WCAW.org :: WCAW at World Water Forum 5 in Istanbul Turkey 16-25 March 2009

WCAW at World Water Forum 5 in Istanbul Turkey 16-25 March 2009

Posted on Jan 8, 2010. This article has been read 334 time(s).

WCAW at World Water Forum 5 in Istanbul Turkey 16-25 March 2009

WATER GOVERNANCE IN MALAYSIABy Ngai Weng Chan, PhDProfessor of Universiti Sains Malaysia President of Water Watch PenangEmail: nwchan@usm.myMalaysia is a country richly endowed with copious rainfall and rich water resources, but ironically many parts of the country are subject to water stress. Droughts had occurred in 1977 and 1978, devastating the padi crop in most of the irrigation schemes in Northwest Peninsular Malaysia. In 1982 and 1991, drought resulted in drop of the water levels of the Pedu and Muda dams dropping to critical levels, resulting in cancellation of the off-season crop. In 1998, an El Nino related drought also caused severe water stress in Kedah and Penang, but caused severe water rationing in Kuala Lumpur and Petaling Jaya for many months. In 2002, drought destroyed thousands of hectares of padi in Perlis and many areas also suffered water stress. With 3000 mm of rain per year and about 20,000 m³ of renewable water per capita per year, the above water problems can only mean that there is mismanagement. Hence, water problems in Malaysia is not an issue of scarcity as much as it is an issue of governance. To substantiate this point, the authorities have used the water problems as an excuse to shift the governance of the water sector from government control to private hands. Hence, privatization of water supply and raising water tariffs were preferred governance options as privatisation was seen as the panacea to all of Malaysia’s water woes. Consequently, since the Mahathir period of active privatization of government utilities since the early 1980s, many states have privatized some or all of their water supply functions. Unfortunately, however, this form of water governance has not yielded the success that it claims but on the other hand have led to losses and failures in the privatization (Chan, 2004a). Hence, civil society has argued strongly against privatization (Santiago, 2005). Traditionally, water governance in Malaysia is largely based on a top-down approach. Under this approach, the Water Supply Department (JBA) under the various state governments’ machinery builds the dams, treatment plants, main pipes and supplies the water to the consumers. This approach is also characterized by a water supply management (WSM) approach. This approach has been found wanting as consumers do not cooperate. Water consumers should be allowed to play a more active role as a “partner” of the water authorities via participation in the privatization exercise, fixing of water tariffs, conservation and recycling of water, water education and awareness and the ultimate aim of creating a “Water Saving Society” in Malaysia. The authorities need to employ a more “rakyat friendly” by allowing the public, including NGOs, to play a greater role in water management via consultation and participation in all developments relevant to water. Water is everybody’s business and everyone’s responsibility ranging from the government to water corporations, water authorities, water companies, consultants, industries (including hotels, resorts and theme parks), businesses, NGOs, and the citizenry. All should work together in a partnership to ensure that water resources are exploited sustainably in the best economic manner that does not harm the environment but guaranteeing everyone access and protecting the need of future generations with adequate and clean water. Governance is of utmost importance in determining whether a country succeeds or fails in its water management. The World Bank defines two types of water governance regimes: First, there is “Good governance” which is epitomised by “…predictable, open and enlightened policy-making, a bureaucracy imbued with professional ethos acting in furtherance of the public good, the rule of law, transparent processes, and a strong civil society participating in public affairs.” (Santiago, 2005). In terms of “Poor governance”, however, the World Bank says it is “…characterised by arbitrary policy making, unaccountable bureaucracies, un-enforced or unjust legal systems, the abuse of executive power, a civil society unengaged in public life, and widespread corruption.” Elsewhere, the UNDP defines governance in the following way: It is “… among other things participatory, transparent and accountable. It is also effective and equitable. And it promotes the rule of law.” In short, governance is about the exercise of power in managing a nation’s affairs, in this case the management of water resources. UNDP’s activities at the 3^rd World Water Forum in Japan in March 2003 highlighted the importance of water governance. UNDP together with its partners committed to continue the Dialogue on Effective Water Governance, among other things, to follow up actions as a part of the Type II Partnership for Effective Water Governance. For example, UNDP Malaysia presented the Urban Governance Initiative (TUGI), highlighting a tool that helps to promote good water governance which has a score card that allows people to assess the quality of local water services from a governance perspective. Such a level of governance is experienced in Penang state whereby Water Watch Penang, an NGO, is working in close-partnership with the government and the private sector in ensuring good governance of the water sector (Chan, 2007). However, despite claims that the country is undergoing a civil society revolution with the proliferation of NGOs and other civil society groups, much of water governance, as is the case of governance of other sectors, is still largely run by a top-down government machinery. Moreover, when government has relinquished such powers of governance to the private sector, the power of governance is then left in the hands of powerful companies with close connections to those in power. Hence, it is not surprising to see power being exercised in the governance of water resources in the country that lacks transparency, accountability and professionalism. For example, Santiago (2005) has lamented that when the town of Kluang experienced water shortages between July 2005 and Nov 2005, it was discovered that the water was being channelled to a 2000-acre agri-business farm and a 700-hectare oil palm estate. How and why people are placed as second to business is beyond comprehension. Because of bad governance, people believe that the Johor state government has compromised the peoples’ right to water, and that the state government has acted in favour of agri-business interests as opposed to the collective interests of 200,000 citizens (Santiago, 2005). This is bad governance to say the least. Santiago (2005) has also alledged that bad governance is to blame for the non-transparent water concession agreement between Syabas and the Federal and the Selangor state governments. How can a government agreement that affects water supply to hundreds of thousands of citizens be considered as “Classified”? This is not only bad governance but totally disrespectful of citizen rights. Santiago (2205) asks “Why is the concession agreement still a secret? Is there a role for civil society and consumers in the governance structure of the concession?” Equally, lack of transparency resulted in consumers in Selangor, Putrajaya and Kuala Lumpur being excluded in water tariff increase discussion. In Malaysia, however, legislation and the role of law in water governance is strong. There are sufficient laws to ensure water governance is governed by law. Unfortunately, enforcement of laws is loose and ineffective due to poor governance practiced by those in charge. Water governance in Malaysia has a long history, with legal providing the legitimate and legal framework for water governance. Most laws and rules related to water in Malaysia relate to the protection of water resources, prevention of pollution and thefts, abstraction, treatment and supply of water but fail to underline the social aspects such as the principles of water management, the rights and responsibilities of states, private sector and individuals. But new laws have been passed that can better take care of issues of water ownership and access; water protection and development, environmental flow and ecosystem protection. More recently, the Federal Government has initiated a move to transfer water governance from State Governments to the Federal Government. Although governance implies a shift in authority from state governments to federal government, critical issues remain regarding how one should locate power and authority in the area of water governance. This appears to throw the privatised water companies into disarray as the Federal Government would have to literally “buy” back the privatized rights from the private companies. Hence, while most countries are decentralizing their water governance, Malaysia is going the opposite direction by centralizing its water governance. All over the world, the debate on decentralisation versus centralisation in the water sector is a continuing one. In some countries, there are indications favouring centralisation while elsewhere, there are also trends facing decentralisation. However, many countries are moving towards decentralisation as it is argued that centralisation does not take local stakeholder knowledge and interests into account; but that it imposes a top-down approach which often benefits the vested interests of the rich and powerful while undermining the poor and the powerless. Furthermore, decentation can be more cost-effective and can improve local democratic control over water resources and make government more transparent and accountable. Chan (2004b) stresses that stakeholder participation in water governance is imperative in ensuring sustainable management of water resources. This is because without the support of all stakeholders, both domestic and international water governance will not succeed. There will be wastage, abuse and non-cooperation as the water management is deemed to only benefit a minor section of involved parties. Involving the people affected in decision-making in the water sector elicits better response and cooperation. When people feel that ownership of water resources, they are more motivated to cooperate and implement whatever decision arrived at. Involving all stakeholders in governance also becomes more inclusive as it actively engages people generally excluded from the decision-making and policy process (e.g. the poor, the powerless, women, indigenous groups, squatters, illegal immigrants, etc). Obviously, stakeholder involvement also enhances fairness of the decisions made in the water sector. In modern societies, stakeholders are well educated and are often water experts who can contribute substantially to management of water resources. Clearly, more transparent and greater stakeholder/public empowerment governance structures are needed to improve governance of the water sector in Malaysia. Finally, other than the above mentioned issues, Santiago (2005) mentioned that there are many challenges to better water governance in Malaysia. First, the country is confronted with the following questions: Is government-managed or private-control water sector more efficient? Second, are the examples currently on public and private sectors management practising good or bad governance? Thirdly, is the public good served in an open, transparent, and democratic manner? Fourthly, are there enlightened policy making coupled with a bureaucracy committed to excellence and the welfare of the people? And finally, is there strong NGO and peoples’ participation in the governance of water resources? All these questions need to be addressed adequately before Malaysia can claim that it is successful in water governance. Moreover, even if it is considered successful (for example in comparison to neighbouring South-east Asian countries countries), Malaysia may not be at par in water governance efficiency when compared with developed countries. Moreover, success in water governance need not necessarily be measured in terms of the usual water industry KPIs such as high profits, percentage of population served, low non-revenue water rates, or low water tariffs but should incorporate other socio-environmental KPIs such as access to the poor, public consultation, involvement of stakeholders, CSR, environmental indicators, recycling, etc.In conclusion, water governance in Malaysia can be considered successful in the sense that water is served to more than 95 % of the population, water tariffs are some of the cheapest in the world, the poor is not denied access, and water supply is 24 hours per day. However, there are many areas that need improvement to achieve better governance in water management. One is to improve Government-controlled water departments (JBAs) by ensuring their workers are well-trained and committed to excellence, public service and integrity instead of the usual laid-back government-servant mentality. Secondly, politicians should be barred from interfering in the water sector. Currently, despite claims of