Neither Rural nor Urban: Service Delivery Options That Work for the Peri-urban Poor

Chapter

Abstract

This chapter examines why it is necessary and relevant to overcome the rural–urban divide in order to obtain a better grasp of the water and sanitation (WATSAN) needs of the peri-urban poor. While explicit concern with the nature and impact of rural–urban linkages on people’s livelihoods and quality of life is relatively recent, assumptions about the role of urban and rural areas and their relationship are implicit in almost all development theories. Aimed at taking the reader beyond the rural–urban dichotomy and public–private controversy, the discussion explores the multiple practices and arrangements by which the peri-urban poor actually access water and sanitation on the ground. The concept of ‘service co-production’ is presented in this context as a means to explore meaningful institutional mechanisms to support their multiple practices and arrangements and their role and rights as key agents of change. The chapter concludes with an examination of how the previously discussed conceptual developments and empirical evidence can aid the identification of service delivery options that work for the peri-urban poor.

Keywords

Sanitation Service Water User Association Central Place Theory Private Sector Participation Core Urban Area 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Adam, C., Cavendish, W., & Mistry, P. (1992). Adjusting privatization: case studies from developing countries, James Curry, Ltd, LondonGoogle Scholar
  2. Adell, G. (1999). Theories and models of the peri-urban interface: a changing conceptual landscape. Report prepared for the Research Project. Strategic Environmental Planning and Management for the Peri-urban interface. London: Development Planning Unit.Google Scholar
  3. Aguilar, A. G., & Ward, P. (2003). Globalization, regional development and mega-city expansion in Latin America: analyzing Mexico City’s peri-urban hinterland. Cities, 20(1), 3–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Allen, A. (forthcoming 2010). Service co-production and water management governance in the peri-urban interface: responsible citizenship in Venezuela. In Igor Vojnovic (Ed.), Sustainability: a global urban context. Lansing, MI: Michigan State University (MSU) Press.Google Scholar
  5. Allen, A., Da Silva, N.A. & Corubolo, E. (1999). Environmental problems and opportunities of the peri-urban interface and their impact upon the poor. Document produced for the Research Project Strategic Environmental Planning and Management for the Peri-urban Interface. Development Planning Unit, University College London. http://www.ucl.ac.uk/dpu/pui.
  6. Allen, A., & Dávila, J. (Eds.). (2002). Mind the gap: bridging the rural–urban divide. Insights Development Research (41), May. http://www.id21.org/insights/insights41/index.html.
  7. Allen, A. (2003). Environmental planning and management of the peri-urban interface (PUI): perspectives on an emerging field. Environment and Urbanization, 15(1), 135–147.Google Scholar
  8. Allen, A., Dávila, J. D., & Hofmann, P. (2006a). Governance of water and sanitation for the peri-urban poor: a framework for understanding and action in metropolitan regions. London: University College London, Development Planning Unit. www.ucl.ac.uk/dpu/pui/publications/DPU%20PUI%20WSS_Book.pdf.
  9. Allen, A., Dávila, J. D., & Hofmann, P. (2006b). So close the city, so far from the pipes. London: University College London, Development Planning Unit. www.ucl.ac.uk/dpu/pui/publications/DPU%20PUI%20WSS%20Brochure.pdf.
  10. Allen, A., Hofmann, P., & Griffiths, H. (2007). Rural–urban linkages for poverty reduction. Report commissioned by IDRC/UPE and UN-Habitat for the State of the World’s Cities Report 2008: Creating Harmonious Cities. Google Scholar
  11. Allen, A., Hofmann, P., & Griffiths, H. (2008). Moving down the ladder: governance and sanitation that works for the urban poor. Discussion paper commissioned by IRC for the Symposium: Sanitation for the Urban Poor Partnerships and Governance, Delft, The Netherlands, 19–21 Nov 2008.Google Scholar
  12. Armstrong, W., & McGee, T. G. (1985). Theatres of accumulation: studies in Latin American and Asian urbanisation. London: Methuen.Google Scholar
  13. Banyard, J. (2004). Water for the world – Why is it so difficult? Fifth Brunel International Lecture, Institution of Civil Engineers. www.ice.org.uk.
