Physics and Chemistry of the Earth 28 (2003) 911917 www.elsevier.

com/locate/pce

Linking poverty levels to water resource use and conicts in rural Tanzania
Ndalahwa F. Madulu
*
Institute of Resource Assessment, University of Dar es Salaam, P.O. Box 35097, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania

Abstract Water scarcity is an important environmental constraint to development. Water availability is closely linked to human welfare and health by aecting nutrition status and quantity of drinking water especially for the poor. It has impacts on household labour because of the time and energy spent in obtaining it. These problems are more keenly felt among the poor households and in the agricultural subsistence economy. In many areas, the demand for water has been increasing due to rapid population growth, economic development, and climatic change. Water scarcity also stimulates social conicts between various water users: individuals, communities, industries, livestock, wildlife, agriculture etc. Consequently, local communities have evolved strategies for coping with water stress and drought. These strategies include use of various sources of water, inaction to strict bye-laws regarding the use of water, crop diversication, wage labour, and possibly seasonal migration. The available strategies are likely to vary from one area to another. Some of these actions have measurable longterm demographic consequences, particularly if water stress is severe or repetitive. Although most governments and donor organizations often put much emphasis on the provision of water for drinking purposes, there is clear evidence that the supply of water for other uses has equal importance especially among rural communities. This observation suggests that putting too much emphasis on drinking water needs, addresses a rather insignicant part of the problem of water resources and biases the range of solutions which are likely to be proposed for perceived shortages. The presence of other water uses necessitates the provision of multi-purpose water sources that can serve a number of contrasting functions. This demand-responsive approach can enable the local communities and the poor households to choose the type of services they require on the basis of perceived needs and their ability to manage the water scheme. 2003 Published by Elsevier Ltd.
Keywords: Water scarcity; Subsistence agriculture; Social conicts; Water use strategies; Water demand; Water supply

1. Introduction Water supply is an important commodity for human, animal and plant life. Provision of water services is one of the most important prerequisites for improving the quality of life of people, which is the long-term goal of almost all development policies and strategies in Tanzania. This argument suggests that water is life. Realizing the importance of water, Tanzania adopted a 20-year program in 1970 with the goal of supplying clean and safe water to every citizen within a walkable distance of 400 m from the households. The 1991 National Water Policy set a target of achieving by the year 2002. The aim was to ensure access to safe water and proper sanitary facilities to about 95% of the population by the years

Tel.: +255-22-2410144/-744-272335; fax: +255-744-272335. E-mail address: madulu@ira.udsm.ac.tz (N.F. Madulu).

2002 (URT, 1999). However, recent estimated from the Ministry of Water and Livestock Development indicates that only 50% of the rural population and 73% of the urban population in Tanzania have had access to reliable water supply (URT, 2002). Moreover, about 30% of the rural water schemes are not functioning properly basically because little emphasis was placed on sustainability. A sharp decline in the proportion of households using piped water was noted during the 1978/88 decade as compared to the 1967/78 period (Zaba and Kiwasila, 1995). However, there is evidence to suggest that the water supply services have been declining since 1978. The 1991 Water Policy indicates a clear departure from the era of free water launched in 1967 by introducing the principle of cost sharing in the Operation and Maintenance (O&M) of water schemes (URT, 1991). The revised 2002 Water Policy puts emphasis on a demand-responsive approach and community participation in the management and maintenance of water

1474-7065/$ - see front matter 2003 Published by Elsevier Ltd. doi:10.1016/j.pce.2003.08.024

