Are MUS more sustainable than single-use systems?
•Transferir como PPTX, PDF•
0 gostou•639 visualizações
Presented by IWMI's Floriane Clement at the International Workshop on Multiple Use Water Systems (MUS) for Climate Resilience, in Kathmandu, Nepal. 25-26 Feb 2016
Recomendados
Recomendados
Mais conteúdo relacionado
Semelhante a Are MUS more sustainable than single-use systems?
Semelhante a Are MUS more sustainable than single-use systems? (20)
Mais de International Water Management Institute (IWMI)
Mais de International Water Management Institute (IWMI) (20)
Último
Último (20)
Are MUS more sustainable than single-use systems?
- 1. Are MUS more sustainable than single-use systems? Floriane Clement, IWMI Paras Pokhrel, Water Aid INTERNATIONAL MUS WORKSHOP KATHMANDU, 25-26 Feb 2016 Photo: Ramesh Tamang / IWMI
- 2. Introduction Farmer managed water systems High sustainability and resilience Respond to multiple needs ARE MUS MORE SUSTAINABLE AND RESILIENT THAN SINGLE-USE SYSTEMS? WHY? External water interventions Low sustainability and resilience Designed as single-use systems Photos: Ramesh Tamang / IWMI
- 3. Definitions • RESILIENCE: “Capacity of a system to experience shocks while retaining function, structure and feedback capabilities” (Redman, 2014) • SUSTAINABILITY: “The capability of maintaining over indefinite periods of time specified qualities of human well-being, social equity and environmental integrity” (Leach et al., 2010)
- 4. Framework of analysis for social- ecological systems Water source Water user committee Physical condition and rules for O&M Quantity and quality of water for drinking and irrigation From Anderies et al., 2004
- 5. Methodology • Case study programme: SIMI • Rapid appraisal of 16 MUS • Case study of 2 MUS • Syangja, Kaski, Palpa • June – August 2014 Study findings to inform MAWTW project, Feed the Future initiative and food security programmes in general Photos: Ramesh Tamang / IWMI
- 6. • Benefits: Time saved, enhanced diet and knowledge • Average annual household income: NPR 13,722 (USD 136) • Who controls income: Women (58%), men (33%), both (8%) • Income used for: household expenses, education and health • CB ratio: 11 • 0.7 year return period Contribution to well-being Photo: Ramesh Tamang / IWMI
- 7. Sustainability indicators 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 No of MUS Physical condition InstitutionsSourceEquity Performance
- 8. Sustainability and resilience assessment • Most systems are still functional (87.5%) • Security of the source of water is the biggest issue for sustainability/resilience • Our sustainability assessment matches with farmers’ resilient assessment • All sustainable/resilient systems are governed by formal institutions
- 9. LUMLE-I, KASKI Photos: Ramesh Tamang / IWMI
- 10. BHANDAREKHOLA, SYANGJA Photos: Ramesh Tamang / IWMI
- 11. Pre-existing factors affecting cooperation • Characteristics of the resource: Sufficient flow of water throughout the year • Characteristics of the infrastructure: Relatively compact settlement • Characteristics of the water users: Small group and good social cohesion. Homogeneity (size of bari land and use of water). High financial capacity. • Characteristics of the resource: Decline in water flow • Characteristics of the infrastructure: spread settlement, steep terrain; • Characteristics of the resource users: Lack of social cohesion; Water use is heterogeneous LUMLE I BHANDAREKHOLA
- 12. Addressing inequities and supporting cooperation • Technology: Increased storage and taps has allowed a fair allocation and increased equity • Institutions: Simple set of institutions is sufficient LUMLE I BHANDAREKHOLA • Technology: Increased storage has not addressed inequity in water allocation for the overall system • Institutions: Ineffective and not functional
- 13. Providing multiple services • Basic needs: improved for all users, covered all year round • Economic returns: for a large share of users LUMLE I BHANDAREKHOLA • Basic needs: some users face shortage during the dry season • Economic returns: for a small share of users
- 14. Conclusion • The ‘multiple’ of MUS matters but is not sufficient ! • ‘Multiple’ needs careful inter- community planning • Need to consider social and gender equity in how this ‘multiplicity’ is distributed Photo: Ramesh Tamang / IWMI
- 15. Recommendations • Feasibility study: – Consider level of trust/reciprocity and existing conflicts – Comprehensive assessment of water demand and supply beyond the targeted community • Social survey on existing/potential inequities and recommendations for technological intervention and institutional support
- 16. THANK YOU Photo: Ramesh Tamang / IWMI
Notas do Editor
- Income among calculated among 32 users – other benefits include time saved, enhanced knowledge on veg farming and improved diet von egetable consumption
- Most systems show high level of equity and are managed with formal institutions - I would however be cautious on the equity results because of the methodology we used. Inequity issues do not necessarily come up during rapid appraisals. The security of the source of water is the largest issue for the systems surveyed – with almost one third of the systems where users reported to have an unsecure source of water throughout the year. A formal institution has been categorized as the one with an active committee, regular meetings, fee collection and a set routine for maintenance (by water users themselves or by a designated caretaker). An informal institution has been categorized as the one that has a formal or informal committee which meets and performs activities (fee collection and maintenance) as per need in an informal manner.
