23/03/2026
๐ช๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐ ๐ฏ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐ฉ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐ซ๐๐๐๐๐ ๐ซ๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐ ๐บ๐๐๐๐๐๐.
In Somalia, humanitarian agencies have invested significantly in the construction of boreholes to improve access to safe and reliable water for conflicts and drought affected vulnerable communities. These boreholes are typically delivered as fully equipped systems, including:
โข Drilling and infrastructure development
โข Solar powered pumping systems
โข Water storage tanks
โข Distribution points
โข Fencing for protection
โข Operator rooms and security structures
The intention behind these interventions is humanitarian: to ensure affordable, sustainable access to water, particularly during climate shocks such as droughts and hard to reach areas.
However, in practice, a concerning trend has emerged during periods of severe drought. Water prices from boreholes, constructed and fully equipped by humanitarian agencies, often increase significantly at the very moment when communities are most vulnerable. This development raises serious concerns regarding governance, accountability, and the gradual transformation of humanitarian water services into revenue generating mechanisms.
Currently in Somalia, during drought conditions, the price of a 40 drum water tank from some humanitarian supported boreholes has risen to nearly USD 150, even though the borehole infrastructure including drilling, solar systems, storage facilities, fencing, and operator rooms was entirely funded by humanitarian agencies. Given that the capital investment and major infrastructure costs were already covered by donors, the sharp increase in water tariffs raises legitimate questions about the justification for such pricing.
When compared to community funded public boreholes within the same district, a notable disparity emerges. Water from community level boreholes developed through local investment rather than humanitarian funding is sold at approximately USD 60 to 90 per 40 drum tank during drought periods, even when serving areas at similar distances and under comparable operating conditions.
This discrepancy suggests that factors beyond operational costs may be influencing managing committees, role of the government for the pricing and tariffs if it exists at the humanitarian supported boreholes. The situation calls for closer examination of management practices, cost recovery models, and oversight mechanisms to ensure that donor funded water infrastructure continues to serve its intended humanitarian purpose, particularly during times of crisis.
๐. ๐๐ซ๐ข๐๐ข๐ง๐ ๐๐๐ซ๐๐๐จ๐ฑ
During drought seasons in Somalia:
Surface water sources dry up, private shallow wells fail, livestock migration increases, and the demand for borehole water rises sharply to a price that drought affected communities cannot afford during the drought period.
In response to increased demand during drought periods, some borehole management committees raise water prices, citing high consumption levels and the absence of alternative water sources. In many affected areas, boreholes become the only reliable source of water, creating a captive demand situation in which communities have no practical substitute.
Management committees often justify price increases by arguing that additional revenue is necessary to cover operational costs, including routine maintenance, spare parts replacement, operator salaries, and fuel for backup generators where solar systems are insufficient. They further claim that higher tariffs are required to build financial reserves for potential rehabilitation or major repairs.
However, a contradiction emerges when boreholes that charge elevated tariffs later require significant rehabilitation. In such cases, management committees frequently appeal to government authorities or humanitarian agencies for urgent financial assistance. This raises legitimate concerns: if higher water charges were intended to ensure sustainability and maintenance, why are emergency external funds still required? The situation becomes particularly problematic given that these boreholes were originally established through humanitarian funding with the intention of providing water either free of charge or at minimal cost to vulnerable populations.
The consequences are significant. Drought affected households pay more per jerrycan at a time of reduced income and increased vulnerability. Internally displaced people (IDPs) are disproportionately impacted, as they often lack stable livelihoods. Poor households may reduce water consumption due to affordability constraints, increasing public health risks. Livestock keepers face higher production costs, undermining pastoral livelihoods and food security.
As a result, water originally introduced as a humanitarian public good effectively becomes a scarce and expensive commodity during periods of acute crisis.
