|Environment and development
in coastal regions and in small islands
Water Resource Conflicts in Tarawa
|Social Science Investigations|
|Results of Investigations|
|Formal and informal group discussion|
|One to one discussions|
|Discussions with the wider community|
|In summary - 'wise practice'|
This paper examines the conflict between the Government of Kiribati and a local community over the use of fresh groundwater resources. The various perspectives of this complex conflict, as described by the stakeholders, will be summarised. The description of the conflict will be followed by an analysis of the social data collected and its implications for water resource managers.
The social data that served as the basis for this paper arose out of a Groundwater Recharge Study carried out on Bonriki Island Tarawa, Kiribati during 1996-1997. The Study was funded as part of the UNESCO International Hydrological Programme, Humid Tropics Programme, and the UNESCO project on Environment and Development in Coastal Regions and in Small Islands.
There were technical and social science components in the Study. The author was engaged to undertake social science investigations in co-operation with a local counterpart social worker and provide guidance and training as necessary to all the participants in the Study.
The technical objectives of the project were to provide techniques for the more accurate estimation of recharge to groundwater systems (freshwater lenses) on coral islands through the physical measurement of factors influencing recharge. The techniques include quantification of rainfall, interception and evapotranspiration losses under various vegetation regimes, and measurement of soil water, water table and freshwater lens dynamics. The applicability of empirical, analytical and numerical techniques to quantify groundwater recharge was examined.
This project was not designed to provide water managers with all the necessary techniques to estimate sustainable yields from freshwater lenses but rather to focus on the recharge component. In combination with other essential information on the groundwater system, accurate estimates of recharge can provide water managers with the necessary means to establish estimates of sustainable yields and hence safe extraction rates (White 1995).
Social Science Investigations
The social science component had two aims: to conduct investigations into the social/cultural implications of the recharge study and to provide training or demonstration to counterparts/trainees in the process and significance of such investigations. The objectives of the investigation were to involve the people of Bonriki village in the project from the outset to completion, in order to obtain their co-operation in the project and identify any concerns or objections to the establishment of equipment and conducting studies in the Bonriki area. The investigation also sought to identify reasons for past vandalism of water supply infrastructure including interference with pump stations and salinity monitoring boreholes. It was intended that the project provide education about the water cycle and catchment management, and in particular the relevance of evapotranspiration.
The process of involving the Bonriki people included explanation of the objectives and details of the project using appropriate visual aids, and seeking permission to proceed with the Study. This was followed by discussion of issues of land ownership and use, water resources and water supply, effects of trees on water and water on trees, and possible climate change, and by seeking the local perceptions of current conditions including the effects of pumping. It was hoped to gain an oral history of water related problems such as the impact drought. Some residents were invited to assist with the monitoring process in co-operation with Kiribati government counterparts (e.g. checking of equipment, reading rain gauges, feeding ongoing community response back to the project). The invitation was accepted by one resident but not taken up because he relocated to another island during the period of the Study. The issue of past vandalism of monitoring equipment was not referred to directly, out of politeness, but a request was made that if residents saw the equipment in the reserve could they please take care of it.
The social science investigations were conducted during two field trips, two weeks in August 1996 and one week in February 1997. Technical investigations were concurrent and extended into 1997 with monitoring being maintained by local staff between visits by technical specialists. The February 1996 fieldtrip aimed to continue observations in the wet season.
Communication was undertaken with the people of Bonriki in a number of contexts which included the following:
Consultation was also undertaken with personnel from the Ministry of Environment and Social Development, the Ministry of Home Affairs and Rural Development and the Ministry of Works and Energy. Informal discussions were held with members of the wider community including women's groups.
Team members consisted of Australian technical and social science consultants, trainees from the Federated States of Micronesia (FSM), Tuvalu, the Cook islands and the Kiribati Public Works Department, and the social science trainee from the Ministry of Environment and Social Development
Results of Investigations
The Recharge Study could have been perceived primarily as a technical project, and in the planning stages, when a social component was incorporated, some scepticism was expressed: "what could be the social implications of evapotranspiration?".
It became increasingly apparent that the Recharge Study was being conducted in an area of political and social sensitivity and complexity. The factors involved impacted directly on the progress of the Study to some extent, and had long-term implications for management of water resources on Tarawa. Given the long-standing and entrenched nature of the conflicts that emerged, three weeks field-work only allowed an overview of the situation, and much of the information that was gathered relied on hearsay and personal opinions. Review of existing written documents on water and land management in this and similar areas in Tarawa provided some extra detail and background. However, one thing was clear from the outset: there was serious conflict between the community of Bonriki and the Government of Kiribati regarding the use of fresh groundwater resources.
