PhD Candidate, University of Cape Town Water governance in urban Malawi Mapping interactions between state and non-state actors in Lilongwe City Jane Mwenechanya PhD Candidate, University of Cape Town

State Governance Non-state Rogers and Hall, 2003 Governance in Malawi has been described as centralized, fragmented with minimal involvement of non state actors (O’Neal and Cammack, 2014; Chipofya et al., 2009; )

Aim of study The aim is to examine complex collaborative interactions between governmental and non-governmental actors concerning water management in Lilongwe city

Understanding the interactions Social network analysis – provides insight in the role and position of individual actors in the network of interest (Bodin and Crona 2009) Helps to understand the structure by focusing on nodes and ties Hence useful in understanding interactions

Lilongwe as a case study The city of Lilongwe (the capital) is the fastest growing from 19,425 in 1966 to 674,448 in 2008 (NSO, 2008) An annual growth rate of 4.3 percent was registered for the inter-censual period between 1998 and 2008

Water demand and supply for the Lilongwe city Year Demand m3 per day Supply m3 per day 2013 115,479 95,000 2012 100,656 2011 85,834 2010 72, 920 90,000 2009 65,362 Current demand around 123000, supply – 95,000 cubic meters Source: LWB Data

Increase in water demand in the city 35% lost as non revenue water About 61,000m3 reach the consumer

Methodology Identification of actors In total 24 actors were involved (NGOs, government departments, development partners etc) Realist approach used to draw boundaries

Data Analysis Coded and entered into SNA software Ucinet and Netdraw Focused on information exchange and collaboration Analyzed two network characteristics- Density and centrality

Results and discussion Organizations and agencies in Lilongwe city Administrative level Type of organization Total National 4 government departments 3 NGOs 4 development partners 2 research and consultancy   13 Local 6 NGOs 1 utility operator 2 government department 1Research and consultancy 1WUA 11

Collaboration and Information exchange

Results and discussion continued… Network Density: The level of density, that is the number of ties present against the number of possible ties Information exchange: 0.152 (15%) Collaboration: 0.163 (16%)

Centrality (node size based degree of centrality) Collaboration Information exchange

Removing centralized actors from the network (information exchange) Government actor removed NGO removed

Tentative conclusions for now What is obvious? Limited interactions between different actors Existence of peripheral actors e.g. the academia, but contributions limited Prominence of actors in the broker role is evident

What still need to be analyzed? Application of different scenarios Establish how Horizontal and Vertical links are facilitated – what strengthens the links

“Key challenges of the study – how do we strengthen existing linkages from what exists? Are we ready to move to a new form of governance?” (Jane’s reseach diary!)