๐. ๐๐ก๐ข๐๐ญ ๐๐ซ๐จ๐ฆ ๐๐ฎ๐ฆ๐๐ง๐ข๐ญ๐๐ซ๐ข๐๐ง ๐๐๐ซ๐ฏ๐ข๐๐ ๐ญ๐จ ๐๐จ๐ฆ๐ฆ๐๐ซ๐๐ข๐๐ฅ ๐๐ง๐ญ๐๐ซ๐ฉ๐ซ๐ข๐ฌ๐:
Although humanitarian agencies provided the infrastructure free of charge, local management committees often operate the boreholes as semi private enterprises. Revenue is typically collected for:
โข Operatorโs salaries
โข Maintenance and repairs
โข Security
โข Community development funds
In the absence of strong regulatory oversight or tariff guidelines, pricing decisions are often made locally without external monitoring. During crises, this may result in:
โข Profit maximization behavior
โข Lack of price transparency
โข Limited accountability mechanisms
โข Exclusion of the poorest households
Thus, infrastructure funded by humanitarian donors can gradually transition into income generating businesses, especially during emergencies when water demand peaks.
๐. ๐๐จ๐ฏ๐๐ซ๐ง๐๐ง๐๐ ๐๐ง๐ ๐๐๐๐จ๐ฎ๐ง๐ญ๐๐๐ข๐ฅ๐ข๐ญ๐ฒ ๐๐๐ฉ๐ฌ
Key structural issues contributing to this problem include:
a) Weak Regulatory Framework
Somalia has limited centralized water governance structures in many regions. This creates regulatory gaps regarding:
โข Tariff ceilings
โข Emergency price controls
โข Financial transparency
โข Public accountability mechanisms
b) Limited Oversight by Humanitarian Agencies
Once boreholes are handed over to communities, humanitarian agencies often disengage or provide minimal follow up monitoring. Without long term governance arrangements, community management may drift toward commercial priorities.
c) Lack of Social Protection Measures
Few mechanisms exist to ensure:
โข Subsidized access for drought affected households
โข Free water quotas during declared emergencies
โข Targeted support for IDPs or the ultra poor
๐. ๐๐ญ๐ก๐ข๐๐๐ฅ ๐๐ง๐ ๐๐ฎ๐ฆ๐๐ง๐ข๐ญ๐๐ซ๐ข๐๐ง ๐๐จ๐ง๐๐๐ซ๐ง๐ฌ
Water is a basic human right and a critical survival resource during drought. Charging excessive fees during humanitarian crises raises ethical concerns:
โข It contradicts the humanitarian principle of humanity.
โข It may deepen vulnerability.
โข It shifts the burden of crisis financing to affected populations.
โข It undermines trust in aid interventions.
When vulnerable communities perceive that donor funded services become profit sources during hardship, it may damage the credibility of humanitarian actors.
๐. ๐๐จ๐ฅ๐ข๐๐ฒ ๐๐ง๐ ๐๐ซ๐จ๐ ๐ซ๐๐ฆ๐ฆ๐๐ญ๐ข๐ ๐๐๐๐จ๐ฆ๐ฆ๐๐ง๐๐๐ญ๐ข๐จ๐ง๐ฌ
To prevent the commercialization of humanitarian boreholes during drought, several measures can be considered:
1. Tariff Regulation Framework
Develop clear community bylaws that:
โข Set maximum pricing thresholds
โข Define emergency pricing rules
โข Require public display of tariffs
2. Drought Contingency Agreements
Before handover, agencies should include:
โข Crisis pricing clauses
โข Temporary free water distribution during declared emergencies
โข Trigger based subsidy mechanisms
3. Financial Transparency
Management committees should:
โข Publish monthly income and expenditure reports
โข Hold community accountability meetings
โข Maintain audited records
4. Social Equity Mechanisms
Introduce:
โข Free water quotas for IDPs and vulnerable households
โข Livelihood sensitive pricing for pastoralists
โข Voucher systems during drought response
5. Continued Humanitarian Monitoring
Agencies should adopt long term post construction monitoring frameworks to ensure boreholes remain aligned with humanitarian objectives.
๐๐จ๐ง๐๐ฅ๐ฎ๐ฌ๐ข๐จ๐ง
Humanitarian boreholes in Somalia represent critical infrastructure for climate resilience. However, during drought seasons, increased water prices risk transforming humanitarian services into commercial enterprises. Without clear governance structures, tariff regulation, and accountability systems, drought affected populations may face additional hardship rather than relief.
Ensuring that donor funded water infrastructure remains accessible, affordable, and equitable, especially during crises is essential to preserving both humanitarian integrity and community resilience.