Sections of Bonriki had been reserved for public purposes to provide a public water supply and an airport for Tarawa, with obvious implications for the local residents, the government and the wider community. The process of community involvement in the Recharge Study, and relevant information from the investigations and communications are summarised below as they unfolded.
Formal and informal group discussion
From the formal meetings in the maneaba, and informal group discussions with Bonriki residents and elders in their homes, it became apparent that some residents felt that they had not received sufficient compensation for the use of their land as a water reserve. They complained that they had not been made sufficiently aware of the impact that the reserve and the airport would have on their lives. Apart from the loss of the area for housing and gardens, their coconut trees and babai (taro) pits had become virtually non-productive due, they assumed, to excessive water extraction, and they had lost their livelihood and independence. It was reported that the village was previously self sufficient with food and sold copra but since land had been lost to the reserve and the airport, they had to buy coconuts and depend on money from the government and other sources to live. They also complained that the water in their wells had become saline from overpumping. After the second maneaba presentation by the project team that explained the goals and findings of the Recharge Study, one of the residents commented that none of the villagers had believed any of the data offered and regarded the presentation to be a government ploy to avoid further compensation. When it was pointed out that the height or salinity of lens had not changed since the introduction of the water reserve, the villagers were sceptical and responded that food trees on the periphery of the reserve were also "looking bad" due to the reduction in size of the lens.
The subject of evapotranspiration and its implications for water management did not appear to interest the residents in the maneaba presentation or household discussions. It seemed that they were only really concerned about the larger issues of the reserve and the airport and their impact on village life. For example, the elders wished to know if the Study would generate local employment, or lead to a greater quantity of water being extracted from the reserve than was currently occurring.
However, the residents' response was not entirely negative. It was indicated that the village residents appreciated being consulted and that this had not been done in quite the same way before despite projects of a much greater impact being undertaken in the Bonriki area. Some elders would have preferred more notice prior to the commencement of the Study.
One to one discussions
One-to-one discussions were held with residents who did not seem to be involved in the push for compensation. Further information and a different point of view emerged. They suggested that perhaps the fronds of the coconut trees had yellowed and the nuts had become small and scarce because the trees were old and untended, no new trees were being planted, and the nuts and fronds were regularly scavenged by trespassers from the rest of South Tarawa. The babai had deteriorated throughout Tarawa from attacks by the babai beetle during the last ten years, and wells may have been saline from recent flooding from the lagoon. The vegetation on the reserve may have suffered from fires lit by teenagers. It seemed that some of the discontent had arisen because the village had become seriously overcrowded by influx of relatives from the outer islands (a pressure being experienced by all of South Tarawa) and the majority of these people were unemployed. Consequently space/land was in very high demand and the available cash from the compensation or lease payments was not sufficient for, or available to, the expanded population. It was suggested that this discontent had been exploited to some extent during the recent elections and senior politicians were covertly encouraging resentment against the current government in regard to the Bonriki reserve.
Since the new government had been elected the landowners had been paid $200 an acre per year (government representatives said the payment is $300 an acre per year). The residents of Bonriki also received free supply of reticulated water. They reported that there had been a tap to every house but these were not maintained so now there were three tap stands for the whole village. They also used house wells consistently because the reticulated supply is intermittent. When the reticulated water was available they allowed the taps to run continuously. The residents did not consider it an advantage to not pay for reticulated water as "the water belongs to Bonriki anyway" and they knew of many people in other parts of South Tarawa who have not received water bills for over a year.
The government was obliged to compensate for losses associated with the use of the land but not for anything below ground level, including the water. Hence the focus by landowners on the affect of extraction on vegetation, and consequent loss of livelihood or subsistence (Shalev 1994). It was very doubtful that an increase in rent for use of the land could be negotiated, but if other detriment could be proven, then reparation would be arguable. In addition to the agitation for redress, the villagers were taking practical steps to alleviate their difficulties. Against the conditions of agreement for lease of the reserve land, Bonriki residents were moving onto the reserve, building houses and growing vegetables. It was implied that in some cases plots had been sold or rented to them by the landowners. In other cases, the landowners could not refuse their relatives due to the custom of bubiti even though they had been compensated by the government for non-use of their land. There were also the children of the landowners who had recently married, and needed their own home and gardens. In addition, space was required to bury the dead.
