important to

carry out PRA or RRA in order to capture community needs and benefits in the Sub Catchment

Management Plan.

There is need for the WRUAs to be capacity built not only in training but on skills on networking

and information and knowledge management.WRUAs should be supported in technical support,

infrastructure , equipment and human in order to assist the WRUAs to become self sustaining.

82

5.6 Suggestions for further research

Most of the WRUAs in the study area were assisted to be formed and capacity built by MKEPP

project. After MKEPP project ends in September 2012 the WRUAs will be managed by

executive committee who are elected members of the community on voluntarily basis. A study to

establish on how executive committee members can be more effective would assist improving

the performance of the WRUA.

A study to establish how best WRUAs can reward or motivate volunteers or how best to address

human resource is necessary. Other options of motivating project volunteers need to be explored

especially for them to be able to devote more time and better commitment to project work for

enhanced output/deliverables.

A research to establish reasons as to why increase in volunteerism in the WRUA management

decreases WRUA performance must be established to assist in the improvement of WRUA

performance.

Other capacity building factors that were not considered in this study can also be researched on

to understand more deeply on issues of capacity building and how it relates to the performance of

the WRUA.

83

REFERENCES

Adhikari P. K., & Risal, R.N, (2006). An exploration of prevalence and sustainability of

community based organization in Nepal.

Alaerts, G. T., Harvest, F.J.A., Patorni F.M. (1996). Water sector Capacity building.

Australian Agency for International Development. (2000). Promoting practical sustainability.

Baker, K. & Campbell, N. (2003). The complete guide to project management (3rd edition). New

York alpha books.

Belgium Administration for Development Co-operation. (1999). Water Users Associations

support project. Kajiado District feasibility study report.

Blackburn, J., & Holland, (1998). Institutionalizing participation in Development.

Chambers R. (1994). The Origins and Practice of Participatory Rural Appraisal.

Claudio, S. (2004). The Community development Dilema: When are services delivery, capacity

building, Advocacy and social mobilization really empowering. Retrieved 17TH April from

http://mailto:aviva@netnam.org.vn.

Cole, G. (1995). Organization Behaviour.

Cooke, B. & Kothari, U. (2001). Participation: the new tyranny.

Cooper & Schindler, D. (2003). Business Research Methods ( eigth edition). New York.

Croxton, Fredrick, E., Dudley, J., Cowden & Sidney K. (1986). Applied general statistics (third

edition). Printer S &v Isaac Pitman and sons LTD London.

Dearden, P., & Parker, (1991). In service training needs assessment: A guide to the assessment of

training needs.

Deborah, E. (1997). Capacity –building: An approach to people –Centered development.

Falkenmark & Lingh (1976).Water for starving World.

Food and Agriculture Organisation. (1997). Participation in practice: from the FAO people’s

participation. Retrieved 20th May 2012 from <http://www.fao.org.

Frederick, G., & Lori, F. (2009). Research Methods for the behavioural sciences.

Government of Kenya. (1992). National Water Master Plan.

Government of Kenya.(1999).Kenya water policy review and strategic formulation

Government of Kenya. (2007). National Water Services strategy for the years 2007-2015(1999).

Government Printer. (2002). Water Act 2002.

Government Printer. (2007). Water Resources Management Authority Rules.

84

Gray, S. (1994). Project Management issues. The Open University.

Grishvilli, D. (2003). Final report on situation analysis of community based organization in

Georgia.

Grobal Environment Facility. (2003). Review of Financial Arrangements in GEF supported

Biodiversity Project Monitoring and Evaluation- Paper II.

Institute of Water and Sanitation Development. (1995). Project Planning and Management. A

training module for rural water supply and sanitation personnel.

International Fund for Agricultural Development. (2003). Mount Kenya East Pilot Project for

Natural Resources Management: Appraisal Report.

International Rescue Committe. (1997). Water Supplies Managed by rural communities.

Isham, J. (1999). Institutional determinants of the impacts of community based water system.