non-interference, it is widely believed that many water companies are linked to powerful politicians, the awarding of contracts and the setting up of contracts not fully transparent, and that tariffs are also influenced by politicians. Within the JBAs that run the water supply, politicians that govern should act on the professional advice of the civil service and not the other way around. Santiago (2005) has also claimed that under the current scenario, politicians have successfully subjugated the civil service in order to promote their personal and political agenda. Thirdly, much like the entire government machinery, the Prime Minister has launched a war against corruption since coming into office in 2003. In the water sector, there should also be an all-out war on corruption, both in the JBAs as well as in the private sector. To achieve the above objective, the government should make all contracts in the water sector awarded through open tender with public consultation. This would ensure professionalism, fairness, transparency, accountability and good governance. Equally, all contracts and other relevant documents drawn up between the government and private companies should not be “classified” but instead be public documents available to the public for discussion, review and improvement. Fourthly, as discussed earlier, in order to ensure better governance, the government must involved all stakeholders in the water sector, especially civil society and NGOs. Fifthly, the Federal Government should reconsider its plans to centralize the water sector by taking it over from State Governments. This is because, centralization would be contradictory towards involvement of all stakeholders and also pose problems to many states that had already privatized the water sector. Finally, governance of the water sector should be based on Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM) which is the logical way forward in ensuring sustainable development. References Chan, N. W. (2004a) Tackling Water Crisis: Is Privatisation and Increasing Water Tariffs TheAnswer? Proceedings in CD Rom of the International Conference “Inaugural International Conference – Southeast Asia Since 1945: Reflections and Visions”, 20 – 23 July 2004, Penang, Malaysia. Penang: Asia Pacific Research Unit, School of Humanities, Universiti Sains Malaysia.Chan, N. W. (2004b) Managing Water Resources in the 21^st Century: Involving All Stakeholders Towards Sustainable Water Resources Management in Malaysia. Bangi: Environmental Management Programme, Centre for Graduate Studies, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia.Chan, N. W. (2007) Partnerships in Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM): A Case Study of Water Watch Penang. In Chan N W and Bouguerra L (Editors) (2007) World Citizens’ Assembly on Water: Towards Global Water Sustainability. Penang: Water Watch Penang and Alliance for a Responsible, Plural and United World, 47-56.Santiago, C. (2005) “Murky figures cloud water tariff hikes: Challenges and issues of governance in water management in Malaysia” Aliran Monthly Vol 25 (2005): Issue 11. POLLUTION OF WATER RESOURCES IN MALAYSIABy Ngai Weng Chan, PhDProfessor of Universiti Sains Malaysia President of Water Watch PenangEmail: nwchan@usm.my Rivers are the cradle of life. In Malaysia, major cities and towns have developed along river banks and estuaries for various reasons. Rivers supply 97% of Malaysia’s water supply as the country is not rich in groundwater. Rivers and their vicinities are sources of life, providing water supply for the people, irrigation for agriculture, as a means of transportation, a source of food in fisheries, hydro-electric power, and water use for industries. However, rivers are not the sole possession of humankind as they provide rich habitats for riverine and aquatic flora and fauna, and the river environment supports a rich biodiversity of life forms .Rivers are also important for maintaining the geomorphology and hydrology of an area. Unfortunately, however, abuse and mismanagement has resulted in deterioration of a significant number of rivers in Malaysia. Pollution is a manin concern as rivers provide easy conduits for the discharge of varying domestic, commercial, industrial and agricultural. Malaysia has developed very rapidly over the last three decades, with urbanisation increasing many folds in all the major cities and towns. Coupled with this, agriculture expansion and industrialisation have also rapidly changed the land use from one of mainly forest and food crops to one of estates (cash crops), urban, commercial and industrial centres. All these developments have overstressed river systems. As a result, many river basins have reached their limits of water supply and are now susceptible to water stress and droughts. Deforestation has also led to the opening up of large tracts of land within river basins and this has resulted in not only increased sediment loading in the river systems but also in the aggravation of floods which further pollute the waters. During historical times, rivers were the hub of life with not only the major settlements lining the banks but rivers also play an important role in the economic and social life of the people. Since independence in 1957, however, Malaysia has developed steadily changing from a rural economy based on agriculture and tin mining to an export based manufacturing economy. Over the last three decades, the transformation has been unprecedented with very rapid urbanisation and industrialisation. The change from rubber estates to oil palm and the opening up of extensive tracts of land by the Federal Land Development Agency (FELDA) coupled with uncontrolled logging transformed the land use from one of mainly forest and food crops to one of estates (cash crops) and townships. This was followed by expansion of urban, commercial and industrial centres. All these developments have overstressed river systems. As a result, many river basins have reached their limits of water supply and are now susceptible to water stress and droughts. The occurrence of low flows is exacerbated when rapid development has produced great amounts of human wastes as well as wastes from all of man’s activities, including agriculture, industrial, commercial and transportation wastes. This has resulted in a great number of rivers that are very polluted, some to the extent of being not rehabilitable. Yet, many rivers can be restored and rehabilitated given the right kind of efforts. Deforestation has also led to the opening up of large tracts of land within river basins and this has resulted in not only increased sediment loading in the river systems but also in the aggravation of floods which further pollute the waters. Related to deforestation and development of hill land is the incidence of accelerated erosion leading to landslides. These events lead to sediment pollution of rivers. Further downstream, the excess runoff from the heavy tropical rainstorms inundate large tracts of land, causing damage and economic losses with significant loss of life. Low water levels during periods of drought result in water shortages leading to rationing of supply, interruptions to commercial and industrial activities, and losses to agricultural production. The rapid pace of development of the past three decades have exacerbated the situation and brought with it problems of flash floods, reduced base flows, river water pollution and siltation. In recent decades, especially since the 1970s, development of the country has been very rapid and this has impacted negatively on rivers. In its natural state, rivers have built-in self-purification abilities, i.e. they can absorb and cleanse themselves of wastes and impurities. Hence, they can maintain a level of river water quality that is able to enrich the natural beauty and to support humans as well as the diversity of riverine flora and fauna. However, rivers have their limits. Disruptions to the natural river basins via opening up of catchment areas for polluting humans activities have resulted in adverse changes to the hydrology of rivers, including deteriorating river water quantity as well as quality. As a result, the river’s role as an important life support system has greatly diminished in importance, and its ability to support the eco-system is greatly threatened. In Malaysia today, as in many other developing countries, the state of rivers is appalling and in many urban areas, rivers have been literally turned into open sewers, some to the extent of being non rehabilitable. Various sources of pollution occur in Malaysia, mainly from agriculture (fertilisers, pesticides and sediments from soil erosion), livestock farming (animal wastes), domestic homes (human wastes), urban areas (greywaters and untreated wastewaters) and industries (industrial effluent). Pollution already adversely affects river water as well as the river environment. This renders river water unfit for any use. First there is organic wastes, the main sources being from domestic, agro-based industries and livestock farming (mostly pig farming). In many urban and industrial areas, organic pollution of water from both point and non-point sources have resulted in environmental problems and adversely affected river water quality and the habitats of aquatic flora and fauna. Perhaps the worse cases of pollution are when rivers flow through urban areas as they are subjected to heavy solid and liquid waste disposal from squatter settlements, drainage effluents from commercial area, food centres and wet markets, residual hydrocarbon from urban traffic and workshops, and excessive silt loads from land clearings. In the Klang Valley alone, an estimated 80 tons of solid wastes end up in the Sg. Kelang alone daily. Squatters are another major source of river pollution. Most of the towns and cities in Malaysia (including the Federal Capital of Kuala Lumpur) grew from squatter settlements. Currently, squatter settlements line the banks of all the major rivers in the urban areas, with many such as along the Melaka River are built over the river itself. Since river banks are flood-prone, the land is seldom developed. Hence, these areas provide a cheap/free and convenient locale for the poor. In recent years, immigrants from neighbouring countries have literally “flooded” these squatter settlements, just as the settlements themselves are flooded ever so often. Squatter settlements are not provided with sanitation facilities or rubbish disposal facilities. Hence, the squatters use the rivers both as a source of water as well as a means of waste disposal. It is not uncommon to find toilets constructed on stilts in the river. Squatters are also guilty of dumping all sorts of rubbish into rivers, including old furniture and broken down motor-cycles and cars. Along the Sg. Kelang alone, it is estimated that about 40,000 families live in squatter settlements. Hence the amount of pollution generated is huge. Squatters need to be relocated and provided cheap housing. They also need to be educated on the importance of rivers and fined heavily if found to throw garbage into rivers. Deforestation and rapid land use change due to accelerated economic growth have destroyed the natural forest cover replacing it with exposed or partly exposed surfaces. Other activities that have had a similar effect on the land use are mining operations, construction of housing, logging and clearing of forests, highway construction, agriculture estates, quarrying and urbanisation. All these have caused high concentrations of suspended sediment in downstream stretches of rivers. Typically, the lower stretches of Malaysian rivers are characterised by heavy silt loads especially after heavy rains. For urban areas, 90 % of sediment load in rivers are derived from land cleared for construction. For example, in the Klang Valley alone, it has been estimated that erosion averages 2,950 tons/sq. km/yr for the whole catchment, equivalent to about 3 mm of soil loss a year. In many upstream areas where forest clearance has been rapid, erosion rates of more than 50,000 tons/sq. km/yr are not uncommon. In comparison, the rates of erosion for undisturbed forest catchments are only of the magnitude between 10 to 100 ton/sq. km/yr. Hence, pollution via sedimentation is a serious problems for Malaysia rivers and a major river management issue. Hence, upstream forests and riverine forests such as mangroves and nipah need to be protected. In addition, degraded forests should be reafforested. The most serious kind of river pollution, however, is the pollution by heavy metals and hazardous chemicals discharged from the thousands of factories in industrial zones, especially those located upstream of rivers. Privatisation of treatment of industrial wastes has made such treatment expensive, and there are a significant number of factories not treating their wastes. Some have even been caught dumping their wastes illegally. The economic slowdown in recent years has exacerbated this problem as there are more and more been incidents of illegal dumping of toxic wastes and leakages of waste products from improperly constructed containers as well as accidental spillage. This has caused serious pollution, especially to the rivers. Based on the