When told to move off the reserve by government personnel, some of the squatters threatened to burn down the pump housing. It seemed that some young male members of the community were adopting increasingly hostile tactics, including vandalism. Monitoring bores that had been providing consistent invaluable information for more than twenty years had been destroyed even within the period of the Recharge Study. It was reported that there had been deliberate pollution of the groundwater on the reserve. Airport infrastructure had also suffered vandalism in recent years. The situation had been exacerbated lately by an Asian Development Bank report, (Kaly 1997), which had attributed the deterioration of the coconut trees to overpumping, despite being advised by local agronomists and other specialists that the indicators used were inappropriate and inconclusive.
In addition to dealing with the demands for compensation and the impact of vandalism, senior Ministry personnel were also concerned that the negative attitudes to the reserve among the Bonriki residents would hamper negotiations for further reserves with other communities on Tarawa (Kingston Morrison 1996). This concern was justified as already target villages were reluctant to negotiate, or were demanding excessively high compensation for any proposed water reserve leases. The project team was asked if they could provide proof that water extraction was not causing deterioration of the coconut trees. The Groundwater Recharge Study had inadvertently become embroiled in a major political struggle.
Discussions with the wider community
From discussions with the wider community of South Tarawa it emerged that the people of Bonriki were resented because they were perceived as receiving unwarranted special treatment for loss of their land. Many landowners in South Tarawa were suffering the stress of overcrowding, dislocation and increasing demand to accommodate and support relatives from the outer islands (Tebano 1996). It was observed that the Bonriki people still had plenty of breadfruit trees and could easily fish in the lagoon and collect food off the reef as their shoreline was less polluted and degraded than the more populated areas of South Tarawa. There was also some anxiety that the discontented Bonriki residents were 'poisoning' the reticulated water and blackmailing the government to obtain more compensation. From these members of the wider community there was pressure on the government not to listen to the Bonriki residents, and to force the squatters off the reserve.
An integral objective of the Study was to provide training and experience in the social and technical aspects of undertaking this kind of research. Training of local counterparts and the visitors from the other Islands countries was participatory and reinforced by regular informal discussions and review of the project's progress and a number of structured workshops. The I-Kiribati technical trainees maintained the groundwater monitoring systems between visits from the Australian consultants, despite limited transport and other bureaucratic obstacles, and assisted with analysis of data.
It was only possible to work with the social science counterpart on three occasions due to her other commitments as Women's Development Officer. There was some conflict of purpose between the social science training goal and the facilitation of community involvement, as it was usually more effective to work alone in terms of gaining a more candid response from interested parties. It can sometimes be politically awkward discussing delicate issues with a local person as translator. Skills in accurate translation are hard to achieve without considerable training and experience, which the social science counterpart did not have. In the informal discussions, it was obvious that, at times, she was encouraging interviewees to give the answer she thought the social science consultant wanted to hear.
In the first maneaba meeting, the presentation of the objectives of the study by the social science counterpart was significant in itself as it is not traditional practice for young women to speak in the maneaba and she was quite challenged by this experience. In recent times women speaking as government representatives have been increasingly accepted to address the maneaba. However, it is likely that the unimane and the Urban Council would have taken the presentation less seriously because it was delivered by a young inexperienced woman.
The visiting trainees acknowledged that it was very useful to experience a social science component in a technical research project. They referred to situations in their own countries where social and political factors were a major concern in water and land management.
Technical training was more comprehensive during the February 1997 trip workshop as the monitoring system was well established by then, and many of the equipment difficulties experienced during the August 1996 workshop had been sorted out. However it was not possible to fund participants from the other Pacific Island countries for the February fieldtrip.
This summary of the social science aspects of the Groundwater Recharge Study suggests that thorough consultation and ratified agreement between government and landowners prior to acquisition of land could prevent development of many of the problems referred to in this study. However this apparently desirable procedure may be complicated by a number of interrelated factors which should be anticipated in the planning of any such consultation. The personnel selected to conduct the negotiations on behalf of the government, and the manner in which the process is conducted, are also vital issues that will determine the efficacy of government/community relations in regard to water resource security.
The situation on South Tarawa is to some extent specific to the culture and history of Kiribati, and to the socio-economic conditions prevailing on that island, but in other respects certain principles may be applied further afield where government bodies are negotiating with communities on water resource use.