Ivancevich, M., Peter, L., Sleven, J., Phillip, B., Crosby, (1997).Management quality and

competitiveness (2nd Edition). Irwin Macgraw-Hill, USA.

Japan International Cooperation Agency. (2003). Project research on Development of

Sustainable Community based Irrigation and Drainage Schemes in Kenya.

Khwaja, A. (2001). “Can good projects succeed in bad communities?” Harvard

University:Washington D.C.

Ki-moon, B. (2012). Ensuring access to water for agriculture is vital for sustainable future.

Retrieved from http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?

Kleemeter, E. (2000). The impact of participation on sustainability: “An analysis of the Malawi

rural piped scheme program.” World Development.

Kothari, C. (2007). Quantitative Techniques (Third Edition). Vikas Publishing House PUT Ltd,

New Delhi.

Mancini, J., Marek, L., & Book D. (2003). Sustaining Community Based Programs and family

development implications.A research at Virginia State University.

Michael, M. (2004). Capacity Building for Water Supply projects in the Gash Barka Region of

Eritrea.

Mike F & Laurie K, (2005). Project Management: Open University, Zrinksidd, Croatia.

Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock Development. (1986). Small Holder Irrigation Projects in

Rural Development.

85

Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources. (2002). Country Strategy on integrated Water

Resources Management.

Ministry of Water and Irrigation. (2004). WRMA newsletter

Ministry of Water and Irrigation. (2007). The water news-June- July 2007

Ministry of Water and Irrigation. (2007). WRMA Rules 2007

Ministry of water and Irrigation. (2008). Ministry of Water and Irrigation strategic plan 2009-

2012.

Mintzberg, H. (1979). The nature of managerial work

Mkirigia, J. (2010). Factors Affecting the Performance of private water firms in delivery of water

services.

Mt. Kenya East Pilot Project for Natural Resources. (2010). Annual report.

Mt. Kenya East Pilot Project for Natural Resources. (2011). Annual report.

Mugenda, O., & Mugenda,A. (2003). Research methods: Quantitative & Qualitative Approaches.

Muketha, J. (2006). Project Monitoring and Evaluation (unpublished). Kenya Institute of

Administration, Nairobi.

Mullins, L. (1996). Managed an organizational Behaviour .

Mulwa, F. (2000). Demystifying Participatory Community Development. Paylines Publication

Africa, Nairobi Kenya

Mulwa, F. (2007). Participatory monitoring and evaluation of community project community

based project monitoring quality impact assessment and people friendly evaluation

methods. Zapt chancery research publishers Eldoret Kenya.

Mulwa, F. (2008). Demystifying participation community development (2nd edition). Pay-Lines

publication Africa, Nairobi, Kenya.

Muriithi, M. (2010). Factors influencing successful implementation of the community based

water projects in Kenya.

Mwangi, W. (2006). Project Planning and Administration, Department of Sociology,

Anthropology and Economics, Egerton University, Njoro, Kenya

Mwangi, W. (2007). A Leader in Community Organization with special reference to Kenya.

Nele, F. (2008). Integrated Water Resources Management for Conflict Transformation – A Case

Study of Bwathonaro WRUA (unpublished, Master’s of Arts Thesis).

86

Norman, R. (2000). Rural community development.

Nyoroka, M. (2009). An assessment of the challenges facing the sustainability of community

based projects.

Oakley, (1991). Projects with people: The practice of participation in rural development.

Patrick, D. (2012). Determining sample size; Balancing Power, Precision and Practicality.

Robinson, P. (2002). Understanding reliability and validity in qualitative research.

Sera, J. & Katz, T. (1998). Making rural water supply sustainable.

The 4C’s – working group. (2003). A framework for shared community stewardship.4C’s

principles, elements, barriers, projects and tools.