current large volume (which is increasing alarmingly) of pollutants of all sorts, rivers can no longer perform their self-purification function. Consequently, river pollution monitoring by the Department of Environment (DOE) has shown a drastic decline in water quality of rivers. For example, out of the 117 rivers monitored in 1997, 24 were rated as clean, 68 slightly polluted and 25 polluted. The situation improved slightly in 1998 but the conditions of rivers deteriorated again in 2002. In terms of heavy metal contamination, 55 rivers have been found to exceed the maximum limit of 0.001 mg/l for cadmium, 44 rivers exceeded the iron limit of 1.00 mg/l, 36 rivers exceeded the lead limit of 0.01 mg/l and 24 rivers exceeded the mercury limit of 0.0001 mg/l. To address this issue, DOE should allocate more personnel to monitor and enforce the law. Polluters found guilty should be charged in court and fined heavily. The issue of corruption should also be addressed. In order to ensure future supply of clean water resources, Malaysia must protect its rivers. Restoration of rivers is one solution. The term “Restoration” brings with it negative connotations as something ought to be in a poor/bad/degraded state to warrant restoration. Hence, river restoration broadly means bringing a degraded river back to where it used to belong, i.e. in its natural state. Although river restoration has been defined in a number of ways, depending on who is doing the restoration (engineers will give a completely different definition from environmentalists or biologists), it can be taken to mean the process of returning a degraded/damaged river ecosystem to its condition prior to disturbance. Although river restoration aims to restore a river back to its original natural state, whereby the river attains equilibrium (within itself as well as with its environment), the aims of restoration managers must be realistic and practical. Hence, practical river managers often define river restoration as …”the return of an ecosystem to a close approximation of its condition prior to disturbance. In restoration, ecological damage to the resource is repaired. Both the structure and the functions of the ecosystem are recreated…The goal is to emulate a natural, functioning, self-regulating system that is integrated with the ecological landscape in which it occurs. River restoration should involve all stakeholders – government, businesses, water departments, water companies, industries, NGOs, local communities, schools, and all who have an interest in the river. All stakeholders should work together in a joint effort to clean-up the river, control pollution and garbage dumping, de-silt and dredge out garbage, re-establish streamside habitat, bring back fish and bird life, and improve recreation facilities along the river. At the same time, they should also convert the river from a neglected flood hazard to an economic asset for the local communities. “Public awareness and education” is necessary to ensure clean rivers. A programme aimed at educating the general public and raising awareness with respect to preservation and conservation of rivers and its environment is imperative in protecting rievrs. Special attention is given to those living the vicinity of the rivers, especially the thousands of squatters. The many activities under this programme are gotong royong (community self-help), talks and lectures, exhibitions, camping and kayaking on the river. Overall, these activities have been successful but the number of people involved was not as high as expected. Often, despite the presence of many laws which protect rivers in one way or another, enforcement is a problem. Hence, another sub-programme is that of enforcement headed by the Department of Environment Malaysia (DOE). The DOE is supported by all Local Authorities and state Department of Environment offices. It is responsible for monitoring water quality and inspecting factories for their wastewater discharges. It is also responsible for charging the polluters. The DOE has also set up a GIS database for the Klang River basin. However, while the GIS database expedites the work of the DOE, monitoring and enforcement have always been problems. Lack of staff and “problematic” factories have reduced the effectiveness of this sub-programme. The use of forums and publications can be effective in instilling greater public awareness in loving and restoring our rivers. People need to be constantly reminded about the fragility of our water resources. In order to do so, for example, Water Watch Penang (WWP), an NGO, creates greater awareness for water conservation by giving public talks, takes part in forums of discussion and publishes water related articles in newspapers. The occurrence of severe water crises in the 1990s in Malaysia, particularly in 1997 and 1998, made everyone take notice of the importance of water conservation. Many forums and workshops were held of which WWP were a part of them. Another example is WWP’s Education Programme for School Children and Website - WWP’s main aim is to educate the young to love and monitor the health of our rivers. More importantly, we must start taking proactive actions, even sacrifices, to protect, conserve and restore our rivers so that their waters can be sustained for future use. This is where people from all levels ranging from politicians, policy makers, private companies, NGOs to individuals can play an important part. River conservancy and restoration are currently tackled by the authorities. The example of the Sg Klang clean-up programme is encouraging but much needs to be done. Government need to involve NGOs and the people. River pollution and related water problems happens at the local level. Hence, decision making regarding solutions should be carried out at the lowest appropriate level, ideally involving all stakeholders ranging from government to the private sector, NGOs, the local community and schools. People should be the focus both in decision making as well as active “workers” involved with restoration work. If the people are not involved, they may not co-operate, not because of spite but because they are not aware. The motto of “Malaysia Boleh” (Malaysia Can) is not necessarily limited to the role of government alone. Finally, more efforts and funding need to be injected to sustain the river clean-up programme. Some loose ends also need to be tightened. More importantly, the programme needs to be extended to all other rivers in the country. Government should also explore the option of working together with NGOs and the people in the cleaning and restoration of rivers. WWP and other NGOs offer an option, an extra tool in which authorities can use effectively to curb water demand. Authorities and water companies must get out of their accustomed role of being the sole-provider to being partners with NGOs and people for the benefit of the country. They can continue to play their pivotal role in water supply management but must increasingly employ a significant portion of their strategies on managing the demand side. While the authorities and water companies can build upon their expertise in the fields of basin-wide planning (especially when basins cut across borders), integrated catchment management, inter-state co-operation and water transfers, legislation on water conservation, enforcement of activities that threaten water resources, more effective pricing that encourages water saving and recycling, greater interaction and co-operation of government agencies in addressing water issues, and wider coverage of awareness through educational programmes in the mass media, they must collaborate and involve the available NGOs with a view to greater effectiveness in sustainable management of our water resources.

GENDER AND WATER MANAGEMENT IN MALAYSIA

By Ngai Weng Chan, PhDProfessor of Universiti Sains Malaysia President of Water Watch PenangEmail: nwchan@usm.my In Malaysia, the role and status of women have improved significantly since independence in 1957. In the Ninth Malaysia Plan 2006-2010, an entire chapter (Chapter 13) has been allocated for women development. The Ninth Malaysia Plan also confirmed that gender mainstreaming will be given emphasis and gender considerations included in the formulation of government policies and programmes. The Malaysian Government has set up a Cabinet Committee on Gender equality and there is now a Ministry of Women, Family and Community Development (KPWK) Malaysia in the country. Women NGOs are also strong in Malaysia. The All Women's Action Society (AWAM) in Selangor State formed in 1988 is an independent feminist organisation committed to improving the lives of women in Malaysia. Its vision is to create a just and equitable society where women are treated with respect, and free from all forms of violence and discrimination, but it does not deal with water issues. The Asian-Pacific Resources and Research Centre for Women (ARROW) in Kuala Lumpur, established in 1993 is a regional NGO and non-profit organization (NPO). Its goal is for women in Asia and the Pacific to be better able to define and control their lives, particularly in the area of women's health and women's rights. Unfortunately, none of their key areas of concern regarding women touches on water. In Kota Bharu, the Murni Women's Development Foundation of Kelantan (YAYASAN MURNI) objectives are mostly to provide assistance to women in need paying special emphasis to socially underprivileged women, single mothers, widows and victims of violence and their family members. However, it does not get involved in water issues. There is even a National Advisory Council on the Inter-Action of Women in Development housed within the Prime Minister's Department in Kuala Lumpur. The National Clearinghouse on Women in Development (NCWS), housed under the National Population and Family Development Board in the Prime Minister's Department aims to further enhance awareness on the role and need of women in the overall development process. But again, there is no focus on water. The National Council of Women's Organizations, Malaysia (NCWO) is the main Women's NGO Consultative Coordinating Council and has 61 Affiliates the portfolios of which cover the social, political, economic, religious, professional and trade union sectors but is by and by its constitution non-racial, non-religious, non-political. The NWCO promotes and enhances women's participation and contribution in all sectors of national development. Hence, the NWCO appears a potentially suitable candidate for gender and water issues in the country. However, hitherto, it does not deal with water. There are many other women organizations in Malaysia, all actively pursuing the interests and role of women. This include the Women's Action Society (SAWO) in Sabah, the Sarawak Federation of Women's Institutes (SFWI) in Sarawak, the Secretariat for Women's Affairs (HAWA) housed within the Administration and Finance Division in the Prime Minister's Department, the Sisters in Islam in Kuala Lumpur, Tenaganita, the Third World Network in Penang, the Women's Aid Organisation (WAO) in Petaling Jaya, the Women's Crisis Centre (WCC) in Penang, and many others. Unfortunately, none of these organizations have a focus on gender and water issues. Hence, this is one aspect of women organizations in Malaysia that needs to be improved. As Malaysia is very concerned with poverty reduction and equality in income distribution, as well as gender equality, the inclusion of gender provides the platform for women participation and poverty reduction, two other key determinants of the effectiveness and sustainability of WSS management. Gender inclusion ties in very well with their national plans and policies. It is therefore strange to note that both countries have hitherto not embarked on a massive endeavour to include women and gender inputs into water projects in a more institutionalized way. Most current projects with gender inputs are largely ad hoc. If a water project allows women participation, and includes women right from the beginning in the areas of project design, construction, operation and maintenance (O & M), training, and monitoring and evaluation (M & E), as well as water conservation, then the results on poverty reduction and income re-distribution would materialize. Women have come a long way in uplifting their socio-economic position since country’s independence. Increasingly, women have now moved significantly into spheres previously held by men. Women have increased their representation in literacy, labor force, politics, state machineries, civil societies and in other decision-making bodies both in local and national levels have significantly improved role and position of Malaysian women. In 2002, about 46.7% of women of working age (15-64 years) were involved in the total labor force. The Malaysian National Policy on the Environment aims to enhance quality of life of Malaysian people through environmentally sound and sustainable development at continued economic, social and cultural progresses. However, there were only two women in the 17-member led Environmental Quality Council – the national level body who provides policy guidance to the Department of Environment towards a more holistic approach to