912

N.F. Madulu / Physics and Chemistry of the Earth 28 (2003) 911917

schemes (URT, 2002). The policy reemphasizes the importance of community involvement in the planning and provision of water services to the population. It also opts for technologies that require low costs investments and that with least operation and maintenance costs. The implementation of the new policy is in line with the Tanzania 2025 Development Vision (URT, 2000). Tanzania is characterized by natural water scarcity alongside a growing demand for water due to high population growth. The ever-widening gap between supply and demand for water calls for the search for new water sources. In most rural communities, domestic water availability is determined by communities own eort to invest in improving, maintaining and developing water sources and not just its physical abundance (Drangert, 1993). In Tanzania, local communities are increasingly expected to contribute to the cost of improved water provision. Evident from rural Mwanza demonstrated the local communities eorts to construct multi-purpose charco dams for providing water for domestic and livestock purposes (Zaba and Madulu, 1998). The purpose of this paper is to identify the linkages between poverty levels and water resource use and conicts in the rural areas of Tanzania. An attempt is also made to identify various conicts that emerge due to competing interests and demands from various water users. This assessment is expected to aid the planning of water source development, so that investment in rural water supply schemes can take account of the community needs and the likely impacts of population pressure on future water demands.

2. Dening poverty in the Tanzanian context Poverty refers to the state of being very poor. A poor person is characterized as one whose standard of living falls below the minimum acceptable level, that is the poverty line (Mtatikolo, 1994). Poverty can be grouped into two categories, the absolute 1 and relative. 2 This approach is appealing, both socially and politically because individuals relate to one another at all levels of economic well-being. This discussion leads us to understand that poverty is a dynamic concept, which change with time and space. Generally, poverty in Tanzania is a rural phenomenon. About 85% of the poor live in rural areas, and 59% of the people living in rural households are categorized as being poor out of which 44% are being very poor. In other words, poverty
1

is much deeper and severe in rural that urban areas. Green (1974) described a Tanzanian poor as a man who scratches a bare living from the soil provided the rains do not fail; his children work at his side without schooling, medical care, safe drinking water or even good feeding. This description supports the contention of poverty being a rural phenomenon. In recent years, income distribution and poverty issues have attracted much of global concerns. According to Semboja (1994), greater equity implies higher welfare levels and lower levels of poverty imply higher levels of welfare. During the 1980s, the focus of adjustment programmes was on the economic growth oriented polices. However, the results of these programmes on equity and poverty depended on baseline situations. Recently, environmental issues have been linked to growing income inequality and poverty. The poor live in regions or areas where arable land is scarce, agricultural productivity is low and drought, oods and environmental degradation are common. These areas are marginal and isolated. They lack sustainable income generation and employment opportunities. Similarly, most of these areas lack basic social services and infrastructure, including adequate water supply and sustainable sanitary facilities. The social, economic and demographic factors in these areas interact to push the poor into the marginal lands leading to further environmental degradation and stimulating further poverty. There are various indicators which are used to measure poverty and the standard of living. The standard of living can be measured by either using consumption/ expenditure or using the total income (Semboja, 1994). Although income/consumption provides a good indicator of standard of living, it does not adequately capture other important dimensions of welfare such as health, education, access to clean water, access to public goods or common property resources. Thus, there is a need to use social indicators to complement the income-based indicators of poverty. These indicators include infant and child mortality, life expectancy, primary school enrolment, nutritional status, housing conditions, proportion accessible to water, incidences of water related diseases, etc. Notable poverty dierential exist between regions and districts, and between rural and urban localities. One of the main causes of such disparities is the dierence in economic development and access to various social ammenities including health and drinking water. Poor access to clean water is among the major causes of mortality because it leads to many water-borne diseases.

Absolute poverty refers to the inability to attain a specied (minimum) standard of living. This denition focuses on the absolute economic well-being of the poor in isolation from the welfare distribution of the whole society. 2 Relative poverty focuses on the economic well-being of poorest proportion of the population.

