| dc.description |
Groundwater resource in Tanzania faces challenges such as low awareness of the local
communities about groundwater management, pollution, unplanned and uncontrolled
exploitation. The general objective of this study was to examine groundwater governance
for groundwater management in Njombe District. Data collection took place between
September and November 2019. The study adopted a cross-sectional research design with
qualitative and quantitative techniques. Qualitative data were collected using key
informant interviews and focus group discussions whereas household survey was used to
collect quantitative data. Purposive sampling procedure was used to select divisions and
wards. A simple random sampling technique was used to select one village from each
ward. From the sampling frame, a total of 250 households were selected. The IMB
Statistical Products and Service Solutions version 20 was used to summarize quantitative
data while qualitative data were subjected to content analysis. A Summated Index Scale
(SIS) with five-point index scale was used to quantify groundwater governance. The
Kruskal Wallis H Test and the Mann Whitney U Test were used to compare responses
between villages and males and females respectively. The ordinal logistic regression
model was used to determine the governance principles and groundwater characteristics
factors that influenced groundwater users’ compliance with groundwater institutions. Chi-
squire test was also used to determine the respondents’ socio-demographic characteristics
that influenced groundwater users’ compliance with groundwater institutions. The results
showed that only three governance principles out of eight were well practised while other
governance principles were poorly practised. The study concludes that the practice of
governance principles was poor, hence affecting groundwater management in the study
area. The overall level of groundwater governance was low and differed by governance
principles. Groundwater governance actors interacted to manage public groundwater points. However, groundwater governance encountered insufficient control over
information flow among governance structures. The study recommends that groundwater
governance structures have to maintain and improve their interaction to enhance effective
groundwater management. The district should provide capacity building related to
interactions particularly on efficient control of information flow and linking with other
governance structures for groundwater governance and management matters at a local
level. Based on the ordinal logistic regression analysis, compliance was mainly influenced
by availability of groundwater (Wald = 7.694, p = 0.006), quality of groundwater (Wald =
20.408, p = 0.000) and participation (Wald = 13.397, p = 0.000). The results from Chi-
squire test showed that compliance was also influenced by the distance from the
respondents’ households to groundwater points (p = 0. 006), sex (p = 0.000), education
level (p = 0. 000) and the households annual income (p = 0.01). The study concludes that,
groundwater characteristics in terms of quality and its availability, the practice of
governance principles particularly participation in decision making, accessibility of
groundwater, and socio-demographic characteristics are essential aspects to influence
groundwater users’ compliance with groundwater institutions. The study recommends that
groundwater governance actors including the district water officials, village councils and
COWSO leaders should practice well the good governance principles in the study area.
Also the study recommends that local government authority and other water development
stakeholders should increase number of groundwater points within the recommendable
distance. The groundwater users’ socio-demographic characteristics particularly sex,
education level and annual households’ income should be considered by groundwater
governance actors to enhance effective groundwater management at the local level. This
will increase the level of compliance with groundwater institutions. |
|