  14. Batley, R. (1996). Public–private relationships and performance in service provision. Urban Studies, 33(4–5), 723–751.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Briggs, J., & Mwamfupe, D. (2000). Peri-urban development in an era of structural adjustment in Africa: the city of Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. Urban Studies, 37(4), 797–810.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Browder, J., Bohland, J. R., & Scarpaci, J. L. (1995). Patterns of development on the metropolitan fringe – urban fringe expansion in Bangkok, Jakarta and Santiago. Journal of the American Planning Association, 61(3), 310–327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Burra, S., Patel, S., & Kerr, T. (2003). Community-designed, built and managed toilet blocks in Indian cities. Environment and Urbanization, 15(2), 11–32.Google Scholar
  18. Calaguas, B., & Roaf, V. (2001). Access to water and sanitation by the urban poor. Paper presented to Development Studies Association Conference, Manchester, 10 Sept.Google Scholar
  19. Cariola, C., & Lacabana, M. (2004). WSS practices and living conditions in the peri-urban interface of metropolitan Caracas: the cases of Bachaquero and Paso Real 2000. Unpublished report prepared for the Research Project Service Provision Governance in the peri-urban interface of metropolitan areas. Development Planning Unit, University College London.Google Scholar
  20. Castells, M. (1989). The informational city: information technology, economic restructuring and the urban-regional process. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
  21. Cook, P., & Kirkpatrick, C. (1988). Privatization in less developed countries, Wheatsheaf, Brighton, UK.Google Scholar
  22. da Costa, S., Campos Borja, S.P., Heller, L., & Santos Moraes, L.R. (2006). Successful municipal experiences in water supply and sanitation services in Brazil. Available online at http://www.tni.org/water-docs/dacosta.pdf.
  23. Dardenne, B. (2006). The role of the private sector in peri-urban or rural water services in emerging countries, OECD Global Forum on Sustainable Development: Public–Private Partnerships in Water Supply and Sanitation – Recent Trends and New Opportunities, Paris, Nov 2006. http://aspa-utilities.com/Dardenne_OECD.pdf.
  24. Douglass, M. (1998). A regional network strategy for reciprocal rural–urban linkages: an agenda for policy research with reference to Indonesia. Third World Planning Review, 20(1), 1–33.Google Scholar
  25. Douglass, M. (2006). A regional network strategy for reciprocal rural–urban linkages: an agenda for policy research with reference to Indonesia. In C. Tacoli (Ed.), Rural–urban linkages (pp. 124–154). London: Earthscan.Google Scholar
  26. Eckerberg, K., & Joas, M. (2004). Multi-level environmental governance: a concept under stress? Local Environment, 9(5), 405–412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Fisher, J. (2006). Achieving sanitation at scale: Innovative approaches to rural and urban sanitation. WELL Briefing Note 18, Water and Engineering and Development Centre, Loughborough. http://www.lboro.ac.uk/well/resources/Publications/Briefing%20Notes/BN18%20Sanitation%20at%20scale.htm.
  28. Frayne, B. (2005). Survival of the poorest: migration and food security in Namibia. In Luc J. A. Mougeot (Ed.), AGROPOLIS: the social, political, and environmental dimensions of urban agriculture (pp. 31–50). London: Earthscan/IDRC. http://www.idrc.ca/es/ev-85401-201-1-DO_TOPIC.html.
  29. Friedmann, J., & Douglass, M. (1975). Agropolitan development: Towards a new strategy for regional planning in Asia, in United Nations Centre for Regional Development. Growth pole strategy and regional development planning in Asia (pp. 333–387). Nagoya: The Asian Experience.Google Scholar
  30. Gilbert, A. (1993). Third world cities: the changing national settlement system. Urban Studies, 30(4/5), 721–740.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Ginsburg, N., Koppel, B., & McGee, T. (Eds.). (1991). The extended metropolis: settlement transition in Asia. Honolulu, Hawaii: Hawaii University Press.Google Scholar
  32. Gutierrez, E., Calaguas, B., Green, J., & Roaf, V. (2003). New rules, new roles: does Private Sector Participation (PSP) benefit the poor? Synthesis report. London: WaterAid and Tearfund.Google Scholar
  33. Harvey, D. (1995). The environment of justice. In A. Merrifield & E. Swyngedouw (Eds.), The urbanization of injustice (pp. 65–99). London: Lawrence and Wishart.Google Scholar
  34. Herzer, H., & Pirez, P. (1989). Municipio y participación popular en America Latina, Desarrollo Económico, 29(114), 187–205 (July–Sept).Google Scholar
  35. Hogrewe, William, Joyce, Steven D. & Perez, Eduardo A. (1993). The unique challenge of improving peri-urban sanitation. Voices from the city. Newsletter of the peri-urban network on water supply and environmental sanitation, Vol 2. WASH Project.Google Scholar
  36. Jack, M., & Morris, R. (2005). The community led infrastructure finance facility (CLIFF), International Association of Local and Regional Development Funds in Emerging Markets. Available online at http://www.citiesalliance.org/doc/resources/financing/cliff/articleIADF(FullVersionFinal)_Jun05.pdf.