3. Water demand and supply situation in Tanzania Access to clean water is an essential necessity for the well-being of all people. Water availability has been

N.F. Madulu / Physics and Chemistry of the Earth 28 (2003) 911917

913

identied as an important environmental constraint on development and ultimately a limiting factor for population growth and food production (World Bank, 1992). Falkenmark (1989) explained population as experiencing water stress if there is not enough water locally available for food production and basic hygiene. According to the 1996 Tanzania Demographic and Health Survey (TDHS), only 31% of the households in Tanzania have access to clean water supply within 15 min distance (Bureau of Statistics, 1997). Water availability is closely linked to human welfare, since it aects nutrition through food production, and peoples health through quantity and quality of drinking water. Scarcity of water also aects household labour costs because of the time and energy spent in obtaining it. Experiences from Igunga District demonstrate the impact of water scarcity on socio-economic development. During the dry season, the distances to water sources in big requiring more than 12 h to access, queuing at water sources is a common factor, and livestock access water once in two days on a rotational basis (Madulu et al., 1990). It is dicult to estimate the per capita water supply needed to maintain an acceptable or minimum living standard especially in the rural areas of Sub-Saharan Africa. The situation is even complicated in areas that are aected by recurrent droughts and souring populations. Hinrichsen et al. (1998) suggested that about 20 40 l of water per person per day to be the necessary minimum for drinking and cooking needs. However, this amount rises to between 27 and 200 l per capita per day if water for bathing and sanitation needs are included. White et al. (1972) measured water consumption in 19 villages in rural areas of East Africa, at times of the year when water was reasonably abundant in the neighborhood of the settlement. They found the average rate of daily use for domestic purposes ranged between 4 and 18 l per head. More recently, Drangert (1993) measured water use in six Sukuma villages village and reported a range of between 22 and 36 l per head. Yet another study study found a wide variation between individual households10% of households used less than 10 l per capita, and 5% used more than 40 l (Zaba and Madulu, 1996). These estimates of mean levels of use are based on the amount carried, and therefore are slight underestimates of total use, as they exclude water collected in the dwelling (for example from an iron roof), and water used at source. In Tanzania, despite signicant investment in the provision of rural water since 1970s, only about 50% of the rural population has access to reliable water supply. The 1978/88 intercensal interval indicates that the absolute number of rural households receiving piped water declined by 22%, although the number of households increased by 16% over the same time period. The proportion of rural households with piped water has thus declined from 28% in 1978 to about 19% in 1988. The

main causes of this alarming decline have not yet been fully analysed. However, some of the decline is undoubtedly due to drying out of sources probably due to rapid deforestation and climatic change, and maintenance failure of water provision schemes, especially those constructed in the 1970s. Moreover, support in the water sector was provided in a fragmented fashion, and little emphasis was placed on sustainability. This understanding was a basis for the 1991 National Water Policy (URT, 1991). Methods for providing water to the rural people in Tanzania have changed over years and emphasis has been directed to more user-friendly demand-driven programs, with emphasis on local community involvement, especially in the planning and management of the cost of improved water provision. On the one hand, the decline in proportion using piped water, for example, reects the impact of rapid population growth on water supply. On the other hand, this decline can be a reection of an absolute decline in the number of households using piped water. Varying socio-economic development, environmental and climatic conditions, and non-availability of reliable water sources such as lakes, rivers and dams in particular locations causes regional and district variations with regards to access to water. Even at the village and household levels, the economic status of individual household is a signicant explanatory factor of water availability, quality and type of source used. Another worrying trend shown by the census data is a fall in the number of households beneting from a water supply within the compound or dwelling from 41% in 1972 to 35% in 1988. In some regions this is partly explained by a switch from wells and other sources within compounds to public standpipes. But there are many regions in which the shift in use is to more distant traditional sources, which may indicate a fall in the quantity of water available to the household. At the same time, local studies an increase in the length of time spent queuing at the both traditional and improved water source. The major problems aecting the provision of water services in Tanzania include inadequate funding for construction of new and maintenance of existing water schemes; destruction of water source catchment areas due to deforestation, poor water quality and sanitation services, socio-cultural values, and lack of appropriate working tools (Zaba and Madulu, 1998).

4. Poverty and water supply in Tanzania The national water policy set a target of providing clean and safe water for domestic use to all people within a distance of 400 m by the year 2000. This target was to be achieved through use of simple technology in developing new sources and improving old ones,

914

N.F. Madulu / Physics and Chemistry of the Earth 28 (2003) 911917

Table 1 Distribution of households by access to drinkable water and regions, 1988 Regions Dar es Salaam Mwanza Kilimanjaro Mtwara Tanga Kagera Mara Shinyanga Dodoma Mbeya Kigoma Iringa Coast Morogoro Arusha Singida Tabora Ruvuma Rukwa Lindi Total Source: Tanzania (1994). Population 1,360,850 1,876,776 1,106,068 887,583 1,280,262 1,313,639 952,616 1,763,960 1,235,277 1,476,261 853,263 1,193,074 639,182 1,279,931 1,352,225 793,887 1,042,622 779,868 704,050 642,364 2,317,4443 Percent of households with access to various sources Piped water 86.1 15.8 58.1 43.9 36.5 6.6 13.9 10.8 31.7 28.4 28.6 33.1 21.1 35.9 31.7 11.8 14.9 21.0 25.3 22.5 21.2 Well water 13.4 71.8 12.1 54.5 44.6 44.2 70.8 66.3 55.9 55.0 32.8 49.5 71.3 42.3 30.4 71.8 81.9 69.9 51.3 68.8 51.2 Other supply 0.4 12.4 24.7 1.7 18.9 49.2 15.3 22.8 12.2 16.6 38.6 17.3 7.6 21.4 27.8 16.4 3.2 9.5 23.4 8.7 17.5

Table 2 Distribution of rural and urban households by type of water supply (196888) Location Rural areas Urban areas Year 1978 1988 1967 1978 1988 Total households 2,994,456 3,480,233 194,591 560,337 939,405 Internal source Piped 11.6 5.8 20.7 34.0 27.4 Well 18.9 22.3 n.a. 2.6 5.7 Others 10.1 6.8 n.a. 1.2 0.6 External source Piped 16.1 12.7 48.9 54.1 52.1 Well 27.5 38.2 n.a. 5.7 11.5 Others 15.8 14.2 n.a. 2.4 2.7

Source: Zaba and Kiwasila (1995).

encouraging peoples participation, rehabilitating water schemes, and by introducing adequate and selected water charges. Although notable attempts have been made to at dierent levels, the target is yet to be achieved. The failure to achieve this target can be linked to poverty both at the national and local levels. Recent studies in Mwanza Region indicate clearly that the poor face severe water problems than anybody else both in rural and urban areas (Kiwasila, 1994; Zaba and Madulu, 1996). The squatters in most urban areas (where the majority of the poor live) are rarely provided with safe and clean water. In the rural areas and especially in the most remote villages, people have continued to depend on traditional water sources which are not even reliable for most part of the year. Again, it is the poor households who suer most because they cannot aord other forms of transport to enable them to reach distant water sources. Under such circumstances, poor households are often exposed to risks of health hazards.

Sometimes they have to travel for over 10 km in search for water (Madulu et al., 1990). Regional variations in terms of availability and access to drinkable water as per 1988 population census are reected in Table 1. The data seem to suggest that the well is the most important source of drinkable water for the majority of the Tanzanians. Wells serve a larger proportion of the population especially the rural poor. A sharp decline in the proportion of households using piped water has been noted for the 1978/88 decade as compared to the 1967/78 periods as demonstrated in Table 2. In both rural and urban areas there has been a decline in the proportion of households obtaining drinking water from a piped supply. This fall was compensated by a rise in the proportion using wells, especially wells outside the compound. In urban areas the decline in piped water reects the fact that the total number of households has grown faster than the number with piped supply. In rural areas there has been an absolute

N.F. Madulu / Physics and Chemistry of the Earth 28 (2003) 911917

915

decline in the number of households using piped water from 829,000 in 1978 to 644,000 in 1988. With the exception of Rukwa, Kigoma, Mbeya, Mtwara and Lindi that show an increase, most regions experienced a declining trend as far as use of piped water is concerned as it has been observed at the national level (Zaba and Kiwasila, 1995). Generally, poverty is a major contributing factor in the regional and district level variations in the water sector. Water buying is practised mainly because the piped water is not reliable and does not meet the demands of the ever-growing population. Even in households which have piped water in their compounds, large amounts of money is spent for buying water from neighbours and water vendors (Madulu and Zaba, 1997). The consequences of such an option to the poor is much severe because most of them cannot aord to buy water for all domestic uses. They suer most in terms of cost and distance to alternative water sources. In other words, the poor are forced by circumstances to rely on contaminated water sources like ponds, rivers and surface runos, increasing the risks of water-borne diseases like cholera, typhoid and diarrhoea. Mosi (1996) observed in Dar es Salaam that the majority of the low income people who live in the high density squatters areas spend a considerable amount of their monthly incomes for buying water as compared to the high-income earners living in low density areas. Similarly, there are spatial variations with regard to distribution of domestic water supply. Whereas the high income areas (low density) are well served with water supply networks, the low income areas (high density) are poorly served. This imbalanced water distribution system illustrates the existence variations in the water consumption patterns between the rich and the poor, low and high density areas, and between rural and urban areas. Such disparities increase the health consequences to the poor population.

overlooked when estimating total available water resources because of the focus on the drop to drink at the expense of the bucket to bathe. In some villages, there are real hardships experienced in terms of access to water especially drinking water. In such villages, a water source within the village could mean a walk of 510 km from a village to a water source. In many villages about half of all traditional and improved water sources ran dry for three or four months a year, so many households cannot use their nearest source throughout the year. In other areas a trip to and from a water source to fetch water or to send cattle to a watering point takes the whole day (Madulu et al., 1990). Another important and controversial use of village water resources is water for the livestock. Ownership of livestock in many pastoral areas is an essential investment and a traditional wealth indicator (Malcolm, 1953). Problems of water especially for livestock are eminent in the pastoral areas and have often resulted into serious conicts leading to seasonal or permanent migration. Such problems are facing the Maasai, the Sukuma, and the Barbaig, to mention only a few. It is hard to nd a widely accepted minimum water need gure for the livestock. A rough estimate of 30 l per day per LU has been given for Mwanza Region (Brokonsult, 1978). This gure exceeding the human per capita target for all domestic uses; Drangert (1993) gives current use rates between 15 and 20 l. In Mwanza Region, though there has been eorts to improve or develop water sources under the self-help initiatives. Most cattle are watered at the specially constructed charco dams (bwawa) which accounted for 51% of dry season use and 58% of the wet season use (Zaba and Madulu, 1996). Other sources of water for livestock include traditional wells, rivers, and the lake. In many areas like the Usangu Plains in Mbeya Region, serious conicts that are centered around the water resource have emerged especially between local communities and the pastoralists.

5. Types of water sources used 6. Water use conicts Dierent water sources are sometimes used for different uses in dierent seasons. The most common uses, however, are drinking, cooking, washing, and crop cultivation. There are often major disparities in the counts of sources of water at the village, district and region levels. This situation is largely contributed by the neglect by researchers of the small ponds and dams that are used principally for washing or for water cattle. Various studies (e.g. White and Bradely, 1972) have shown that even when water is scarce, or has to be carried from a long distance, people use more water for washing (bodies, clothes, utensils etc.) than for direct consumption (drinking and cooking). Generally, water sources that are not t for human consumption are Observations from the Kilimanjaro and Arusha areas indicate that the rural population are generally aware of the changes in the water levels in rivers and other sources especially for irrigation purposes. However, noticeable dierences exist in the perception of the main causes of the decline in water levels (Mwamfupe, 1999). The causes vary from increase in demand and uses of water; to the greedy of upstream users who deny water to people in the lower slopes; prolonged drought; poor maintenance of furrows; and insucient design of furrows. According to Mjwahuzi (1999) water use conicts in the Pangani Basin exist because dierent people have dierent goals and interests while using the same water

916

N.F. Madulu / Physics and Chemistry of the Earth 28 (2003) 911917

source. Existence of competitions or change in the use of a resource my trigger conicts between various source users. Mujwahuzi lists a number of factors that trigger conicts in the Pangani Basin. These factors include: competition for a scarce resource, dierences in organizational status and inuence, unmet expectations, unequal power or authority, incompatible objectives and or methods, juridictional ambiguities, communication distortions, misperceptions, and interdependence of people and tasks.