In Kiribati the notion of private land boundaries being determined by a public institution is a colonial imposition that is still not entirely accepted by local residents. In pre-colonial times neighbours were very clear about the dimensions of their plot, the boundaries being determined by such markers as the location of a particular breadfruit tree, or 'sweet' groundwater well. The demarcation and significance of these naturally occurring borders was passed down orally from generation to generation. When the British Land Commissioners and Surveyors delineated and registered land allocations during the mid twentieth century the technique, of drawing straight lines across the width of the atoll, left many people feeling they had lost essential features of their land. So there is an historic distrust of outsiders or government bodies 'carving up' the land for what ever purpose, private or public. This distrust has been exacerbated in some cases by incomplete or erroneous details being recorded by the Land Court, and in the Lands and Survey Division register.
A further overriding condition that will affect community consultation in Kiribati, where government is acquiring land for water resource use (or for any other public benefit for that matter), is that the notion of public responsibility is a non traditional value. What people do with their land and their resources is their business. The historic personal relationship to the land and the pressures of extended family obligation are far more compelling than the expectation of co-operation or sacrifice for the common good.
Centralised control of land for public purposes is a superimposed notion inherited from a period of foreign rule. Also, during the colonial and postcolonial process of acquisition, thorough consultation with the private sector was not the custom. The more recent promotion of community consultation prior to, or during acquisition, or if certain activities are planned on the land is, yet again, an introduced notion. To some degree it is not that attractive to the government personnel, who are being advised by expatriate consultants to undertake it. This may be because local government personnel are aware of the long standing complexities of the situation which they feel are better avoided. And they may even have direct or indirect personal involvement in the issues due to the small closely-knit composition of the community. If there is no personal investment in the situation there is also the inclination not to get involved in what is perceived as other people's business. A common response from government personnel to the proposal for community consultation is that they dont wish to give the locals the opportunity to complain. However, the foreign donors fund most research and infrastructure projects so the community consultation goes ahead often within a very tight schedule, and sometimes without sufficient preparatory background. If government personnel are not entirely convinced of the wisdom of the proposed consultative process it may be sabotaged in a variety of subtle ways. For example, the choice of an inexperienced young person who had no interest in the goals of the project, as social science counterpart, could be interpreted as an indication that the local bureaucracy did not consider the consultation process as a high priority. The choice of counterparts for social science work is in itself a political issue.
There is a traditional process of consensus within the village structure in the maneaba context but this was based on allegiance to, and respect for the senior citizens particularly the old men of the village, the unimane. Staff from any government organisation are often perceived by the wider community as an assembly of individuals whose primary motivation is the promotion and support of their family's interests. That self-interest may be seen as being furthered under the guise of the activities of the Ministry concerned.
Therefore it could be useful to have personnel conducting consultation and negotiation on behalf of government who are respected in their own right, for example, an unimane from another village or an esteemed and experienced community worker, or someone unrelated to the local family networks i.e. an expatriate. If this facilitator's role is to be undertaken by an expatriate then attention has to be paid to prevailing mores of communication.
To the extent that useful discussions were conducted during the Recharge Study, it was usually in the one-to-one context, that is, without translation by I-Kiribati personnel and not in the presence of other team members. Informal one to one or small group discussions with community members (who could speak English, and most I-Kiribati understand some English) were much more revealing than formal translated discussions either one to one or in groups. It seems that local people felt more comfortable making frank comments to a stranger without the presence or intervention of one of their own people, because of the complex web of local relationships and alliances and other factors
To some degree a more relaxed familiar atmosphere could be established between two people. Many I-Kiribati are reluctant to speak English in front of each other even when their English is fluent, and will only readily converse when alone with a foreigner. Also the manner of asking questions and listening to responses could be controlled. For example, if the interviewer asked a question it was done in neutral fashion, i.e., the answer was not implied in the question, and if the person hesitated in their response, they were not prompted or the answer provided for them. This basic guideline in interviewing technique seems particularly important in discussions with I-Kiribati, and with many Pacific Islanders as there is a common tendency to give an answer that is assumed to be expected or desired by the questioner. Also it has often been observed that people may be silent for some minutes before answering a question and if this silence is interrupted then it is unlikely one will learn what was the true content of the response. Westerners are often embarrassed by this silence and feel compelled to fill it. The I-Kiribati tend to avoid direct conflict particularly in formal discussions and it is important to listen carefully to what may appear to be mild comments, particularly of a negative nature. In local terms these could be interpreted as strong statements of protest or disagreement. Expatriate consultants often complain that local counterparts do not inform them of significant information at critical times. In some cases this is due to lack of attention to what might be interpreted as indecisive, disinterested or non-emphatic communications which are, in fact, presented as such out of politeness. The I-Kiribati do not usually directly question or confront authority. They sabotage or co-operate with whatever is being advocated, as they see fit (Saito 1997).