- In contrast, 56.8% of piped drinking water systems are in well-functioning state (DWSS study)
- Lumle VDC is a very old settlement with a majority of Brahmin/Chettri (15) and a few Gurung (7) households. The water user group in MUS consists of 22 households, with around six persons per household. Although agriculture is the main occupation, more than 80% of the households also have a non-farm income source. The soil in the area is black soil. The main crops cultivated are paddy, wheat and maize. Rice and wheat, grown on khet land, are irrigated through a FMIS. Two households have more than 15 ropanis of khet land and two are landless, the remaining households have around 5-10 ropanis with an average land size of 7.4 ropanis (0.37ha). The MUS in Lumle-I is an upgraded system. A drinking water system with a tank and a few taps was built by the government in 1989 in Lumle – 22 drinking water taps + SIMI added one jar and six irrigation taps. Later on the users added one tank next to the jar. Success story in the sense that MUS was scaled up in the VDC to 9 MUS and active cooperative just down on the road.
- The Bhandarekhola settlement in Ward 2, VDC Pelakot, Syangja district, is an old settlement with 33 Brahmin, Chettri and Janajati households. The average household size is around six persons. Agriculture is the main occupation but, as in Lumle, around 80% of the households have a non-farm income source. The settlement is quite spread out on the side of a hill with a steep gradient. It takes around 20mn to walk from the upper households to the lower ones. The households are spread on the sides of a recently built road, a gravel road which is to be pitched but for the moment very rough (only accessible to motorbikes and 4-wheelers in the dry season and not accessible to a 4-wheeler in the rainy season). The main crops cultivated are paddy, wheat, maize and millet. There is no canal system for irrigation, all the crops are rainfed. MUS upgraded system. The system in Bhandarekhola was upgraded by SIMI to MUS in 2004 by adding a tank to store irrigation water and a network of irrigation pipes and taps, with one tap serving one to five households. The irrigation system provided water for 30 out of the 33 households of the settlement. Three households were not part of the system because they could not contribute labor for the construction. Households from groups B and C progressively stopped using irrigation water from 2007-2008 because the flow of water reduced and the road construction damaged some of the pipes. The system totally collapsed when the pipe feeding the tank was damaged. All households then used the drinking water system to irrigate their vegetables.
- Lunle 1: They donate to the collective funds during weddings and other religious functions and the maintenance funds is today around USD 500. All 22 households have other sources of income apart from agriculture, with remittance being the main contributor. A few households have a house in Pokhara. This has significantly helped in collecting funds, maintaining and even upgrading the system, e.g. by installing additional taps and building an additional tank. Bhandarekhola: Users did not manage to keep a caretaker neither to repair/replace the irrigation pipes damaged six years ago. The high rate of outmigration and local gender norms have also reduced the ability of the water users to conduct collective actions. According to one female respondent: ‘we have been talking about maintenance but we have not been able to collect money for such activities. No one takes initiatives as there are no males/sons in the houses. It is difficult for women to take the lead. 3 households engaged in commercial poultry farming (between 300-600 chickens) and 3 in commercial veg prod Downstream users mention that SIMI project staff did not visit households from group C. The intervention revived a latent conflict. SIMI started to build the tank for irrigation before understanding and resolving water allocation issues regarding the source.
- No specific rules for water allocation in terms of quantity. There is however an informal norm that households limit their use of irrigation water in the dry season to subsistence production only. Addition of the tank by the water users greatly helped to improve equity in water distribution
- Economic returns matter: those taking care of the source in Bhandarekhola were those with high economic returns. However the skewed distribution of economic returns has sustained mistrust and hindered cooperation to maintain the system.