Conict exists between small scale and large scale irrigators; upstream and downstream riparian irrigators; and between domestic water use and other uses (agriculture, livestock, industry, municipality etc.). Other conict areas include industrial and environmental uses (pollution, environmental protection, ecosystem management etc.); agricultural and industrial uses (power generation, consumption versus non-consumption); and conicts originating from donors who are supporting dierent projects that depend on water.

Kyeeri, Kware, Kwa Sadala and Boma Ngombe. The project goal is to provide clean and safe water to 90,000 people by the years 2010. The main lesson to learn from the UNWS is the willingness and importance of community involvement in solving water problems. In the UBWS, the local communities were involved in all stages from project initiation to the planning process and implementation. During project implementation, villagers provided self help support in terms of labour for digging trenches, transporting materials and providing security. Eorts to ensure cost recovery have been taken into consideration in the project operation mechanisms. Water taris have been calculated to ensure full recovery of the Operation and Maintenance costs (O&M) and the replacement costs of major assets.

8. Conclusion and recommendations The ndings of the study show that there are notable variations in terms of water availability, access and use between individuals and communities. There are also signicant variation in water access and uses according to levels of wealth and economic status. In most cases the poor users suer much or are denied the right to access water, hence, forced by circumstances to use water sources that are not safe for human consumption. Such circumstances result into serious health consequences. Another observation made is that though much emphasis is put of improving water sources for drinking/ domestic water uses, evidence seems to suggest that much more water is used for other uses (bathing, laundry, livestock and cleaning) than for drinking and cooking alone. In facts, rural communities often do not abandon their traditional sources even after having improved water source. The health benets of water used for these other uses are, just as important as any other uses. It has also been observed that local people are sometimes compelled to go far outside the village to access water especially for livestock and other uses. This suggests that the most pressing water uses at the household, community, and village levels are rarely considered in most of the donor funded water programs. These observations have a policy implication especially to the donor community. There is need to redirect resources and investment in rural water supply towards multiple-use sources like charco dams and boreholes rather than just putting emphasize on drinking water. However, local communities should be given the choice to select the type of water source they can manage to maintain. This omission inuences development of water use conicts because other interests are underestimated. Generally there is need to adopt a demanddriven approaches in the provision of water services especially to the rural poor communities.

7. Lessons for integrated water demand management One important aspect that needs to be considered in order to ensure that the poor are not marginalized is to have proper water resource management plans. This is a management approach that aims to conserve water by controlling demand. It involves the application of selective incentives to promote ecient and equitable use of water. It considers the demand and usage of water. To ensure sustainability there is need to emphasize demand-driven and community participation approaches. Experiences from the HESAWA project 3 suggest that small-scale projects like improved wells are both cost eective and easily managed by the villagers themselves through their own water committees (Zaba and Madulu, 1996). The focus here should be placed on village/user ownership and strengthening womens participation in planning and decision making. This approach aims at reaching the poor and making them responsible for the search for solutions. Another good example is the Uroki-Bomangombe Water Scheme (UBWS) in Hai District, which serves eight villages, namely: Roo, Uswaa, Maube, Shari,

HESAWA refers to Health Through Sanitation and Water. This project covers Mwanza, Mara and Kagera regions. The project propagates the principal of peoples participation in planning and implementation of the village projects.

