mus thematic group: multiple use systems (water for productive use) wsscc planning meeting for...
TRANSCRIPT
MUS thematic group: www.musgroup.net
Multiple Use Systems (Water for Productive Use)
WSSCC Planning meeting for national coordinators and regional representatives
April 2007
Background - domestic
• The domestic water sector should focus on meeting minimum needs and quality to improve health…some for all
• Productive uses overload domestic water systems… should be banned
• Potable water is too valuable for gardening… should be conserved
• Beneficiaries of productive activities are the rich… lack of equity
Background - irrigation
• Household level productive uses (including livestock) are not the business of the sector…focus on field-scale irrigation
• Irrigation sector should not worry about non-commercial production …valuable cash crops and growth
• Irrigation water is not safe for domestic use …and supplying that is someone else’s problem
Alternative approach
• Small-scale productive uses as a vital contribution to poor people’s livelihoods… wider benefits of domestic and irrigation water
• Water quantity is often the highest priority, and domestic water often not potable anyway… respond to demands
• Incremental costs may be affordable… examine costs and benefits
• Productive uses can be designed for…plan
Multiple use water services
Infrastructure Example Key issues
Irrigation + • water quality for domestic use
Domestic + • water quantity for productive use
• universal coverage
Household level systems/ self-supply
• upscaling of access to sources and technologies
Thematic group
• Operational for 4 years…strengths and weaknesses
• Wider interest and uptake of ideas
• Now at a crossroads
• Should the group be more formalised?
• How to deepen participation?
• How to embed ideas/ activity in other platforms and groups?
What we know
• What do we now know from various research studies?
• Including:– papers at Johannesburg
symposium 2003– AWARD, South Africa– PRODWAT/ MUS group case
studies– MUS project case studies
www.musproject.net – Looking Back evaluation
(Wateraid)– Drawers of Water Study (IIED)
What we know
• People draw multiple benefits from access to small-scale water supplies
• Direct use of water in productive activities…gardening, livestock, agro-processing, micro-enterprises
• Link between improved WASH, health and time-saving and productivity
• The right water supplies can add up to an appreciable impact on livelihoods and poverty
Bushbuckridge, South Africa
• Vegetable gardens, fruit trees, building; brewing, livestock
• Income from productive uses was substantial in these poor villages– averaged $34 per person per year in the ‘worse’ villages – averaged $62 per person per year in the ‘better’ villages
Benefit/cost US$/m3
Gross margin from vegetable gardens and fruit trees
1 to 2
Gross margin from beer brewing 100
Estimated cost of increasing water supply 0.1 – 1.0 (utility)
0.8 – 2.0 (vendors)
Gujarat, India
• Service breakdowns cost women the equivalent of 4 days labour over summer months
• Potential extra income of Rs750-5500 year when collection time reduced from 3 to 1 hour per day
• However, enterprises are about much more than water
What we know
• norms of 50-200 lpcd depending on setting are needed to provide sufficient water for productive uses
• In peri-urban Cochabamba, Bolivia, 50 lpcd for domestic and 62 lpcd for productive uses
• In rural Bushbuckridge, South Africa, 21-22 lpcd for domestic use and of 23-40 lpcd for productive activities
• In Ethiopia, 7 lpcd for domestic and productive use
• Low and inflexible norms-based ‘basic needs’ or rights-based approaches can be a handicap
What we know
• Productive uses may lead to system failure
• Tail-end problems
• May be linked to illegal connections
• Managing productive uses is an important issue in demand management
• Also potential negative impacts on sewerage systems e.g. small towns in Colombia
• Unplanned productive uses leads to inequitable access
What we know
• Potential for improved cost recovery
• E.g. Challacaba case study, Cochabamba
• Financing of water system linked to access of water for diary production in a peri-urban area
• Narrow approaches to water supply that neglect the potential of productive uses are an opportunity missed
Cochabamba, Bolivia
Key ingredients
Appropriate te
chnology a
nd support
Ownership of th
e syste
m: empowerm
ent
Appropriate fin
ancial m
odels
Users improve their capacity and willingness to pay for the service
3
The service is improved reinforcing the needs of users
4 Users utilise water forproductive activities and Improve their economicsituation
2
Users have access to water at low cost and appropriate quantity and quality
1
What we know
• bottom-up, people-centred, and multi-sectoral planning processes tend to facilitate
• Projects fail to address these small-scale productive needs because these uses slip between sub-sectoral remits
Questions
• Is the MUS concept useful in your attempts in improve access to WASH? Why?
• What opportunities/ ideas are there to share lessons, pilot, implement etc in your countries, regions and networks?
Thematic group
• Think tank/ action research/ advocacy and information
• Website, newsletter, award, regular meetings
• www.musgroup.net
• 300 members and a more active core group
Thematic group impacts
• MUS project: examples of advocacy at international and country levels
• Session at 3rd world water forum, Mexico– Wider support from domestic and
irrigation sectors
– Importance of investigating sanitation linkages
• In South Africa, household level productive uses have been recognised in DWAF policy, and guidelines developed
• www.musproject.net
Thematic group impacts
• increase in recognition, across water sub-sectors, for holistic approaches to meeting people’s water needs at household level
• some convergence between sectors
• offers practical support to implementing IWRM
• many positive examples are now emerging
Experiences from implementation at scale
• NGOs– PumpAid– PLAN International
• Governments– South Africa– Colombia
PumpAid
• NGOs like PumpAid are encouraging better access to groundwater
• Government support for rural water supply under strain: coverage up but access down
• Rope and washer pumps are cheap and easy to maintain
PLAN
• PLAN Eastern and southern Africa region have mainstreamed multiple uses of water
• Bringing together fragmented water related interventions in health, food security/nutrition, livelihoods and WATSAN to have more impact
• Examples :– multiple purpose dams in Ghana
designed for irrigation, fisheries and livestock use
– dams in Kenya for livestock, gardening and domestic use
– promotion of drip kits in Zimbabwe for garden irrigation
– boreholes with windmills in Zambia to supply groups of 20-30 families with water for irrigation, livestock and domestic use
Colombia
• The PAAR programme have piloted increasing design criteria from 20 m3 to 30-40 m3 per month per family
• Proposals for changes in rural water supply policy
• How to manage productive uses at household level?
• Tariffs/ cost recovery. Boundary between domestic and commercial.
Strengthening our group
• Coming back to our crossroads….
• Should the group be more formalised?
• How to deepen participation?
• How to embed ideas/ activity in other platforms and groups?
Strengthening our group
• Governance of the group– Currently coordinated by IRC, 9 coordinating
partners, open membership list– Limited funding from IRC will continue for next 5
years
• Welcome new partners and members
• …also funding participation
• Regional/ national groups? Participation
Some key issues
• Promoting more implementation (and learning and sharing lessons)
• Key elements– Financing mechanisms and cost recovery– Micro-credit and enterprise support/ marketing– Sanitation linkages– Learning alliances/ scaling-up
Some new initiatives
• Research Inspired Policy and Practice Learning in Ethiopia and the Nile region (RIPPLE)– Money into water – water into money
• Planned WSP surveys (Colombia, Zimbabwe, Kenya)
• Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation scoping study
• UNICEF Zimbabwe: water and livelihoods