The Relationship between Participation and Project Success : Evidence from Rural Water Supply Projects in India

Summary This study examines data collected at the household and village level in 45 villages in two water supply projects in India. Based upon the results of regression models, capital cost contribution and household involvement in decision making are both found to be independently significant predictors of village level measures of household satisfaction, equal access, and time savings. This suggests that projects should continue to encourage both contributions and household involvement in decision making from as many households within a village as possible. Neither form of participation is a significant predictor of whether households in a village pay tariff.

[1]  Introduction and Overview 1.1 Introduction , 2001 .

[2]  K. Finsterbusch,et al.  The contribution of beneficiary participation to development project effectiveness , 1987 .

[3]  Dale Whittington,et al.  A study of water vending and willingness to pay for water in Onitsha, Nigeria , 1989 .

[4]  P. Oakley.  Projects with people : the practice of participation in rural development , 1991 .

[5]  Christine van Wijk-Sijbesma,et al.  Gender in Water Resources Management, Water Supply and Sanitation: Roles and Realities Revisited , 1998 .

[6]  Sherry R. Amstein.  “A Ladder of Citizen Participation” , 1969 .

[7]  Bill Cooke,et al.  Institutions, agency and the limitations of participatory approaches to development. , 2001 .

[8]  Jonathan Isham,et al.  Institutional Determinants of the Impact of Community-Based Water Services: Evidence from Sri Lanka and India , 2001 .

[9]  The Role of Social Capital in Development: How do participation and social capital affect community-based water projects? Evidence from Central Java, Indonesia , 2002 .

[10]  Rekha Van Wijk Christine Mukherjee Nilanjana Dayal.  Methodology for participatory assessments with communities, institutions, and policymakers : linking sustainability with demand, gender, and poverty , 2000 .

[11]  Jules Pretty,et al.  Participatory learning for sustainable agriculture , 1995 .

[12]  B. Cooke,et al.  Participation: the New Tyranny? , 2001 .

[13]  L. Pritchett,et al.  Does participation improve project performance: establishing causality with subjective data , 1995 .

[14]  C. Wijk-Sijbesma,et al.  The best of two worlds? : methodology for participatory assessment of community water services , 2001 .

[15]  D. Whittington.  Behavioural studies of the domestic demand for water services in Africa: a reply to Stephen Merrett , 2002 .

[16]  C. Wijk-Sijbesma,et al.  Participation of women in water supply and sanitation: roles and realities. , 1985 .

[17]  L. Prokopy.  Women's participation in rural water supply projects in India: is it moving beyond tokenism and does it matter? , 2004 .

[18]  Travis Katz,et al.  Making rural water supply sustainable: report on the impact of project rules , 2005 .

[19]  Deepa Narayan,et al.  The contribution of people's participation : evidence from 121 rural water supply projects , 1995 .

[20]  Paul Collier.  The Role of Social Capital in Development: An Empirical Assessment. , 2004 .

[21]  P. Moriarty,et al.  Community Water, Community Management: From System to Service in Rural Areas , 2003 .

[22]  B. Agarwal,et al.  Participatory Exclusions, Community Forestry, and Gender: An Analysis for South Asia and a Conceptual Framework , 2001 .