United Nations. (2009). United nations 2000-2008 millennium development goals indicators-The

official united nationals’ site for the MDC indicators.II 7&8: Proportion of population

using improved drinking water source. Retrieved from http://

unstats.un.org/unsd/mdg/data.aspx

United Nations Development Programme. (2004). Nepal National Human Development Report:

Empowerment and Poverty Reduction, Kathmandu, Nepal.

United Nations Environmental Programme. (2005). Co-ordinating body on the Seas on East

Asia; case study of coral reef monitoring and management projects.

United Nations Environmental Programme. (2006). Case studies of Coral Reef Monitoring and

Management Projects (2004, 2005). Water Resources Management Authority. (2009).

Catchment Area Management Strategy.

Water Resources Management Authority. (2009). Annual progress report

Water Resources Management Authority. (2010). Annual progress report

Water Resources Management Authority. (2011). Annual progress report.

Water Services Regulatory Board. (2009). Impact report. Water and Sanitation Coverage.

Water Services Regulatory Board. (2009). Impact Report. Water Service Quality.

Wikipedia. Defination of capacity building.Retrieved from http://

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/capacitybuilding

Wim, S. & Guy,H. (1995). Water sector policy review and strategy formulation. A general

framework.

87

World Bank – Post Conflict Fund, (2003) .Workshop on closing the gap on community

integration activities; learning from inter-urgency collaboration fund final report

World bank. (2004). Arid Lands Resource Management Project. Community –Driven

development Manual.

World Customs Organization. (2011). Definition of capacity building. Retrieved on 4th June

2011 From http://www.wcoomd.org/home.htm.

World Health Organization & United Nations Children’s Fund- Joint Monitoring Programme

(JMP). (2008). Water Supply and Sanitation. Retrieved from http://www.wssinfo.org.

World Health Organization & United Nations Children’s Fund- Joint Monitoring Programme

(JMP). (2010). Water Supply and Sanitation. Retrieved from http://www.wssinfo.org.

88

APPENDICES

Appendix I: Introduction letter.

Francis Koome Simon

P.O. Box 996 -60100

EMBU

17th April 2012

Dear Sir/Madam,

RE: REQUEST FOR PARTICIPATION IN A RESEARCH STUDY

I am a final year Masters of art student at the University of Nairobi. My area of specialization is

Project Planning and Management. I am currently undertaking a research on “INFLUENCE OF

CAPACITY BUILDING ON PERFORMANCE OF WRUAS IN THARAKA-NITHI

COUNTY”.

I will be grateful if you could spare sometime from your busy schedule and complete the

enclosed questionnaire. All the information provided will be used purely for academic purposes

only and your identity will be treated with utmost confidentiality.

Thank you for your cooperation.

Yours faithfully,

FRANCIS KOOME SIMON

89

Appendix II: Questionnaire for the WRUA committee

Instructions please tick in the appropriate bracket or provided spaces

Date……………………………………

NAME OF WRUA…………………..

SECTION A GENERAL DATA

1) Gender

Male ( )

Female ( )

2) What is your age in years

26 – 35 ( ) 36-35 ( )

46-55 ( ) 56 and above ( )

3) Education background

Primary ( ) Secondary ( ) College ( )

University ( ) Post graduate ( )

4) Are you a member of a WRUA? Yes ( ) No ( )

5) If yes, how did you become a member?

a member of a WUA ( )

a riparian member ( )

a representative of an industry ( )

a representative of an institution ( )

an ex-official member ( )

Other (specify) ( )

6) Is there any other condition you must fulfill in order to become a member of WRUA

Yes ( ) No. ( )

7) If yes, is there subscription fees required to be paid by a member?

Yes ( ) No ( )

90

8) If yes, what are they?

Membership fee ( )

Monthly subscription fee ( )

Yearly subscription fee ( )

Other contribution (Describe) ( )

9) Does your WRUA have a constitution?

Yes ( ) No ( )

10) Does your WRUA have By-laws?