N.F. Madulu / Physics and Chemistry of the Earth 28 (2003) 911917

917

References
Brokonsult, 1978. Water Master Plan for Kagera, Mwanza and Mara Regions. Taby, Sweden. Bureau of Statistics, 1997. Tanzania Demographic and Health Survey, 1996. Bureau of Statistics, (Planning Commission) and DHS (USA). Drangert, J., 1993. Who Cares About Water? Household Water Development in Sukumaland, Tanzania, Water and Environment Studies, Linkoping University, Sweden. Falkenmark, M., 1989. Water availability as carrying capacity determinant: A new factor in third world demography. In: Zaba, B., Clarke, J. (Eds.), Environmental and Population Change. Derouaux Ordina Editions, Liege, pp. 325347. Green, R.H., 1974. Towards ujamaa and kujitegemea: Income distribution and absolute poverty eradication aspects of the Tanzania transition to socialism. Economic Research Bureau Paper no. 74.11. Hinrichsen, D., Robey, B., Upadhyay, U.D., 1998. Solutions for a Water-Short World. Population Reports, Series M, no. 14, John Hopkins University, Baltimore. Kiwasila, H.L., 1994. Socio-economic study in Mwanza urban: Water supply aspirations and willingness to pay. Research Reports to Howard Humpreys Consulting Civil Engineers (T) Ltd., Dar es Salaam. Madulu, N.F., Mungongo, C.G.M., Kiwasila, H., 1990. A socioeconomic assessment of the north-eastern parts of Igunga district, Tanzania. Institute of Resource Assessment Research Report no.78, University of Dar es Salaam. Madulu, N.F., Zaba, B., 1997. Water Use and Population Change in the Mwanza Region: Mwanza Urban Survey Report. A Research Report, January, 1997. Malcolm, D.W., 1953. Sukumaland: An African People and Their Agriculture. Oxford University Press, London. Mjwahuzi, M.R., 1999. Water use conicts in the Pangani Basin: An overview. In: Ngana, J.O. (Ed.), Workshop Proceedings on Water Management in Pangani River Basin, University of Dar es Salaam and Technical University of Norway, Dar es Salaam, pp. 3041. Mosi, J.B.R., 1996. Urban Population Growth and Accessibility to Domestic Water Supply in Tanzania: A Case Study of Dar es Salaam City, M.A. Dissertation, University of Dar es Salaam.

Mtatikolo, F.P., 1994. Implications of public policies on poverty alleviation: The case of Tanzania. REPOA Special Papers, no. 4. Mwamfupe, D., 1999. Problems of Water for Irrigation and Farmers Responses: A Case Study of Makuyuni and Kahe Wards of Kilimanjaro Region. In: Ngana, J.O. (Ed.), op.cit. pp. 113 119. Semboja, J., 1994. Poverty assessment in Tanzania: Theoretical, conceptual and methodological issues. REPOA Special Papers, no. 2. United Republic of Tanzania, 1991. The National Water Policy, Ministry of Water, Dar es Salaam. United Republic of Tanzania, 1994. 1988 Population Census National Prole: The Population of TanzaniaThe Analytical Report. Bureau of Statistics, Presidents Oce, Planning Commission, Dar es Salaam. United Republic of Tanzania, 2002. National Water Policy, Ministry of Water and Livestock Development, Dodoma. URT, 1999. Population of Tanzania: An Analysis of the 1988 Population Census. 1998 Population Census Reports, Bureau of Statistics, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. URT, 2000. Development Vision 2025. Presidents Oce, Planning Commission, Dar es Salaam. White, G., Bradley, D., White, A., 1972. Drawers of Water: Domestic Water Use in East Africa. University of Chicago Press, Chicago. World Bank, 1992. In: Cleaver, K., Schreiber, G. (Ed.), The Population, Agriculture and Environment Nexus in subSaharan Africa. IBRD, Washington. Zaba, B., Kiwasila, H., 1995. Domestic water supply trends in Tanzania: Rural and urban contrast. In: Clarke, J.I., Tabah, L. (Eds.), Population, Environment and Development Interactions. CICRED, Paris. Zaba, B., Madulu, N.F., 1996. Water use and population mobility: An analysis of data collected in a household survey of 12 villages in Mwanza region. Final Report to ODA, London. Zaba, B., Madulu, N.F., 1998. A drop to drink? Population and water resources: illustrations from Northern Tanzania. In: Sherbinin, A., Dompka, V. (Eds.), Water and Population Dynamics: Case Studies and Policy Implications. American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), Washington, DC.