It is also worth noting that Kiribati is still a society where effective communication is primarily conducted orally. The written word has limited relevance. Lengthy reports may have some usefulness for aid donors and expatriates, but the locals rarely read them. Even at a ministerial level, a one page document with clearly spaced key points will have more effect than detailed communiqués. If the recipient wants to know more they will ask. Creative images and active demonstration can also save hours or pages of verbosity.
Cross-cultural communication particularly of a technical nature can be hampered by the absence of suitable technical words or concepts in the local language. When preparing the presentation for the maneaba, the points that needed to be covered were first detailed in English by the expatriate specialists and then reviewed and translated into Kiribatese by the I-Kiribati technical team. The content then had to be further refined so that it was appropriately respectful to the unimane (old men) and the context of the maneaba. Translation was complicated, among other things, by the fact that there is no local word for 'evapotranspiration' but later the team had devised a new word which means 'vapour up'. Because of the general difficulty of translation and the requirement for a particular form of address, the original content of the presentation was significantly abbreviated.
In summary - 'wise practice'
From the experience of the Study, certain activities can be suggested to facilitate government/community relations These activities may seem onerous and time consuming but it is predicted that the effort will be well spent. It may avoid complications in the future that can be far more onerous and time consuming in the long term.
Prior to acquisition of private land for public purposes it is advisable to undertake thorough consultation with landowners and affected community. Firstly the government body should clarify what they wish to achieve from the consultations, and what is negotiable. The person or persons conducting the consultations on behalf of government should be respected individuals in the community, or respected visitors, with effective listening skills. They should, as much as possible, have no personal interest in the outcome of the discussions. Informal private discussions should be conducted in addition to formal group presentations. Adequate time should be allowed for both parties to cover all relevant issues and to consult with other stakeholders, and then provide feedback. This may take many months, and the process should be consistent and methodical.
The aim of these interactions is to ascertain the nature of the landowners' relationship to the land (and water resource) from a legal and traditional values point of view, to address that relationship when calculating compensation, and to incorporate whatever is agreed upon into an accessible legal document that is signed by all interested parties. In the case of leases, it may also be useful to negotiate ongoing involvement by the landowners in the maintenance of the land, i.e. in the maintenance of the water reserve. Monetary compensation does not always compensate for the loss of relationship to the land, the dignity and identity that it provides. Perhaps the compensation can be tied in some way to the role of guardianship, which can then be passed on to the next generation. Although in some respects traditional attitudes and relationships to land may work against acquisition and use for public purposes, it may be possible to work with those values.
It is not being suggested here that private parties to a consultative or negotiating process should achieve all the conditions that they want in any water resource agreement. If all concerns are aired in advance then at least it can be stated whether or not those concerns will be attended to, and if not, why not. This reduces the likelihood of unanticipated or unacknowledged needs surfacing at a later date and causing resentments and ongoing claims for compensation, or vandalism. In the case of a water reserve, it is advisable that land is purchased outright, if possible to avoid the long term nexus of a leasing agreement. Whether the water reserve is leased or purchased, it should be emphatically stated that no agricultural, industrial or domestic activity would be permitted on the land and adequate compensation paid accordingly. If this restriction is not likely to be observed, then activities that are allowed should be clearly specified, and the rent lowered accordingly. In some cases it is more constructive and sustainable to allow productive activity to prevent inactivity and loss of self-esteem leading to agitation, and vandalism. Whatever the conditions, they should be clearly understood and accepted as there is a positive disinclination to police any regulations that may govern activities on government reserves.
It is advisable not to allude to any possible later benefits from the agreement, such as paid work on future water resource infrastructure, as a means of persuasion for local residents. People have long memories. The mutual concrete benefits should be detailed in the agreement as a final and complete settlement.
