assessment of water supply and sanitation in amhara region
TRANSCRIPT
MAIN DOCUMENT
Assessment of Water Supply and
Sanitation in Amhara Region
Seifu A. Tilahun, Amy S. Collick, Manyahlshal Ayele
Learning
and
Communication
Research
Report
This research document is prepared by
Seifu A Tilahun: Lecturer at School of Civil and Water Resources Engineering of Bahir Dar
University
Dr. Amy S Collick: Assistant Professor of Civil and Water Resources Engineering of Bahir Dar
University and Post Doctoral Associate of Cornell University, USA
Manyahlshal Ayele: Learning and Communication, WaterAid, Addis Ababa Ethiopia
This research document was the result of a project of Learning and Communication of Water
supply, Sanitation and Hygiene (WaSH) of Amhara region which was financed by Water Aid
Ethiopia. The following people were the research team members from the school of Civil &
Water Resources engineering that helped with data collection from 32 sites:
Atikelte Abebe, Abeyou Wale, Chalachew Abebe, Elias Sime, Essayas Kaba, Mengiste
Abate, Seifu Admassu, Temesgen Enku, Tammo Steenhuis
Declaration
The ideas and opinions presented in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily
reflect the view of Bahir Dar University.
Citation
WaterAid Ethiopia and Bahir Dar University encourages fair use of this document with proper
citation. Please use the following for citation:
Seifu A Tilahun, Amy S. Collick and Manyahlshal Ayele. 2012. Water Supply and
Sanitation in Amhara Region. Learning and Communication Research Report, Bahir
Dar, Ethiopia
Cover photograph shows small girls fetching water from hand pump fitted hand dug well at
Ermito locality in Enbese Sar Medir woreda of E. Gojam Zone, Ethiopia (photo credit: Mewael
Gebregiorgis, 2010 )
Please send inquiries and comments to: [email protected] and [email protected]
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Great effort has been put forth to increase the number of people with access to safe water supply,
adequate sanitation and effective hygiene in the developing world. However, the issues and factors
of sustainability of these services are just as important and not documented very well. WaterAid has
made an effort to address the challenges of sustainability by funding a project to improve the
documentation of the conditions and status of 32 localities in which Water, Sanitation and Hygiene
(WaSH) schemes have been implemented throughout the Amhara Region. These 32 WaSH schemes
have been investigated by using physical observation and checklist interviews conducted with
communities, water user committees and woreda experts. Additional information was gathered
through the review of five Cornell-BDU master theses concerning rural water supply and sanitation
and their factors of sustainability.
The findings showed that the idea of simple technology is not always a solution as two different
communities (Kule and Awera Amba localities) have been able to manage for long period of time a
borehole equipped with a diesel pump. However, they have encountered the major challenge of the
high cost of fuel to run the diesel. In this study, it is shown that pumps powered by solar panesl can
be an alternative technology in such cases where the sites are far from the electric grid system. The
simple technologies such as hand pump fitted on hand dug well works well in areas where there is no
alternative water supply sources as shown in Enbes Sar Mider locality and in areas where springs can
be developed for multiple use of water (cattle trough and irrigation).
The sustainability of developed water supply sources is often dependent on the existence of
alternative water supply sources. In areas where there are a sufficient number of alternative sources,
the strategy should be to develop the water point most preferred by the community, or to direct
efforts towards household provision of water rather than a communal water point. Otherwise, the
communities would not buy into the operation and maintenance since their preferred water source
remains undeveloped but free of charge to use. The most common challenges observed at the study
sites were (1) collected fees paid for maintenance only, (2) confusion about the management
prevailed where there were different types of users and (3) conflict often raged between users and
farmer who owned the land on which the scheme was constructed. In such cases, more complete
community participation and awareness and implementation of multiple uses at a water scheme are
better approaches and lead to potential solutions of these challenges.
Finally, sanitation and hygiene practices are observed to be low. In most cases, the latrines have little
or no walls or roofs and are not suitable for people who are disabled. Those households reported to
have latrines are in most cases not the actual users of the latrine or the hand washing facilities.