Yes ( ) no ( )

11) If yes, how effective are your the by-laws

very effective ( )

Effective ( )

Moderately effective ( )

Little extent ( )

Not at all ( )

12) Are you a member of the executive committee? Yes ( ) No ( )

13) If yes, how were you chosen

Election ( )

Selection ( )

Appointment ( )

Other (Specify) ( )

14) How long have you been a member of the WRUA committee

1-3yrs ( )

4-6 yrs ( )

6-8 yrs ( )

Above 8 years ( )

15. Does your WRUA have a sub-catchment management plan?

Yes ( )

No ( )

91

16. If yes is the WRUA implementing the sub-catchment management plan consistently?

I highly agree

Agree ( )

Not decided ( )

Disagree ( )

Highly disagree ( )

17) What benefits have you received from being a WRUA member

………………………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………………………

18) How can you gauge the performance of your WRUA?

Very good ( )

Good ( )

Fairly good ( )

Poor ( )

Very poor ( )

SECTION C: TRAINING

19) How many trainings have you attended since you became a member of this WRUA?

1-3 ( )

3-5 ( )

5-8 ( )

Above 11 ( )

20) Have you attended any training more than once yes ( ) no ( )

92

21) If yes, how often since you became a committee member?

Twice ( )

Thrice ( )

Four times ( )

Five times ( )

More than five times ( )

22) What is the average number of trainees who attend those trainings? ( )

23) List the training attended?

………………………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………………………

24) Rate the importance of training attended and their applicability in the management of the

WRUA

Very important ( )

Important ( )

Little importance ( )

No importance ( )

25. Training slots are shared fairly amongst WRUA Members

I highly agree ( )

Agree ( )

Not decided ( )

Disagree ( )

Highly disagree ( )

93

D: COORDINATION AND MANAGEMENT

26 )How does the WRUA official’s communicate with your members and other

stakeholders?

Word of mouth ( )

Letters ( )

Telephone ( )

E-mail ( )

Other (specify) ( )

27) How do you store WRUA information?

Head ( )

Folders ( )

Computers ( )

Other specify ( )

28) Do you have a physical office? yes ( ) no ( )

29) If yes, what else is in that office?

Chairs ( )

Desks ( )

Stationery ( )

Computers and accessories ( )

Other (specify) ( )

30) The flow of information downwards and the upwards is good.

I highly agree ( )

Agree ( )

Not decided ( )

Disagree ( )

Highly disagree ( )

31) Are you a paid employee of WRUA? Yes ( ) No ( )

94

32) If yes, how are you paid?

Allowances ( )

Monthly payment ( )

Daily payment ( )

Others (specify) ( )

33) If no, what motivates you to work for the WRUA?

………………………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………………………

34) WRUA holds meeting according to your by-laws.

I highly agree ( )

Agree ( )

Not decided ( )

Disagree ( )

Highly disagree ( )

35) Do you have any collaborators in management of your River basin?

Yes ( ) No ( )

36) If yes, what kind of collaboration is there?

Supervision ( )

Monitoring ( )

Evaluation ( )

Infrastructure ( )

Development ( )

Technical support ( )

37. Coordination ensures collaboration is part of joint planning sections. I highly agree ( )

Agree ( )

Not decided ( )

Disagree ( )

Highly disagree ( )

95

38) .We need infrastructure development support in our WRUA to develop our water catchment.

I highly agree ( )

Agree ( )

Not decided ( )

Disagree ( )

Highly disagree ( )

39).Currently WRUA needs equipments to function optimally

I highly agree ( )

Agree ( )

Not decided ( )

Disagree ( )

Highly disagree ( )

40).WRUA needs technical support especially carrying out studies in our water catchment.

I highly agree ( )

Agree ( )

Not decided ( )

Disagree ( )

Highly disagree ( )

41) We need infrastructure development support in our WRUA to develop our water catchment.