To further prevent ongoing discontent with leasing agreements it may be advisable to pay rent in regular instalments throughout the year rather than annual lump sums. In regard to practical matters the I-Kiribati live for today, and are inclined to spend all their cash at once, particularly if there is demand from many dependent relatives. If the extended family relies mainly on rent or government compensation for survival this can mean that during the rest of the year they are in serious economic difficulty.
During the process of consultation it is important to provide graphic objective information as to the likely short term and long term environmental effects of the proposed water use.
A lesson that could be learnt from the Bonriki story, which was set in a land/ subsistence based culture, is not to overburden one community with too much demand for public sacrifice. Land for an airport and a water reserve is a lot to ask of one small island even though the two uses may be practically compatible from the government's point of view. There is no benefit from the local residents' perspective, apart from monetary compensation, which often only reaches the primary landowners. Prior to the reserve acquisition, the residents already had access to an ample supply of sweet water. The airport has little relevance to residents squeezed into a reduced village area, many of whom will never have the opportunity to undertake air travel.
South Tarawa is under environmental and socio-economic stress. This has been steadily increasing over the last twenty years (Harrison 1980). The difficulties facing Tarawa go far beyond the problem of water use, although it is a critical issue. However on Tarawa, and when considering augmentation of water resources in any context, it is advisable to give as much attention to demand management, as to increasing supply. Establishing new sources of reticulated water supply and supportive infrastructure has immediate and obvious beneficial effect but the social disruption and cost of maintaining public water supply sources and systems can be an unseen and long term burden on community and government alike. This is particularly so in a resource constrained country like Kiribati, where maintenance requirements are often not attended to, or are of a low priority (Falkland 1992). It is advisable to attempt to reduce existing demand on reticulated water by whatever means possible; consumer education campaigns, rain tanks, properly constructed private wells where appropriate, leak detection and reduction, and low-flush dry and minimum discharge sanitation technology. The on-site solutions could also be more sustainable in a culture where independence and self/family reliance was a traditional value.
A co-ordinating body or Urban Management Committee is needed (Jones 1995). There is an ongoing problem with lack of communication between agencies dealing with water and land management issues. This universal problem could be exacerbated by the I-Kiribati inclination not to get caught up with other peoples' (or other bureaucracy's) business. Ideally, this Committee could also centralise and review aid projects to avoid duplication and cross purposes, and ensure relevance through consultation with local experts. To reduce the burden on government and increase community responsibility the private sector could be allowed greater involvement and investment in public works.
Falkland, A., 1992. Review of Tarawa Freshwater Lenses, ACT Electricity and Water. Funded by AIDAB
Harrison, G., 1980. Socio-Economic Aspects of the Proposed Water Supply Project for South Tarawa, Kiribati. Prepared for the Department of Housing and Construction, Canberra, Australia.
Jones, P., 1995. Urban Management Plan for South Tarawa prepared for Planning Section of Lands and Survey Division, Ministry of Home Affairs and Rural Development, Government of Kiribati, Funded by AusAID.
Jones, P., 1995. Responding to Urban Change - Observations on Urbanisation, Urban Planning and Urban Management in the Pacific. Ministry of Home Affairs and Rural Development. Funded by AusAID
Kaly, U., 1996. Environmental Improvement for Sanitation and Public Health, Tarawa, Kiribati. Project Report. Funded by Asian Development Bank
Kingston, Morrison, 1996. South Tarawa Integrated Urban Plans and Program Study. Final Report (Draft), July. Asian Development Bank.
Ministry of National Resources Development. 1994. Kiribati National Environment Management Strategy
Saito, S., 1997. Knowledge, Attitudes and Practices on Selected Environmental Issues, prepared for Foundation for the Peoples of the South Pacific, Kiribati Environmental Education Programme (KEEP)
Shalev, Z., 1994. 10 Year National Water Master Plan (Draft) Ministry of Works and Energy. Government of Kiribati.
Tebano, T., 1996. Integrated Urban Plans and Programme Study for South Tarawa, Kiribati, Results of a Survey Conducted in 3 villages of South Tarawa, Betio, Bairiki, Bikenbeu, Report prepared by Atoll Research Program for MHARD, funded by Asian Development Bank
White, I., 1995. Fresh Groundwater Lens Recharge, Bonriki, Kiribati, Preliminary Report, Groundwater Recharge Study Funded by UNESCO.
By Dr Leonie Crennan
For further information contact:
Dr Leonie Crennan
85 Dunbar St, Stockton 2295. NSW, Australia
International fax: 61-49-284082.