Reasons for not using latrines were found to be the additional work to dig a hole was excessive, the
latrine was not able to be used during the summer due to runoff, the location at the homestead was far
from the users’ agricultural land where they worked for most of the day and many more.
Furthermore, it is important to evaluate the impact of current sanitation and hygiene practices on the
water quality of the water sources and domestic water at individual households and on the overall
health of the community.
iv
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
We would like to express our sincere appreciation to all the people and organizations at the regional
level, such as Amhara Bureau of Water Resources Development, at the zonal and woreda levels, such
as the branch offices of the Regional Bureaus, NGO’s (ORDA, RWSEP-Finida, CARE-South
Gonder, and UNICF) and all the schemes’ communities and water user committees for giving their
precious time to share knowledge, experience and information about water supply and sanitation. We
also greatly appreciate the efforts taken by all project team members (Atikelte Abebe, Abeyou Wale,
Chalachew Abebe, Elias Sime, Essayas Kaba, Mengiste Abate, and Temesgen Enku) of the School of
Civil and Water Resources Engineering to coordinate and facilitate all research activities from
inception to completion of the project and this report. We are thankful to the financial, transportation,
procurement and other university administrative offices for making this project possible. We are
very grateful to Prof Tammo Steenhuis for his advisory role and to Cornell graduate students for
sharing their documentation and data of the water supply and sanitation projects in their research
areas. We also would like to extend our appreciation to Michael Assefa, Mewale Gebregiorgis,
Teshale Tadesse and Wondimu Paulos for their photography collection, data collection and water
quality analysis on the field. Finally, we are grateful to WaterAid for their financial and advisory
support to conduct such a meaningful project.
v
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Table of contents ............................................................................................................................. v
List of Figures ............................................................................................................................... vii
List of Tables ................................................................................................................................. ix
1 Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 1
2 Objectives ............................................................................................................................ 4
3 Significance of the Project ................................................................................................... 5
4 Site Description of Selected WaSH Schemes ...................................................................... 6
5 Methodology ...................................................................................................................... 10
6 Technology ........................................................................................................................ 13
6.1 Spring ............................................................................................................................. 13
6.2 Hand dug well ................................................................................................................ 14
6.3 Shallow well and Borehole ............................................................................................ 16
6.4 Hand Pumps ................................................................................................................... 16
6.5 Diesel pump.................................................................................................................... 18
6.6 Solar Driven pump ......................................................................................................... 19
6.6.1 History and description of the solar powered schemes ........................................... 21
6.6.2 Current status .......................................................................................................... 21
6.6.3 Points to be considered ........................................................................................... 23
6.6.4 Recommendations ................................................................................................... 24
7 Operation and Maintenance ............................................................................................... 26
7.1 Definition of Terms ........................................................................................................ 27
7.2 Cash contribution for operation and maintenance .......................................................... 29
7.3 Safeguarding the water source ....................................................................................... 29
7.4 Alternative sources ......................................................................................................... 30
7.5 Trainings on maintenance .............................................................................................. 31
7.6 Recommendations .......................................................................................................... 33
8 Multiple use of Water ........................................................................................................ 36
8.1 Background .................................................................................................................... 36
vi
8.2 Conditions for MUS ....................................................................................................... 37
8.3 MUS at the onset ............................................................................................................ 39
8.4 Upgrading the existing system to MUS ......................................................................... 40
8.5 Pitfalls of lack of MUS................................................................................................... 41
8.6 Recommendations .......................................................................................................... 42
9 Sanitation and Hygiene ...................................................................................................... 44