  37. Jerve, A. M. (2001). Rural–urban linkages and poverty analysis. In A. Grinspun et al. (Eds.), Choices for the poor: lessons from national poverty strategies (pp. 89–120). Bergen and New York: CMI/UNDP.Google Scholar
  38. Jolly, R. (2003). Water and sanitation goals: is progress in the pipeline? id21 Research Highlight: 10 Mar 2003.Google Scholar
  39. Joshi, A., & Moore, M. (2002). Organisations that reach the poor: why co-production matters. Paper prepared and presented at the Making Services Work for Poor People, World Development Report (WDR) 2003/04 Workshop, Oxford, 4–5 Nov.Google Scholar
  40. Joshi, A., & Moore, M. (2004). Institutionalized coproduction: unorthodox public service delivery in challenging environments. Journal of Development Studies, 40(4), 31–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Joshi, D., & Morgan, J. (2007). Pavement dwellers’ sanitation activities: visible but ignored. Water Lines, 25(3), 19–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Lewis, W. A. (1954). Economic development with unlimited supplies of labour. The Manchester School, 22, 139–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Lewis, W. A. (1979). The dual economy revisited. The Manchester School, 47, 211–229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Lipton, M. (1977). Why poor people stay poor: a study of urban bias in world development. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  45. Lynch, K. (2005). Rural–urban interaction in the developing world. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  46. Mara, D. (1998). Low-cost sewerage, Sanitation Promotion, WSSCC Working Group on Promotion of Sanitation, WHO, Geneva. Available online at http://www.efm.leeds.ac.uk/CIVE/Sewerage/articles/WHO_EOS_98.5_pp249-262.pdf
  47. McGee, T. G. (1991). The emergence of the desakota regions in Asia: expanding a hypothesis. In N. Ginsberg, B. Poppel, & T. G. McGee (Eds.), The extended metropolis (pp. 3–25). Honolulu, HI: University of Hawaii Press.Google Scholar
  48. McGranahan, G., & Satterthwaite, D. (2006). Governance and getting the private sector to provide better water and sanitation services to the urban poor. IIED human settlements discussion paper series, theme: Water-2. London: International Institute for Environment and Development.Google Scholar
  49. McGregor, D., Simon, D., & Thompson, D. (2006). The peri–urban interface. Approaches to sustainable natural and human resource use. London: Earthscan.Google Scholar
  50. Montgomery, M., Stren, R., Cohen, B., & Reed, H. E. (Eds.). (2004). Cities transformed: demographic change and its implications in the developing world. London: Earthscan.Google Scholar
  51. Mortimore, M. (1993). The intensification of peri-urban agriculture: the Kano close-settled zone, 1964–1986. In B. L. Turner, R. W. Kates, & G. Hyden (Eds.), Population growth and agricultural change in Africa. Florida: University Press of Florida.Google Scholar
  52. Myint, H. (1964). The economics of developing countries. London: Hutchinson.Google Scholar
  53. Neder, K. D., & Nazareth, P. (1998). Condominial sewerage systems for the federal district of Brazil. CAESB – Water and Sewerage Company of Brasília. http://www.efm.leeds.ac.uk/CIVE/Sewerage/.