environmental management. Nonetheless, it is unfortunate that provisions or interventions related to UEM have not been a major focus of action plan or policy formulated in relations to women and gender equality. Safe drinking water has been provided with equal access to women and men without any segregation in the provision of water to both genders in term of access and charges. Majority of the houses have piped water and electricity. However, there are places such as interior parts of Kelantan, Sabah and Sarawak that lack the provision of safe and hygienic basic amenities such as clean water and sanitation facilities. In some areas water is stored in wells but there are no reports stating gender inequality to the amount of water used. In smaller states such as Malacca, Penang Negeri Sembilan and Perlis, the dry season or El Nino can bring about dry taps, especially outskirts of urban areas. Often, during such times, women and children have to queue in line for water brought by trucks. The limitations of women organizations in the area of water management and conservation should not be seen as a weakness. In fact, it should be viewed as a potential that needs to be developed. Since most women organizations do not yet have a section on water, developing such a section would bring unprecedented results towards greater water conservation, especially in households. Despite their relatively subdued current role in water management in women organizations in the country, there is no doubt that women can play a very vital role in the sustainable management of water (Chan and Nitivattananon, 2006). One area that women can contribute significantly would be to reduce domestic water consumption via education of family members, teaching school children, and auditing of the household water budget. Domestic Water Audit (DWA) refers to calculating the amount of water that a household uses. This includes water use for indoor water usage such as laundry, in the kitchen, for bathing, for flushing toilets, and other chores as well as outdoor water usage such as watering gardens and lawns, washing tiled/cemented floors, paths and driveways, washing cars, and other installations. All these water usage are in the control of women managers of the home. Based on a study on domestic water audit, selection of the type of washing machine and pattern of usage will determine the amount of water use. A water efficient washing machine will use only 45 litres per wash (3 kgs of clothes) whereas a large Automatic Washing machine will use 120 litres, i.e. 2.7 times the amount of water. When a washing machine is half-full, using the “half-full” function will additionally save half of water per wash. This may seem insignificant but if one adds up the number of washes per year, the amount of water and money saved is huge. Chan and Vilas (2007) illustrates how Mrs. Chan from Penang (Malaysia) managed to save water by using a water efficient washing machine. It should be pointed out that the water savings is only from one activity, i.e. washing clothes. If we consider water savings from other activities as well, it would be much more. However, because of the low water tariffs in Malaysia (average 50 sen per 1000 litres), the amount of money saved is very small. Hence, one cannot look at water savings in terms of money in Malaysia. In order for water saving to be effective, one has to educate the public, especially women who have to be aware and sensitized towards water conservation. If mobilized throughout the country in a national water saving campaign, the influence of women on water conservation can be phenomenal. Considering per capita water use, Malaysia exhibit high rates, i.e. about 310 litres. If the UN recommended usage of 165 litres per capita per day is applied, then Malaysians are wasting 145 litres per capita per day. In urban areas, particularly large cities such as Kuala Lumpur and Georgetown, the per capita usage are much higher averaging above 500 litres per capita. Hence, the urban wastage is about 335 litres per capita. If we multiply the wastage figures by the country’s population of 26 million, the wastage will be 8.71 billion litres of water per day. Such a high level of water wastage is certainly not sustainable. Women can contribute effectively towards reducing this wastage via conservation and education via the following ways. Say if each woman manager of a home manages to reduce 10 % of their water use per day, 31 litres of water is saved per person per day. For the entire country, this is equivalent to 806 million litres per day. Annually, the amount of water savings is about 294,190 million litres, i.e. equivalent to about 14 mid-sized dams. If the water demand reduction is reduced to 20 %, the water saved would be able to fill 28 mid-sized dams. Also, besides reducing water use, women in rural areas are the ones who have to fetch water from wells or rivers. Here, they act as the primary means of sourcing alternative sources of water and reduce dependence on piped water. In the area of education, mothers can mould their children into responsible water saving adults by starting them young. They can take their children for outings to rivers instead of to supermarkets or shopping complexes. They can lead the children in "River Walk" along the banks of rivers such as the Sg Air Terjun inside the Botanical Gardens. Mothers can request help from WWP experts who will brief the children on the importance of water conservation and hence the need to keep rivers clean. The children can then be treated to some basic water monitoring exercises whereby they would go into the shallow river to conduct themselves. Many women are school teachers and this is an area where water education becomes important. Women teachers can teach students to conserve water the way they teach their own children. In many developed countries, schools have “River Watch” programmes whereby school children monitor the “health” of an adopted river (usually one that is adjacent to their school). This way, they can report any major changes in water quality of rivers due to dumping of toxic materials, rubbish, oil spill or otherwise. In Penang, one of WWP’s activities is the continuous education programme to instill awareness and love for our rivers. The objective is to get one school to adopt a river or part/section of a river and monitor the "Health" of the river via simple indicators. Because participants actually get into the river to perform various tasks, they really enjoyed themselves. Hence there is tremendous potential for women teachers to take advantage of this interesting water education activity. Children need to get out into the field to learn about rivers. Women control the water budget in the house as they are engaged in watering of plants/vegetables, wash floors and toilets, and other chores needing water. Hence, women can either save or waste water. There may be many other areas in which women can play an important role in water saving. Since the Government is now preaching the use of Water Demand Management (WDM) to complement Water Supply Management (WSM) that has been largely employed by Government so far, WDM in the household will determine whether WDM succeeds or fails. This is because more than half the water demand is from domestic households. Hence, the family unit holds the key to WDM.

In a country blessed with abundant water, water has turned into a critical issue whereby there is inefficient use and high wastage. Given this scenario, there is an impact as well as a role for gender. Via WDM, a non-technological tool, women can help curb domestic wastage, ensuring wise use and conservation of water. In the domestic area, women can play a vital role as they are the “water managers” at home. Women such as Mrs. Chan can use Domestic Water Audit effectively to audit their household water use, and make adjustments to the water use pattern to reduce demand. Significant savings, both in terms of the volume of water and money can be saved. As women use water for most of the domestic chores in the home, they are effective water conservation agents in the home. When women save water in the home, they also educate their children, family members, neighbours and friends about the importance of water conservation. Women can also cut down on water use via substitution of water-saving equipment and methods, and other personal adjustments. A sustained national WDM initiative whereby women are the key players towards achieving sustainable management of water resources is needed. As domestic water consumption is about half of the country’s total water demand, the reduction of domestic water demand would be vital in achieving water sustainability. When every family cooperates, led by women, the reduction in consumption can save the country a lot of water and postponed the building of dams which can be saved for future generations. Bibliography Chan N W (2004) Managing Water Resources in the 21^st Century: Involving All Stakeholders Towards Sustainable Water Resources Management in Malaysia. Bangi: Environmental Management Programme, Centre for Graduate Studies, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia. Chan, N. W. and Nitivattananon, V, (2006) Gender Perspectives in Water Demand Management: Examples from Malaysia and Thailand. In Jamaluddin Md. Jahi, Kadir Arifin, Azahan Awang and Muhammad Rizal Razman (Editors) Managing Changes. Proceedings 3^rd Bangi World Conference on Environmental Management, 5-6 September 2006, Bangi, Malaysia. Bangi: Environmental Management Programme, Centre For Graduate Studies, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia and Environmental Management Society (EMS) of Malaysia, 200-220. Chan N W and Vilas Nitivattananon (2007) The Role of Gender in Domestic Water Conservation in Malaysia. Malaysian Journal of Environmental Management 8 (2007): 109-129. THE ISSUE OF PRIVATISATION OF THE WATER SECTOR IN MALAYSIA" By Ngai Weng Chan, PhDProfessor of Universiti Sains Malaysia President of Water Watch PenangEmail: nwchan@usm.my Privatisation of public utilities and government departments is one of the main thrusts of the government’s long term objective of achieving greater effectiveness and cost reduction. Arguably, the government has a case when it comes to many non cost-effective agencies which consume a great chunk of the annual budget. However, privatization has its pros and cons, and not all public utilities can be privatized. Several questions will have to be asked before privatization of water can go ahead: (i) Should a basic need of humanity be privatised? (ii) Can privatization be justified on moral or ethical grounds? (iii) Who will determine the price of water after privatisation? (iv) What happens if a poor person cannot afford to pay his/her water bill? (v) What will happen to our water supply if the water company goes bankrupt? If and when all the above questions are justifiably addressed, and privatisation is 100 % transparent (based on meritocracy) and it brings about greater efficiency, professionalism, less burden to the masses and government, and will improve the economy, then by all means privatise.

In Malaysia, the “Privatisation Policy” was mooted when Dr Mahathir Mohamad, our fourth Prime Minister came into office in 1981. Since its introduction in 1983, the country's privatization programme has saved the Government some RM132.16 billion[1] and RM7 billion in capital and operating expenditure, respectively. In addition, the sale of the Government's interests in various entities raked in proceeds amounting to RM23.1 billion. However, it must be pointed out that the majority of the privatized entities were already highly successful even before privatization. These include manufacturing, transportatation, telecommunications, etc. For example, the national car Proton and its distributors were a monopoly. Arguably, the main argument for privatisation is that government can shed a large chunk of its annual expenditure on water supply, and could use the money elsewhere,for example in education. In addition, it has been argued that the majority of water works departments, water corporations and other government departments involved with managing water are not as effective as they ought to be, as testified by their susceptibility to water stress. There are now increasingly frequent occurrences of dry spells and water crises in recent years, most notably happening now in Malacca, Selangor and parts of East Malaysia. The painful fact is that Malaysia does not possess an efficient water management system yet. How else can one explain the average Non-Revenue Water (NRW) losses (water loss through leakage, theft, public use, faulty meters, metter-reading errors & other unaccountable losses once it leaves the treatment plant) ranging from 38 % to more than 50 % in many states? Water thefts are also rampant and pipe bursts often take the relevant agencies a long to repair, hence losing a great deal of precious water. If we can tackle half of the NRW losses (via replacement of old mains), many states would have solved their water problems and there would be no need to build expensive large dams (the negative impacts on the environment, wildlife and local communities of which are well known).

