ABSTRACT

Sustainability of water supply continues to be a global priority due to water stress and scarcity attributable to climate change and other anthropogenic factors. The situation is especially dire in informal settlement urban areas which are beleaguered by a strain on extant water supply infrastructure due to population increase resulting from rural-urban migration. Collaboratively, stakeholders in this space have implemented water supply projects in these areas. However data collected from Nairobi City County informal settlement areas reveal that these water supply projects have registered soaring failure rates with the existing water supply systems running below the intended operational capacity. Further, the current regulatory policy is not explicit on water supply management in informal settlement areas. Considering that water is a human right and key resource for economic development, ensuring sustainability is imperative. This research was premised on the argument sustainability is under the project manager’s purview and should be intrinsic to project management approaches and activities. The main objective of this study was therefore to investigate the effect of Results-Based Management on sustainability of water supply projects in the informal settlement areas in Nairobi City County, Kenya. The specific objectives were to establish the effect of Results-Based Management principles namely: accountability, national ownership and inclusiveness on sustainability of water supply projects. The study further investigated the moderating effect of regulatory policy on the relationship between Results-Based Management and sustainability of water supply projects. The main theory underpinning this study was the Four-Capital Model, supported by other theories: Public Value Theory, Stakeholder Theory and Agency Theory. The study was guided by the positivism philosophy and employed an explanatory, non-experimental research design. The target population of this study comprised 741 leaders of projects implemented by the Nairobi City Water & Sewerage Company in informal settlement areas in Nairobi City County. A sample of 260 project leaders obtained through stratified random sampling was considered and 194 respondents participated in the study. Data was collected through semi-structured questionnaires. Quantitative data was analyzed through descriptive and multiple linear regression analysis using SPSS while qualitative data was analyzed using content analysis. The study established that the combined effect of Results-Based Management accounted for seventy-five per cent of the variation in sustainability of water supply projects in informal settlement areas of Nairobi City County. Separately, the independent variables (accountability, national ownership and inclusiveness) showed a positive and statistically significant effect on sustainability. The study also established that the moderator, regulatory policy had a positive and significant effect on the relationship between Results-Based Management and sustainability. The study concluded that water supply projects should strive to strengthen accountability and inclusiveness mechanisms. The project implementers should also ensure that the projects address local community priorities. The study recommended that the projects enhance participatory evaluation, conduct regular assessment of the project managers’ performance, improve the existing policy framework to meet the needs of informal settlement areas and develop sustainability plans with which they can monitor and evaluate specifically for sustainability.

CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

  Background to the study

The publication of the 1987 Brundtland Commission report dubbed “Our Common Future” set in motion the global discourse on project sustainability. Project implementers across the globe now strive to ensure projects remain sustainable in light of diminishing natural resources and continuous developing uncertainties (Chawla, Chanda, Angra, & Chawla, 2018). As a vehicle through which change and innovation is made in society by state and non-state actors, projects have been widely adopted owing to the immense contribution they make to economic growth and development especially in developing as countries (Aarseth, Ahola, Aaltonen, Okland, & Andersen, 2016). Projects generate approximately one-third of the global Gross Domestic Product (Okland, 2015) and act the stimulus for developmental assistance offered by bilateral and multilateral organizations (Yamin & Kim 2016).

In spite of increased project uptake, projects across various sectors continue to register failures with 20-50 per cent of projects failing to meet their quality, schedule and budget constraints (Standing, Standing & Kordt, 2016; Ika, Diallo & Thuillier, 2012; Kusek, Prestidge & Hamilton, 2013).Given that projects have a finite duration, the high project failure rates have spurred interest in the project management fraternity with regard to making project outcomes and benefits sustainable in the long term to protect the continuity of the society and enhance economic welfare (Sabini, 2016). Therefore,

integration of project sustainability principles in project management to harness projects’ economic potential is essential.

The International Fund for Agricultural Development-IFAD (2009) posits that sustainability is attained at the point where the institutions supported through specific projects and the benefits generated by those projects continue even after project termination. A broader perspective offered by the 1987 Brundtland report, insists that for development to be considered sustainable it should inherently meet the needs of the present generation without jeopardizing the potential of future generations to address their own needs (World Commission on Environment and Development, 1987).

Deriving from the Brundtland Commission’s report, sustainability has been conceptualized to encompass economic, social and environmental aspects operationalized through the Triple Bottom-Line. Elkington (1998), outlines the key elements of the Triple Bottom Line: People, Planet, Profit and argues that sustainability is attained at the convergence of economic, social and environmental indicators. Silvius, Schipper, Planko, Brink, and Köhler (2012), support this argument noting that though transitioning towards sustainability combines economic prosperity, environmental protection and social equity; traction gained in one element should not compromise the other dimensions. The Global Precipitation Measurement (GPM) Global (2014); as cited by Gichohi, Sang and Kosimbei (2019) provides the P5 standard which requires projects to incorporate sustainability into Products (technical element), Processes (governance element), Profit (financial element), Planet (environmental element) and

People (social element). This P5 standard is better known as PRiSM (Projects integrating Sustainable Methods) project management methodology and considered an distension of the Triple Bottom-Line.