  54. Nunan, F., & Satterthwaite, D. (2001). The influence of governance on the provision of urban environmental infrastructure and services for low-income groups. International Planning Studies, 6(4), 409–426.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Ostrom, E. (1973). Community organisation and the provision of police services. Woodland Hills, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  56. Ostrom, E. (1996). Crossing the great divide: co-production, synergy and development. World Development, 24(6), 1073–1087.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Percy, S. L. (1984). Citizen participation in the co-production of urban services’. Urban Affairs Review, 19(4), 431–446.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Portes, A. (1985). The informal sector and the world-economy: notes on the structure of subsidized labor. In M. Timberlake (Ed.), Urbanization in the world-economy (pp. 53–62). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  59. Portes, A., & Walton, J. (1981). Labor, class, and the international system. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  60. Potter, R., Binns, T., Elliott, J., & Smith, D. (2004). Geographies of development. Harlow: Pearson (Second edition).Google Scholar
  61. Qadeer, M. A. (2000). Ruralopolises: the spatial organisations of residential land economy of high density rural regions in South Asia. Urban Studies, 37(9), 1583–603.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Rakodi, C. (1998). Review of the poverty relevance of the peri-urban interface production system research. Report for the DFID natural resources systems research programme (PD70/ZE0091), Second Draft, Sept.Google Scholar
  63. Rigg, J. (1998). Rural–urban interactions, agriculture and wealth: a southeast Asian perspective. Progress in Human Geography, 22(4), 497–522.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Rondinelli, D. (1979). Applied policy analysis for integrated regional development planning in the Philippines. Third World Planning Review, 1(2), 151–178.Google Scholar
  65. Rostow, W. W. (1960). The stages of economic growth: a non-communist manifesto. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  66. Satterthwaite, D. (2000). Seeking an understanding of poverty that recognizes rural–urban differences and rural–urban linkages. Paper commissioned by the World Bank, first draft presented at the World Bank’s Urban forum on urban poverty reduction in the 21st century, April 2000.Google Scholar
  67. Schaub-Jones, D. (2006). Sanitation partnerships: can partnership make a difference to the urban sanitation challenge? BPD Sanitation Series, Feb 2006.Google Scholar
  68. SIGUS (2003). Providing sanitation services, in Water and sanitation for all: a practitioners companion. http://web.mit.edu/urbanupgrading/waterandsanitation/levels/provide-san-serv.html#household-latrine-pit-septic.
  69. Tacoli, C. (1998). Rural–urban interactions: a guide to the literature. Environment and Urbanization, 10(1), 147–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Tacoli, C. (Ed.). (2006). The Earthscan reader in rural–urban linkages. London: Earthscan.Google Scholar
  71. Tayler, K. (2005). Notes on sanitation and wastewater disposal. Prepared for the Research Project Service Provision Governance in the Peri-urban interface of Metropolitan Areas. London: Development Planning Unit.Google Scholar
  72. Tiffen, M. (2003). Transitions in sub-Saharan Africa: agriculture, urbanisation and income growth, World Development, 31(8): 1343–1366. Reprinted in C. Tacoli (Ed.) (2006). The Earthscan reader in rural–urban linkages (pp. 91–123). London: Earthscan.Google Scholar
  73. Varley, R. C. G., Yacoob, M., & Smith, S. (1996). Beyond participation: locally based demand for environmental health in peri-urban areas. USAID. http://pdf.dec.org/pdf_docs/pnabz936.pdf.
  74. Watson, G. (1995). Good sewers cheap? Agency–customer interactions in low-cost urban sanitation in Brazil. Water and sanitation currents. Washington, DC: World Bank.Google Scholar
  75. Webster, D. (2004). Summary of peri-urbanisation: the new global frontier. Enschede, Netherlands: International Institute for Geo-Information Science and Earth Observation.Google Scholar
  76. Wellisz, S. (1971). Economic development and urbanization. In L. Jakobson & V. Prakash (Eds.), Urbanization and national development (pp. 39–55). Woodland Hills, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  77. Whitaker, G. (1980). Co-production: citizen participation in service delivery. Public Administration Review, 40, 240–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Williamson, J. (1965). Regional inequality and the process of national development: a description of patterns. Economic Development and Cultural Change, 13(4), 3–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. World Bank. (2003). World development indicators. Washington, DC: World Bank.Google Scholar
  80. WUP (Water Utility Partnership for Capacity Building) Africa. (2003). Better water and sanitation for the urban poor. Good practice from sub-Saharan Africa. Nairobi: European Communities and Water Utility Partnership.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Senior Lecturer and Director of the M.Sc. in Environment and Sustainable Development (ESD) Development Planning UnitUniversity College LondonLondonUK

Personalised recommendations