There are more cases of failures in privatization of water resources in Malaysia than there are successes. Sabah is deep financial crisis and never recovered from massive overspending and privatization resulting in a cycle of debt that caused serious cash flow problems for the government. Since 1992, the Sabah government had signed several lopsided deals and over-priced contracts with private firms well beyond its capacity to pay and these had completely drained its treasury. By the end of 2002, the state owed RM524mil to three water concessionaires – Jetama, Timatch and Lahad Datu water supply. Clearly, such massive debts have never happened in the old days before privatization. The privatisation of water supply in Kelantan to KelantanWater Sdn Bhd was debated at the State Assembly sitting and six of the 19 oral questions forwarded by assemblymen to the State Government were on the issue. UMNO Kelantan has proof that Menteri Besar Datuk Nik Abdul Aziz Nik Mat was aware of the contents of the agreement on the State's privatization of water supply, its deputy chief Datuk Annuar Musa said today. He said Nik Aziz was aware of the agreement signed between Water Thames Water of London and the State


Navigation Back to Home Page Contact Us Search Articles Related Articles 2nd WCAW Meeting, Marseille, 5-7 Nov 2007 Conclusions and recommendations of the Inaugural World Citizens Assembly on Water (WCAW), 27-29 Octo Contact Us Continent Citizens Assembly on Water (CCAW) - Asia & The Pacific Join WCAW! List of Participants of the Inaugural WCAW in Kuala Lumpur 27-29 Oct 2005 WCAW at World Water Forum 5 in Istanbul Turkey 16-25 March 2009 WCAW at World Water Forum 5 in Istanbul Turkey 16-25 March 2009 WCAW Participants in Marseille What is Alliance? What is Charles Leopold Mayer Foundation?		WCAW at World Water Forum 5 in Istanbul Turkey 16-25 March 2009 Posted on Jan 8, 2010. This article has been read 334 time(s). WCAW at World Water Forum 5 in Istanbul Turkey 16-25 March 2009 WATER GOVERNANCE IN MALAYSIABy Ngai Weng Chan, PhDProfessor of Universiti Sains Malaysia President of Water Watch PenangEmail: nwchan@usm.myMalaysia is a country richly endowed with copious rainfall and rich water resources, but ironically many parts of the country are subject to water stress. Droughts had occurred in 1977 and 1978, devastating the padi crop in most of the irrigation schemes in Northwest Peninsular Malaysia. In 1982 and 1991, drought resulted in drop of the water levels of the Pedu and Muda dams dropping to critical levels, resulting in cancellation of the off-season crop. In 1998, an El Nino related drought also caused severe water stress in Kedah and Penang, but caused severe water rationing in Kuala Lumpur and Petaling Jaya for many months. In 2002, drought destroyed thousands of hectares of padi in Perlis and many areas also suffered water stress. With 3000 mm of rain per year and about 20,000 m³ of renewable water per capita per year, the above water problems can only mean that there is mismanagement. Hence, water problems in Malaysia is not an issue of scarcity as much as it is an issue of governance. To substantiate this point, the authorities have used the water problems as an excuse to shift the governance of the water sector from government control to private hands. Hence, privatization of water supply and raising water tariffs were preferred governance options as privatisation was seen as the panacea to all of Malaysia’s water woes. Consequently, since the Mahathir period of active privatization of government utilities since the early 1980s, many states have privatized some or all of their water supply functions. Unfortunately, however, this form of water governance has not yielded the success that it claims but on the other hand have led to losses and failures in the privatization (Chan, 2004a). Hence, civil society has argued strongly against privatization (Santiago, 2005). Traditionally, water governance in Malaysia is largely based on a top-down approach. Under this approach, the Water Supply Department (JBA) under the various state governments’ machinery builds the dams, treatment plants, main pipes and supplies the water to the consumers. This approach is also characterized by a water supply management (WSM) approach. This approach has been found wanting as consumers do not cooperate. Water consumers should be allowed to play a more active role as a “partner” of the water authorities via participation in the privatization exercise, fixing of water tariffs, conservation and recycling of water, water education and awareness and the ultimate aim of creating a “Water Saving Society” in Malaysia. The authorities need to employ a more “rakyat friendly” by allowing the public, including NGOs, to play a greater role in water management via consultation and participation in all developments relevant to water. Water is everybody’s business and everyone’s responsibility ranging from the government to water corporations, water authorities, water companies, consultants, industries (including hotels, resorts and theme parks), businesses, NGOs, and the citizenry. All should work together in a partnership to ensure that water resources are exploited sustainably in the best economic manner that does not harm the environment but guaranteeing everyone access and protecting the need of future generations with adequate and clean water. Governance is of utmost importance in determining whether a country succeeds or fails in its water management. The World Bank defines two types of water governance regimes: First, there is “Good governance” which is epitomised by “…predictable, open and enlightened policy-making, a bureaucracy imbued with professional ethos acting in furtherance of the public good, the rule of law, transparent processes, and a strong civil society participating in public affairs.” (Santiago, 2005). In terms of “Poor governance”, however, the World Bank says it is “…characterised by arbitrary policy making, unaccountable bureaucracies, un-enforced or unjust legal systems, the abuse of executive power, a civil society unengaged in public life, and widespread corruption.” Elsewhere, the UNDP defines governance in the following way: It is “… among other things participatory, transparent and accountable. It is also effective and equitable. And it promotes the rule of law.” In short, governance is about the exercise of power in managing a nation’s affairs, in this case the management of water resources. UNDP’s activities at the 3^rd World Water Forum in Japan in March 2003 highlighted the importance of water governance. UNDP together with its partners committed to continue the Dialogue on Effective Water Governance, among other things, to follow up actions as a part of the Type II Partnership for Effective Water Governance. For example, UNDP Malaysia presented the Urban Governance Initiative (TUGI), highlighting a tool that helps to promote good water governance which has a score card that allows people to assess the quality of local water services from a governance perspective. Such a level of governance is experienced in Penang state whereby Water Watch Penang, an NGO, is working in close-partnership with the government and the private sector in ensuring good governance of the water sector (Chan, 2007). However, despite claims that the country is undergoing a civil society revolution with the proliferation of NGOs and other civil society groups, much of water governance, as is the case of governance of other sectors, is still largely run by a top-down government machinery. Moreover, when government has relinquished such powers of governance to the private sector, the power of governance is then left in the hands of powerful companies with close connections to those in power. Hence, it is not surprising to see power being exercised in the governance of water resources in the country that lacks transparency, accountability and professionalism. For example, Santiago (2005) has lamented that when the town of Kluang experienced water shortages between July 2005 and Nov 2005, it was discovered that the water was being channelled to a 2000-acre agri-business farm and a 700-hectare oil palm estate. How and why people are placed as second to business is beyond comprehension. Because of bad governance, people believe that the Johor state government has compromised the peoples’ right to water, and that the state government has acted in favour of agri-business interests as opposed to the collective interests of 200,000 citizens (Santiago, 2005). This is bad governance to say the least. Santiago (2005) has also alledged that bad governance is to blame for the non-transparent water concession agreement between Syabas and the Federal and the Selangor state governments. How can a government agreement that affects water supply to hundreds of thousands of citizens be considered as “Classified”? This is not only bad governance but totally disrespectful of citizen rights. Santiago (2205) asks “Why is the concession agreement still a secret? Is there a role for civil society and consumers in the governance structure of the concession?” Equally, lack of transparency resulted in consumers in Selangor, Putrajaya and Kuala Lumpur being excluded in water tariff increase discussion. In Malaysia, however, legislation and the role of law in water governance is strong. There are sufficient laws to ensure water governance is governed by law. Unfortunately, enforcement of laws is loose and ineffective due to poor governance practiced by those in charge. Water governance in Malaysia has a long history, with legal providing the legitimate and legal framework for water governance. Most laws and rules related to water in Malaysia relate to the protection of water resources, prevention of pollution and thefts, abstraction, treatment and supply of water but fail to underline the social aspects such as the principles of water management, the rights and responsibilities of states, private sector and individuals. But new laws have been passed that can better take care of issues of water ownership and access; water protection and development, environmental flow and ecosystem protection. More recently, the Federal Government has initiated a move to transfer water governance from State Governments to the Federal Government. Although governance implies a shift in authority from state governments to federal government, critical issues remain regarding how one should locate power and authority in the area of water governance. This appears to throw the privatised water companies into disarray as the Federal Government would have to literally “buy” back the privatized rights from the private companies. Hence, while most countries are decentralizing their water governance, Malaysia is going the opposite direction by centralizing its water governance. All over the world, the debate on decentralisation versus centralisation in the water sector is a continuing one. In some countries, there are indications favouring centralisation while elsewhere, there are also trends facing decentralisation. However, many countries are moving towards decentralisation as it is argued that centralisation does not take local stakeholder knowledge and interests into account; but that it imposes a top-down approach which often benefits the vested interests of the rich and powerful while undermining the poor and the powerless. Furthermore, decentation can be more cost-effective and can improve local democratic control over water resources and make government more transparent and accountable. Chan (2004b) stresses that stakeholder participation in water governance is imperative in ensuring sustainable management of water resources. This is because without the support of all stakeholders, both domestic and international water governance will not succeed. There will be wastage, abuse and non-cooperation as the water management is deemed to only benefit a minor section of involved parties. Involving the people affected in decision-making in the water sector elicits better response and cooperation. When people feel that ownership of water resources, they are more motivated to cooperate and implement whatever decision arrived at. Involving all stakeholders in governance also becomes more inclusive as it actively engages people generally excluded from the decision-making and policy process (e.g. the poor, the powerless, women, indigenous groups, squatters, illegal immigrants, etc). Obviously, stakeholder involvement also enhances fairness of the decisions made in the water sector. In modern societies, stakeholders are well educated and are often water experts who can contribute substantially to management of water resources. Clearly, more transparent and greater stakeholder/public empowerment governance structures are needed to improve governance of the water sector in Malaysia. Finally, other than the above mentioned issues, Santiago (2005) mentioned that there are many challenges to better water governance in Malaysia. First, the country is confronted with the following questions: Is government-managed or private-control water sector more efficient? Second, are the examples currently on public and private sectors management practising good or bad governance? Thirdly, is the public good served in an open, transparent, and democratic manner? Fourthly, are there enlightened policy making coupled with a bureaucracy committed to excellence and the welfare of the people? And finally, is there strong NGO and peoples’ participation in the governance of water resources? All these questions need to be addressed adequately before Malaysia can claim that it is successful in water governance. Moreover, even if it is considered successful (for example in comparison to neighbouring South-east Asian countries countries), Malaysia may not be at par in water governance efficiency when compared with developed countries. Moreover, success in water governance need not necessarily be measured in terms of the usual water industry KPIs such as high