No matter how good the technical design of a monitoring program, the intended benefits or value can only be realized if the program is effectively implemented. For the purpose of this paper, implementation is defined as putting a theoretical concept or a new product, program, or service into practice. “Putting into practice” can be described as carrying out, executing, achieving, or accomplishing. Taylor¹ warns that “… nothing is more powerful than a great idea. And nothing is more deadly than its poor execution.” Because of the universal elusiveness of putting a new idea into practice,² the implementation challenge has been the topic of many studies. These studies are generally in the context of organizational transformation and change management.^3-5 However, a study that documents the 10 most important lessons for implementing an integrated watershed approach to protecting wetlands, streams, rivers, and estuaries⁶ shows that many of the principles that apply to effective implementation are generic.

The South African River Health Program (RHP) has, over a period of 9 years (1994 to 2003), grown from a mere idea to a national operation. This is especially significant when considering that adoption and implementation of the RHP are largely voluntary. To add to the achievement, program implementation is taking place in an environment characterized by limited financial resources, a multitude of competing social and economic priorities, and a severe scarcity of appropriately skilled people.

The RHP was designed in response to a specific information need, namely, to assess the ecological state of riverine ecosystems in relation to all the anthropogenic disturbances affecting them. It is a screening-level monitoring program operating on a low sampling frequency and a low resolution of sites scattered semi-randomly across catchments. The program’s assessment philosophy is based on the concept of biological integrity⁷ and use is made of biological indices (fish, invertebrates, riparian vegetation), as well as indices for assessing in-stream and riparian habitats. The RHP is geared to assess the general ecological state of rivers rather than site-specific impacts or conditions. A description of the design criteria and process is presented in Roux⁸.

While the design, development, and standardization (concepts, methods, processes) of the RHP is coordinated at a national level, implementation activities largely take place at the provincial level. Due to the relatively flexible and learn-by- doing approach that has been advocated for provincial adopters of the RHP, a diversity of implementation models has developed across the country. As a result, there are nine provincial “case studies” regarding the implementation of the RHP. These implementation models have resulted in varied levels of success — from two provinces being nearly self-sufficient in conducting routine surveys, health assess- ments, and reporting to two provinces still needing to take the basic step of estab- lishing an implementation team.

Reflecting on the RHP successes and failures in South Africa provides an opportunity to better understand the transition of environmental monitoring programs from theoretical design to sustainable operation, particularly in resource scarce environments. A previous paper has used the RHP as case study to focus on this transition from a technological maturation perspective ⁹. This communication focuses on three semi-social themes that appear to be key drivers of successful implementation of the RHP. The three themes are: