MASTER'S THESIS - SuSanA
MASTER'S THESIS - SuSanA
MASTER'S THESIS - SuSanA
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
7 Presentation of the institutional framework<br />
LGUs are not very interested in actually getting the license. But ADF and CES stay in close contact with the<br />
WRA and inform about their project in order to make licensing possible in the future.<br />
7.2.2.2 Identification of the main steps of the project<br />
For this project, the necessary steps were:<br />
• Preparation of list of priorities by LGU and presenting it to the Qark<br />
• Close contact between ADF inspectors and Qark, discussion and information about water supply<br />
project<br />
• Funding secured by KfW<br />
• Application of LGU to ADF with approvement of Qark. LGU has to confirm a payment of 10 % of the<br />
construction costs as local contribution.<br />
• Involvement of inhabitants and public meetings. Secure local contribution of at least 2 % of the<br />
construction costs from villagers.<br />
• Call for tenders and selection of design, construction and supervision companies<br />
• Getting construction permission from Qark<br />
• Secure operation and maintenance by LGU. Manual is prepared by CES and ADF.<br />
• For future: getting license for LGU by WRA<br />
7.2.2.3 Identification of main stakeholders<br />
In the water supply project of ADF, the following stakeholders were involved in the project planning and<br />
implementation process:<br />
• Qark:<br />
◦ Close contact with ADF, knowledge about the necessities of the communes/municipalities and<br />
acting in-between LGU and ADF<br />
◦ Approval of the application from LGU to ADF<br />
◦ Issuing the construction permission<br />
• LGU:<br />
◦ Application for project to ADF by mayor<br />
◦ Provision of 10 % of construction costs as local contribution<br />
◦ Responsibility for O&M and tariffs (has to get a license in the future)<br />
• Villagers:<br />
◦ Formation of beneficiary groups<br />
◦ Local contribution by villagers by 2 % of the construction costs<br />
91