profits, percentage of population served, low non-revenue water rates, or low water tariffs but should incorporate other socio-environmental KPIs such as access to the poor, public consultation, involvement of stakeholders, CSR, environmental indicators, recycling, etc.In conclusion, water governance in Malaysia can be considered successful in the sense that water is served to more than 95 % of the population, water tariffs are some of the cheapest in the world, the poor is not denied access, and water supply is 24 hours per day. However, there are many areas that need improvement to achieve better governance in water management. One is to improve Government-controlled water departments (JBAs) by ensuring their workers are well-trained and committed to excellence, public service and integrity instead of the usual laid-back government-servant mentality. Secondly, politicians should be barred from interfering in the water sector. Currently, despite claims of non-interference, it is widely believed that many water companies are linked to powerful politicians, the awarding of contracts and the setting up of contracts not fully transparent, and that tariffs are also influenced by politicians. Within the JBAs that run the water supply, politicians that govern should act on the professional advice of the civil service and not the other way around. Santiago (2005) has also claimed that under the current scenario, politicians have successfully subjugated the civil service in order to promote their personal and political agenda. Thirdly, much like the entire government machinery, the Prime Minister has launched a war against corruption since coming into office in 2003. In the water sector, there should also be an all-out war on corruption, both in the JBAs as well as in the private sector. To achieve the above objective, the government should make all contracts in the water sector awarded through open tender with public consultation. This would ensure professionalism, fairness, transparency, accountability and good governance. Equally, all contracts and other relevant documents drawn up between the government and private companies should not be “classified” but instead be public documents available to the public for discussion, review and improvement. Fourthly, as discussed earlier, in order to ensure better governance, the government must involved all stakeholders in the water sector, especially civil society and NGOs. Fifthly, the Federal Government should reconsider its plans to centralize the water sector by taking it over from State Governments. This is because, centralization would be contradictory towards involvement of all stakeholders and also pose problems to many states that had already privatized the water sector. Finally, governance of the water sector should be based on Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM) which is the logical way forward in ensuring sustainable development. References Chan, N. W. (2004a) Tackling Water Crisis: Is Privatisation and Increasing Water Tariffs TheAnswer? Proceedings in CD Rom of the International Conference “Inaugural International Conference – Southeast Asia Since 1945: Reflections and Visions”, 20 – 23 July 2004, Penang, Malaysia. Penang: Asia Pacific Research Unit, School of Humanities, Universiti Sains Malaysia.Chan, N. W. (2004b) Managing Water Resources in the 21^st Century: Involving All Stakeholders Towards Sustainable Water Resources Management in Malaysia. Bangi: Environmental Management Programme, Centre for Graduate Studies, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia.Chan, N. W. (2007) Partnerships in Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM): A Case Study of Water Watch Penang. In Chan N W and Bouguerra L (Editors) (2007) World Citizens’ Assembly on Water: Towards Global Water Sustainability. Penang: Water Watch Penang and Alliance for a Responsible, Plural and United World, 47-56.Santiago, C. (2005) “Murky figures cloud water tariff hikes: Challenges and issues of governance in water management in Malaysia” Aliran Monthly Vol 25 (2005): Issue 11. POLLUTION OF WATER RESOURCES IN MALAYSIABy Ngai Weng Chan, PhDProfessor of Universiti Sains Malaysia President of Water Watch PenangEmail: nwchan@usm.my Rivers are the cradle of life. In Malaysia, major cities and towns have developed along river banks and estuaries for various reasons. Rivers supply 97% of Malaysia’s water supply as the country is not rich in groundwater. Rivers and their vicinities are sources of life, providing water supply for the people, irrigation for agriculture, as a means of transportation, a source of food in fisheries, hydro-electric power, and water use for industries. However, rivers are not the sole possession of humankind as they provide rich habitats for riverine and aquatic flora and fauna, and the river environment supports a rich biodiversity of life forms .Rivers are also important for maintaining the geomorphology and hydrology of an area. Unfortunately, however, abuse and mismanagement has resulted in deterioration of a significant number of rivers in Malaysia. Pollution is a manin concern as rivers provide easy conduits for the discharge of varying domestic, commercial, industrial and agricultural. Malaysia has developed very rapidly over the last three decades, with urbanisation increasing many folds in all the major cities and towns. Coupled with this, agriculture expansion and industrialisation have also rapidly changed the land use from one of mainly forest and food crops to one of estates (cash crops), urban, commercial and industrial centres. All these developments have overstressed river systems. As a result, many river basins have reached their limits of water supply and are now susceptible to water stress and droughts. Deforestation has also led to the opening up of large tracts of land within river basins and this has resulted in not only increased sediment loading in the river systems but also in the aggravation of floods which further pollute the waters. During historical times, rivers were the hub of life with not only the major settlements lining the banks but rivers also play an important role in the economic and social life of the people. Since independence in 1957, however, Malaysia has developed steadily changing from a rural economy based on agriculture and tin mining to an export based manufacturing economy. Over the last three decades, the transformation has been unprecedented with very rapid urbanisation and industrialisation. The change from rubber estates to oil palm and the opening up of extensive tracts of land by the Federal Land Development Agency (FELDA) coupled with uncontrolled logging transformed the land use from one of mainly forest and food crops to one of estates (cash crops) and townships. This was followed by expansion of urban, commercial and industrial centres. All these developments have overstressed river systems. As a result, many river basins have reached their limits of water supply and are now susceptible to water stress and droughts. The occurrence of low flows is exacerbated when rapid development has produced great amounts of human wastes as well as wastes from all of man’s activities, including agriculture, industrial, commercial and transportation wastes. This has resulted in a great number of rivers that are very polluted, some to the extent of being not rehabilitable. Yet, many rivers can be restored and rehabilitated given the right kind of efforts. Deforestation has also led to the opening up of large tracts of land within river basins and this has resulted in not only increased sediment loading in the river systems but also in the aggravation of floods which further pollute the waters. Related to deforestation and development of hill land is the incidence of accelerated erosion leading to landslides. These events lead to sediment pollution of rivers. Further downstream, the excess runoff from the heavy tropical rainstorms inundate large tracts of land, causing damage and economic losses with significant loss of life. Low water levels during periods of drought result in water shortages leading to rationing of supply, interruptions to commercial and industrial activities, and losses to agricultural production. The rapid pace of development of the past three decades have exacerbated the situation and brought with it problems of flash floods, reduced base flows, river water pollution and siltation. In recent decades, especially since the 1970s, development of the country has been very rapid and this has impacted negatively on rivers. In its natural state, rivers have built-in self-purification abilities, i.e. they can absorb and cleanse themselves of wastes and impurities. Hence, they can maintain a level of river water quality that is able to enrich the natural beauty and to support humans as well as the diversity of riverine flora and fauna. However, rivers have their limits. Disruptions to the natural river basins via opening up of catchment areas for polluting humans activities have resulted in adverse changes to the hydrology of rivers, including deteriorating river water quantity as well as quality. As a result, the river’s role as an important life support system has greatly diminished in importance, and its ability to support the eco-system is greatly threatened. In Malaysia today, as in many other developing countries, the state of rivers is appalling and in many urban areas, rivers have been literally turned into open sewers, some to the extent of being non rehabilitable. Various sources of pollution occur in Malaysia, mainly from agriculture (fertilisers, pesticides and sediments from soil erosion), livestock farming (animal wastes), domestic homes (human wastes), urban areas (greywaters and untreated wastewaters) and industries (industrial effluent). Pollution already adversely affects river water as well as the river environment. This renders river water unfit for any use. First there is organic wastes, the main sources being from domestic, agro-based industries and livestock farming (mostly pig farming). In many urban and industrial areas, organic pollution of water from both point and non-point sources have resulted in environmental problems and adversely affected river water quality and the habitats of aquatic flora and fauna. Perhaps the worse cases of pollution are when rivers flow through urban areas as they are subjected to heavy solid and liquid waste disposal from squatter settlements, drainage effluents from commercial area, food centres and wet markets, residual hydrocarbon from urban traffic and workshops, and excessive silt loads from land clearings. In the Klang Valley alone, an estimated 80 tons of solid wastes end up in the Sg. Kelang alone daily. Squatters are another major source of river pollution. Most of the towns and cities in Malaysia (including the Federal Capital of Kuala Lumpur) grew from squatter settlements. Currently, squatter settlements line the banks of all the major rivers in the urban areas, with many such as along the Melaka River are built over the river itself. Since river banks are flood-prone, the land is seldom developed. Hence, these areas provide a cheap/free and convenient locale for the poor. In recent years, immigrants from neighbouring countries have literally “flooded” these squatter settlements, just as the settlements themselves are flooded ever so often. Squatter settlements are not provided with sanitation facilities or rubbish disposal facilities. Hence, the squatters use the rivers both as a source of water as well as a means of waste disposal. It is not uncommon to find toilets constructed on stilts in the river. Squatters are also guilty of dumping all sorts of rubbish into rivers, including old furniture and broken down motor-cycles and cars. Along the Sg. Kelang alone, it is estimated that about 40,000 families live in squatter settlements. Hence the amount of pollution generated is huge. Squatters need to be relocated and provided cheap housing. They also need to be educated on the importance of rivers and fined heavily if found to throw garbage into rivers. Deforestation and rapid land use change due to accelerated economic growth have destroyed the natural forest cover replacing it with exposed or partly exposed surfaces. Other activities that have had a similar effect on the land use are mining operations, construction of housing, logging and clearing of forests, highway construction, agriculture estates, quarrying and urbanisation. All these have caused high concentrations of suspended sediment in downstream stretches of rivers. Typically, the lower stretches of Malaysian rivers are characterised by heavy silt loads especially after heavy rains. For urban areas, 90 % of sediment load in rivers are derived from land cleared for construction. For example, in the Klang Valley alone, it has been estimated that erosion averages 2,950 tons/sq. km/yr for the whole catchment, equivalent to about 3 mm of soil loss a year. In many upstream areas where forest clearance has been rapid, erosion rates of more than 50,000 tons/sq. km/yr are not uncommon. In comparison, the rates of erosion for undisturbed forest catchments are only of the magnitude between 10 to 100 ton/sq. km/yr. Hence, pollution via sedimentation is a serious problems for Malaysia rivers and a major river management issue. Hence, upstream forests and riverine forests such as mangroves and nipah need to be protected. In addition, degraded forests should be reafforested. The most serious kind of river pollution, however, is the pollution by heavy metals and hazardous chemicals discharged from the thousands of factories in industrial zones, especially those located upstream of rivers. Privatisation of treatment of industrial wastes has made such treatment expensive, and there are a significant number of factories not treating their wastes. Some have even been caught dumping their wastes illegally. The economic slowdown in recent years has exacerbated this problem as there are more and more been incidents