I highly agree ( )

Agree ( )

Not decided ( )

Disagree ( )

Highly disagree ( )

96

42) Currently WRUA needs equipments to function optimally

I highly agree ( )

Agree ( )

Not decided ( )

Disagree ( )

Highly disagree ( )

43) WRUA needs technical support especially carrying out studies in our water catchment.

I highly agree ( )

Agree ( )

Not decided ( )

Disagree ( )

Highly disagree ( )

44) How do you gauge your collaboration with the following stakeholders

Very

collaborative

collaborative Fairly

collaborative

Not

collaborative

WRMA

WSTF

MKEPP

CDF

Other (specify)

45) Has there been any change in water related conflicts since the WRUA was formed?

Yes ( ) No ( )

46) If yes, how is the change?

Reduced ( )

Increased ( )

97

E: RESOURCES

47) What are the sources of resources to finance WRUA operations?

Member’s subscription fee ( )

Income generating activities ( )

WSTF ( )

Others (specify) ( )

48) What kind of resources do you get?

Material ( )

Funds ( )

Human resource ( )

49) How is the consistency of resources received?

Very consistency ( )

Average consistency ( )

Not consistent ( )

50) What financial systems do use to monitor your expenditure?

None ( )

Ledger books ( )

Cash flow ( )

Receipts ( )

Bank statements ( )

Financial software ( )

Others (specify) ( )

51) What other records do you keep?

Attendance register ( )

Minutes book ( )

Asset register ( )

Others (specify) ( )

98

52) According to your assessment are these record kept properly?

I highly agree ( )

Agree ( )

Not decided ( )

Disagree ( )

Highly disagree ( )

53) The WRUA members have mechanism to capture members concerns/problems /suggestions for its use?

I highly agree ( )

Agree ( )

Not decided ( )

Disagree ( )

Highly disagree ( )

54) There has been minimal complain from WRUA Members on management of resources I highly agree ( )

Agree ( )

Not decided ( )

Disagree ( )

Highly disagree ( )

55) WRUA members needs external support in technical areas like financial management and book keeping

I highly agree ( )

Agree ( )

Not decided ( )

Disagree ( )

Highly disagree ( )

56) Are the resources received enough to meet your WRUAs expenditure?

Yes ( ) No ( )

57) If No, what do you think can be done to improve your resources base?

………………………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………………………

99

Appendix III: Questionnaire for WRUA stakeholders to guide in the interviews

1) How does your institution collaborate with WRUAs in your area of jurisdiction?

………………………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………………………

2) According to your opinion what can be done to improve your institution collaboration with

WRUAs?

………………………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………………………

3) What improvements do you think can be done to improve the performance of WRUAs?

………………………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………………………

4) From your experience are WRUAs relevant in the management of water resources in the

river basin?

………………………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………………………

100

Appendix IV: Questionnaire to WRMA staff

1) How long have you worked for WRMA?

1-5 Years ( )

5-10 years ( )

Over 10 years ( )

2) Education background?

Primary ( )

Secondary ( )

College ( )

University degree ( )

Post graduate ( )

3) Do you work directly with WRUAs?

Yes ( ) No ( )

4) If yes, how often do you meet then?

Once in a week ( )

Once in a month ( )

Quarterly ( )

Yearly ( )

Other (specify) ( )

5) How many WRUAs are you assigned to?

1-5 ( )

5-10 ( )

10-15 ( )

Above 15 ( )

6) What is your assignment to the WRUA?

………………………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………………………

101

………………………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………..

7) Since you were assigned to work with WRUAs, have you attended any training?

Yes ( ) No ( )

8) If yes, which trainings?

………………………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………………………

9) Gauge your effectiveness in working with WRUAs.

Very effective ( )

Effective ( )

Fairly effective ( )

Not effective ( )

10) What can be done to improve your work?

………………………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………………………

……………………………………………………………………………………………

102

AppendixV: Map of project area (Yellow, orange and purple colour shows WRUAs along Tungu, Mutonga / Kithino and Kathita River Basin).

(Source: MKEPP-NRM)