of illegal dumping of toxic wastes and leakages of waste products from improperly constructed containers as well as accidental spillage. This has caused serious pollution, especially to the rivers. Based on the current large volume (which is increasing alarmingly) of pollutants of all sorts, rivers can no longer perform their self-purification function. Consequently, river pollution monitoring by the Department of Environment (DOE) has shown a drastic decline in water quality of rivers. For example, out of the 117 rivers monitored in 1997, 24 were rated as clean, 68 slightly polluted and 25 polluted. The situation improved slightly in 1998 but the conditions of rivers deteriorated again in 2002. In terms of heavy metal contamination, 55 rivers have been found to exceed the maximum limit of 0.001 mg/l for cadmium, 44 rivers exceeded the iron limit of 1.00 mg/l, 36 rivers exceeded the lead limit of 0.01 mg/l and 24 rivers exceeded the mercury limit of 0.0001 mg/l. To address this issue, DOE should allocate more personnel to monitor and enforce the law. Polluters found guilty should be charged in court and fined heavily. The issue of corruption should also be addressed. In order to ensure future supply of clean water resources, Malaysia must protect its rivers. Restoration of rivers is one solution. The term “Restoration” brings with it negative connotations as something ought to be in a poor/bad/degraded state to warrant restoration. Hence, river restoration broadly means bringing a degraded river back to where it used to belong, i.e. in its natural state. Although river restoration has been defined in a number of ways, depending on who is doing the restoration (engineers will give a completely different definition from environmentalists or biologists), it can be taken to mean the process of returning a degraded/damaged river ecosystem to its condition prior to disturbance. Although river restoration aims to restore a river back to its original natural state, whereby the river attains equilibrium (within itself as well as with its environment), the aims of restoration managers must be realistic and practical. Hence, practical river managers often define river restoration as …”the return of an ecosystem to a close approximation of its condition prior to disturbance. In restoration, ecological damage to the resource is repaired. Both the structure and the functions of the ecosystem are recreated…The goal is to emulate a natural, functioning, self-regulating system that is integrated with the ecological landscape in which it occurs. River restoration should involve all stakeholders – government, businesses, water departments, water companies, industries, NGOs, local communities, schools, and all who have an interest in the river. All stakeholders should work together in a joint effort to clean-up the river, control pollution and garbage dumping, de-silt and dredge out garbage, re-establish streamside habitat, bring back fish and bird life, and improve recreation facilities along the river. At the same time, they should also convert the river from a neglected flood hazard to an economic asset for the local communities. “Public awareness and education” is necessary to ensure clean rivers. A programme aimed at educating the general public and raising awareness with respect to preservation and conservation of rivers and its environment is imperative in protecting rievrs. Special attention is given to those living the vicinity of the rivers, especially the thousands of squatters. The many activities under this programme are gotong royong (community self-help), talks and lectures, exhibitions, camping and kayaking on the river. Overall, these activities have been successful but the number of people involved was not as high as expected. Often, despite the presence of many laws which protect rivers in one way or another, enforcement is a problem. Hence, another sub-programme is that of enforcement headed by the Department of Environment Malaysia (DOE). The DOE is supported by all Local Authorities and state Department of Environment offices. It is responsible for monitoring water quality and inspecting factories for their wastewater discharges. It is also responsible for charging the polluters. The DOE has also set up a GIS database for the Klang River basin. However, while the GIS database expedites the work of the DOE, monitoring and enforcement have always been problems. Lack of staff and “problematic” factories have reduced the effectiveness of this sub-programme. The use of forums and publications can be effective in instilling greater public awareness in loving and restoring our rivers. People need to be constantly reminded about the fragility of our water resources. In order to do so, for example, Water Watch Penang (WWP), an NGO, creates greater awareness for water conservation by giving public talks, takes part in forums of discussion and publishes water related articles in newspapers. The occurrence of severe water crises in the 1990s in Malaysia, particularly in 1997 and 1998, made everyone take notice of the importance of water conservation. Many forums and workshops were held of which WWP were a part of them. Another example is WWP’s Education Programme for School Children and Website - WWP’s main aim is to educate the young to love and monitor the health of our rivers. More importantly, we must start taking proactive actions, even sacrifices, to protect, conserve and restore our rivers so that their waters can be sustained for future use. This is where people from all levels ranging from politicians, policy makers, private companies, NGOs to individuals can play an important part. River conservancy and restoration are currently tackled by the authorities. The example of the Sg Klang clean-up programme is encouraging but much needs to be done. Government need to involve NGOs and the people. River pollution and related water problems happens at the local level. Hence, decision making regarding solutions should be carried out at the lowest appropriate level, ideally involving all stakeholders ranging from government to the private sector, NGOs, the local community and schools. People should be the focus both in decision making as well as active “workers” involved with restoration work. If the people are not involved, they may not co-operate, not because of spite but because they are not aware. The motto of “Malaysia Boleh” (Malaysia Can) is not necessarily limited to the role of government alone. Finally, more efforts and funding need to be injected to sustain the river clean-up programme. Some loose ends also need to be tightened. More importantly, the programme needs to be extended to all other rivers in the country. Government should also explore the option of working together with NGOs and the people in the cleaning and restoration of rivers. WWP and other NGOs offer an option, an extra tool in which authorities can use effectively to curb water demand. Authorities and water companies must get out of their accustomed role of being the sole-provider to being partners with NGOs and people for the benefit of the country. They can continue to play their pivotal role in water supply management but must increasingly employ a significant portion of their strategies on managing the demand side. While the authorities and water companies can build upon their expertise in the fields of basin-wide planning (especially when basins cut across borders), integrated catchment management, inter-state co-operation and water transfers, legislation on water conservation, enforcement of activities that threaten water resources, more effective pricing that encourages water saving and recycling, greater interaction and co-operation of government agencies in addressing water issues, and wider coverage of awareness through educational programmes in the mass media, they must collaborate and involve the available NGOs with a view to greater effectiveness in sustainable management of our water resources. GENDER AND WATER MANAGEMENT IN MALAYSIA By Ngai Weng Chan, PhDProfessor of Universiti Sains Malaysia President of Water Watch PenangEmail: nwchan@usm.my In Malaysia, the role and status of women have improved significantly since independence in 1957. In the Ninth Malaysia Plan 2006-2010, an entire chapter (Chapter 13) has been allocated for women development. The Ninth Malaysia Plan also confirmed that gender mainstreaming will be given emphasis and gender considerations included in the formulation of government policies and programmes. The Malaysian Government has set up a Cabinet Committee on Gender equality and there is now a Ministry of Women, Family and Community Development (KPWK) Malaysia in the country. Women NGOs are also strong in Malaysia. The All Women's Action Society (AWAM) in Selangor State formed in 1988 is an independent feminist organisation committed to improving the lives of women in Malaysia. Its vision is to create a just and equitable society where women are treated with respect, and free from all forms of violence and discrimination, but it does not deal with water issues. The Asian-Pacific Resources and Research Centre for Women (ARROW) in Kuala Lumpur, established in 1993 is a regional NGO and non-profit organization (NPO). Its goal is for women in Asia and the Pacific to be better able to define and control their lives, particularly in the area of women's health and women's rights. Unfortunately, none of their key areas of concern regarding women touches on water. In Kota Bharu, the Murni Women's Development Foundation of Kelantan (YAYASAN MURNI) objectives are mostly to provide assistance to women in need paying special emphasis to socially underprivileged women, single mothers, widows and victims of violence and their family members. However, it does not get involved in water issues. There is even a National Advisory Council on the Inter-Action of Women in Development housed within the Prime Minister's Department in Kuala Lumpur. The National Clearinghouse on Women in Development (NCWS), housed under the National Population and Family Development Board in the Prime Minister's Department aims to further enhance awareness on the role and need of women in the overall development process. But again, there is no focus on water. The National Council of Women's Organizations, Malaysia (NCWO) is the main Women's NGO Consultative Coordinating Council and has 61 Affiliates the portfolios of which cover the social, political, economic, religious, professional and trade union sectors but is by and by its constitution non-racial, non-religious, non-political. The NWCO promotes and enhances women's participation and contribution in all sectors of national development. Hence, the NWCO appears a potentially suitable candidate for gender and water issues in the country. However, hitherto, it does not deal with water. There are many other women organizations in Malaysia, all actively pursuing the interests and role of women. This include the Women's Action Society (SAWO) in Sabah, the Sarawak Federation of Women's Institutes (SFWI) in Sarawak, the Secretariat for Women's Affairs (HAWA) housed within the Administration and Finance Division in the Prime Minister's Department, the Sisters in Islam in Kuala Lumpur, Tenaganita, the Third World Network in Penang, the Women's Aid Organisation (WAO) in Petaling Jaya, the Women's Crisis Centre (WCC) in Penang, and many others. Unfortunately, none of these organizations have a focus on gender and water issues. Hence, this is one aspect of women organizations in Malaysia that needs to be improved. As Malaysia is very concerned with poverty reduction and equality in income distribution, as well as gender equality, the inclusion of gender provides the platform for women participation and poverty reduction, two other key determinants of the effectiveness and sustainability of WSS management. Gender inclusion ties in very well with their national plans and policies. It is therefore strange to note that both countries have hitherto not embarked on a massive endeavour to include women and gender inputs into water projects in a more institutionalized way. Most current projects with gender inputs are largely ad hoc. If a water project allows women participation, and includes women right from the beginning in the areas of project design, construction, operation and maintenance (O & M), training, and monitoring and evaluation (M & E), as well as water conservation, then the results on poverty reduction and income re-distribution would materialize. Women have come a long way in uplifting their socio-economic position since country’s independence. Increasingly, women have now moved significantly into spheres previously held by men. Women have increased their representation in literacy, labor force, politics, state machineries, civil societies and in other decision-making bodies both in local and national levels have significantly improved role and position of Malaysian women. In 2002, about 46.7% of women of working age (15-64 years) were involved in the total labor force. The Malaysian National Policy on the Environment aims to enhance quality of life of Malaysian people through environmentally sound and sustainable development at continued economic, social and cultural progresses. However, there were only two women in the 17-member led Environmental Quality Council – the national level body who provides policy guidance to the Department of Environment towards a more holistic approach to environmental management. Nonetheless, it is unfortunate that provisions or interventions related to UEM have not been a major focus of action plan or policy formulated in relations to women and gender equality. Safe drinking water has been provided with equal access to women and men without any segregation in the provision of water to both genders in term of access and charges. Majority of the houses have piped water and electricity. However, there are places such as interior parts of Kelantan, Sabah and Sarawak that lack the provision of safe and hygienic basic amenities such as clean water and sanitation facilities. In some areas water is stored in wells but there are no reports stating gender inequality to the amount of water used. In smaller states such as Malacca, Penang Negeri Sembilan and Perlis, the dry season or El Nino can bring about dry taps, especially outskirts of urban areas. Often, during such times, women and children have to queue in line for water brought by trucks. The limitations of women organizations in the area of water management and conservation should not be seen as a weakness. In fact, it should be viewed as a potential that needs to be developed. Since most women organizations do not yet have a section on water, developing such a section would bring unprecedented results towards greater water conservation, especially in households. Despite their relatively subdued current role in water management in women organizations in the country, there is no doubt that women can play a very vital role in the sustainable management of water (Chan and Nitivattananon, 2006). One area that women can contribute significantly would be to reduce domestic water consumption via education of family members, teaching school children, and auditing of the household water budget. Domestic Water Audit (DWA) refers to calculating the amount of water that a household uses. This includes water use for indoor water usage such as laundry, in the kitchen, for bathing, for flushing toilets, and other chores as well as outdoor water usage such as watering gardens and lawns, washing tiled/cemented floors, paths and driveways, washing cars, and other installations. All these water usage are in the control of women managers of the home. Based on a study on domestic water audit, selection of the type of washing machine and pattern of usage will determine the amount of water use. A water efficient washing machine will use only 45 litres per wash (3 kgs of clothes) whereas a large Automatic Washing machine will use 120 litres, i.e. 2.7 times the amount of water. When a washing machine is half-full, using the “half-full” function will additionally save half of water per wash. This may seem insignificant but if one adds up the number of washes per year, the amount of water and money saved is huge. Chan and Vilas (2007) illustrates how Mrs. Chan from Penang (Malaysia) managed to save water by using a water efficient washing machine. It should be pointed out that the water savings is only from one activity, i.e. washing clothes. If we consider water savings from other activities as well, it would be much more. However, because of the low water tariffs in Malaysia (average 50 sen per 1000 litres), the amount of money saved is very small. Hence, one cannot look at water savings in terms of money in Malaysia. In order for water saving to be effective, one has to educate the public, especially women who have to be aware and sensitized towards water conservation. If mobilized throughout the country in a national water saving campaign, the influence of women on water conservation can be phenomenal. Considering per capita water use, Malaysia exhibit high rates, i.e. about 310 litres. If the UN recommended usage of 165 litres per capita per day is applied, then Malaysians are wasting 145 litres per capita per day. In urban areas, particularly large cities such as Kuala Lumpur and Georgetown, the per capita usage are much higher averaging above 500 litres per capita. Hence, the urban wastage is about 335 litres per capita. If we multiply the wastage figures by the country’s population of 26 million, the wastage will be 8.71 billion litres of water per day. Such a high level of water wastage is certainly not sustainable. Women can contribute effectively towards reducing this wastage via conservation and education via the following ways. Say if each woman manager of a home manages to reduce 10 % of their water use per day, 31 litres of water is saved per person per day. For the entire country, this is equivalent to 806 million litres per day. Annually, the amount of water savings is about 294,190 million litres, i.e. equivalent to about 14 mid-sized dams. If the water demand reduction is reduced to 20 %, the water saved would be able to fill 28 mid-sized dams. Also, besides reducing water use, women in rural areas are the ones who have to fetch water from wells or rivers. Here, they act as the primary means of sourcing alternative sources of water and reduce dependence on piped water. In the area of education, mothers can mould their children into responsible water saving adults by starting them young. They can take their children for outings to rivers instead of to supermarkets or shopping complexes. They can lead the children in "River Walk" along the banks of rivers such as the Sg Air Terjun inside the Botanical Gardens. Mothers can request help from WWP experts who will brief the children on the importance of water conservation and hence the need to keep rivers clean. The children can then be treated to some basic water monitoring exercises whereby they would go into the shallow river to conduct themselves. Many women are school teachers and this is an area where water education becomes important. Women teachers can teach students to conserve water the way they teach their own children. In many developed countries, schools have “River Watch” programmes whereby school children monitor the “health” of an adopted river (usually one that is adjacent to their school). This way, they can report any major changes in water quality of rivers due to dumping of toxic materials, rubbish, oil spill or otherwise. In Penang, one of WWP’s activities is the continuous education programme to instill awareness and love for our rivers. The objective is to get one school to adopt a river or part/section of a river and monitor the "Health" of the river via simple indicators. Because participants actually get into the river to perform various tasks, they really enjoyed themselves. Hence there is tremendous potential for women teachers to take advantage of this interesting water education activity. Children need to get out into the field to learn about rivers. Women control the water budget in the house as they are engaged in watering of plants/vegetables, wash floors and toilets, and other chores needing water. Hence, women can either save or waste water. There may be many other areas in which women can play an important role in water saving. Since the Government is now preaching the use of Water Demand Management (WDM) to complement Water Supply Management (WSM) that has been largely employed by Government so far, WDM in the household will determine whether WDM succeeds or fails. This is because more than half the water demand is from domestic households. Hence, the family unit holds the key to WDM. In a country blessed with abundant water, water has turned into a critical issue whereby there is inefficient use and high wastage. Given this scenario, there is an impact as well as a role for gender. Via WDM, a non-technological tool, women can help curb domestic wastage, ensuring wise use and conservation of water. In the domestic area, women can play a vital role as they are the “water managers” at home. Women such as Mrs. Chan can use Domestic Water Audit effectively to audit their household water use, and make adjustments to the water use pattern to reduce demand. Significant savings, both in terms of the volume of water and money can be saved. As women use water for most of the domestic chores in the home, they are effective water conservation agents in the home. When women save water in the home, they also educate their children, family members, neighbours and friends about the importance of water conservation. Women can also cut down on water use via substitution of water-saving equipment and methods, and other personal adjustments. A sustained national WDM initiative whereby women are the key players towards achieving sustainable management of water resources is needed. As domestic water consumption is about half of the country’s total water demand, the reduction of domestic water demand would be vital in achieving water sustainability. When every family cooperates, led by women, the reduction in consumption can save the country a lot of water and postponed the building of dams which can be saved for future generations. Bibliography Chan N W (2004) Managing Water Resources in the 21^st Century: Involving All Stakeholders Towards Sustainable Water Resources Management in Malaysia. Bangi: Environmental Management Programme, Centre for Graduate Studies, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia. Chan, N. W. and Nitivattananon, V, (2006) Gender Perspectives in Water Demand Management: Examples from Malaysia and Thailand. In Jamaluddin Md. Jahi, Kadir Arifin, Azahan Awang and Muhammad Rizal Razman (Editors) Managing Changes. Proceedings 3^rd Bangi World Conference on Environmental Management, 5-6 September 2006, Bangi, Malaysia. Bangi: Environmental Management Programme, Centre For Graduate Studies, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia and Environmental Management Society (EMS) of Malaysia, 200-220. Chan N W and Vilas Nitivattananon (2007) The Role of Gender in Domestic Water Conservation in Malaysia. Malaysian Journal of Environmental Management 8 (2007): 109-129. THE ISSUE OF PRIVATISATION OF THE WATER SECTOR IN MALAYSIA" By Ngai Weng Chan, PhDProfessor of Universiti Sains Malaysia President of Water Watch PenangEmail: nwchan@usm.my Privatisation of public utilities and government departments is one of the main thrusts of the government’s long term objective of achieving greater effectiveness and cost reduction. Arguably, the government has a case when it comes to many non cost-effective agencies which consume a great chunk of the annual budget. However, privatization has its pros and cons, and not all public utilities can be privatized. Several questions will have to be asked before privatization of water can go ahead: (i) Should a basic need of humanity be privatised? (ii) Can privatization be justified on moral or ethical grounds? (iii) Who will determine the price of water after privatisation? (iv) What happens if a poor person cannot afford to pay his/her water bill? (v) What will happen to our water supply if the water company goes bankrupt? If and when all the above questions are justifiably addressed, and privatisation is 100 % transparent (based on meritocracy) and it brings about greater efficiency, professionalism, less burden to the masses and government, and will improve the economy, then by all means privatise. In Malaysia, the “Privatisation Policy” was mooted when Dr Mahathir Mohamad, our fourth Prime Minister came into office in 1981. Since its introduction in 1983, the country's privatization programme has saved the Government some RM132.16 billion[1] and RM7 billion in capital and operating expenditure, respectively. In addition, the sale of the Government's interests in various entities raked in proceeds amounting to RM23.1 billion. However, it must be pointed out that the majority of the privatized entities were already highly successful even before privatization. These include manufacturing, transportatation, telecommunications, etc. For example, the national car Proton and its distributors were a monopoly. Arguably, the main argument for privatisation is that government can shed a large chunk of its annual expenditure on water supply, and could use the money elsewhere,for example in education. In addition, it has been argued that the majority of water works departments, water corporations and other government departments involved with managing water are not as effective as they ought to be, as testified by their susceptibility to water stress. There are now increasingly frequent occurrences of dry spells and water crises in recent years, most notably happening now in Malacca, Selangor and parts of East Malaysia. The painful fact is that Malaysia does not possess an efficient water management system yet. How else can one explain the average Non-Revenue Water (NRW) losses (water loss through leakage, theft, public use, faulty meters, metter-reading errors & other unaccountable losses once it leaves the treatment plant) ranging from 38 % to more than 50 % in many states? Water thefts are also rampant and pipe bursts often take the relevant agencies a long to repair, hence losing a great deal of precious water. If we can tackle half of the NRW losses (via replacement of old mains), many states would have solved their water problems and there would be no need to build expensive large dams (the negative impacts on the environment, wildlife and local communities of which are well known). There are more cases of failures in privatization of water resources in Malaysia than there are successes. Sabah is deep financial crisis and never recovered from massive overspending and privatization resulting in a cycle of debt that caused serious cash flow problems for the government. Since 1992, the Sabah government had signed several lopsided deals and over-priced contracts with private firms well beyond its capacity to pay and these had completely drained its treasury. By the end of 2002, the state owed RM524mil to three water concessionaires – Jetama, Timatch and Lahad Datu water supply. Clearly, such massive debts have never happened in the old days before privatization. The privatisation of water supply in Kelantan to KelantanWater Sdn Bhd was debated at the State Assembly sitting and six of the 19 oral questions forwarded by assemblymen to the State Government were on the issue. UMNO Kelantan has proof that Menteri Besar Datuk Nik Abdul Aziz Nik Mat was aware of the contents of the agreement on the State's privatization of water supply, its deputy chief Datuk Annuar Musa said today. He said Nik Aziz was aware of the agreement signed between Water Thames Water of London and the State
Copyright © 2007 WCAW.org. All Rights Reserved.		Home \| Photos \| Presentations \| Papers \| Weblink s