9.1 Background .................................................................................................................... 44
9.2 Hygienic practices .......................................................................................................... 47
9.3 Latrine coverage and use ................................................................................................ 48
9.4 Promotion of Sanitation ................................................................................................. 50
9.5 Type of Latrines ............................................................................................................. 51
9.6 Cover for latrine hole ..................................................................................................... 51
9.7 Water Quality Anaalysis ................................................................................................ 52
9.8 Recommendations .......................................................................................................... 55
10 Administration of schemes ................................................................................................ 57
10.1 Background .................................................................................................................... 57
10.2 Non-functionality ........................................................................................................... 58
10.3 Community Participation ............................................................................................... 59
10.4 Water user committee..................................................................................................... 61
10.5 Recommendations .......................................................................................................... 62
References ..................................................................................................................................... 64
vii
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 4-1: Location of 32 WaSH schemes in 31 woredas and five woredas studied by Cornell-
BDU MPS students throughout the Amhara Region ...................................................................... 7
Figure 6-1: Excavation and installation of lining procedure of hand dug well below the ground
water level (Source: WaterAid, 2011) .......................................................................................... 15
Figure 6-2: Diesel motor powering pump in the borehole (at the left) and borehole source site
and power house (right) of Kule, Harbu, N Wolo (Photo by: Teshale T, 2011) .......................... 19
Figure 6-3: Location map of solar powered shallow well in this research project ....................... 20
Figure 6-4: Failed solar powered water supply scheme due to pump at Abate Barage locality of
Fogera Woreda in S. Gonder (photo by Michael A. 2011) ........................................................... 22
Figure 6-5: Functional (with major disrepair) solar powered shallow well water supply system
at Yebabe Eyesus, Bahir dar Zuria (Photo by: Teshale T, 2011) ................................................. 22
Figure 7-1: Location map of water points monitored in this study (Map by: Seifu A., 2011) ..... 27
Figure 7-2: Type of water source used before the developed scheme in Mecha woreda ............. 31
Figure 7-3: Missing faucets and other disrepair make the water point at the Gafate locality (W.
Este) inoperable (Photo by: Meserte B., 2010) ............................................................................. 33
Figure 7-4: Damaged hand pump at Manayita locality, Sekela, not an easy repair (photo
byWondimu P, 2010) .................................................................................................................... 33
Figure 8-1: Location map of water points monitored in this study (Map by: Seifu A., 2011) ..... 37
Figure 8-2: Functional MUS spring at Degameske locality of Yilmana Dense Woreda (Photo
by: Teshale T., 2010) .................................................................................................................... 39
Figure 8-3: Irrigation canal and shower (A) provided at a poorly implemented gravity spring
scheme (B) at Tigo spring in Tehuledere Woreda (Photo by: Wondimu P., 2011) ...................... 40
Figure 9-1: Location map of water points monitored in this study (Map by: Seifu A., 2011) ..... 45
Figure 9-2: Never used hand wash facility at Saye Meskel locality of Mojana Woreda N. Shewa
Zone (Photo by: Michael A., 2011) .............................................................................................. 47
Figure 9-3: Solid waste management system at Awora Amba locality of Fogera Woreda, S.
Gonder Zone (left) liquid waste pit at Kaba Locality of Menth Mama woreda of N Shewa Zone
(Photo by: Teshale T., & Michael A., 2011) ................................................................................ 48
viii
Figure 9-4: Poorly walled Pit Latrine Mekidela- Mariam sefer locality of Raya Kobo Woreda,
N.Wollo Zone (Photo by: Teshale T., 2010) ................................................................................ 49
Figure 9-5: Well roofed and walled pit latrine at Shinkurt locality of Farta Woreda S. Gonder
Zone (Photo by; Wondim P., 2010) .............................................................................................. 50
Figure 10-1: Location of 32 WaSH schemes throughout the Amhara Region, Ethiopia
monitored in this study (Map by: Seifu A., 2011) ........................................................................ 58
Figure 10-2: Relationship of the site selection capacity of community, local leader and
implementers and functionality in Quarit and Mecha Woredas (Habtamu, 2012 & Zemenu,
2012) ............................................................................................................................................. 60
Figure 10-3: Percentage Distribution of Respondents in Mecha based on type of contribution for
project cost (Habtamu, 2012) ........................................................................................................ 61
ix
LIST OF TABLES
Table 4-1: Complete list of WaSH water supply projects selected for this study including their
geographical location, scheme type and year of implementation ................................................... 8
Table 6-1: Different types of hand pumps, their maximum depths and remarks on their use as
described in the Technology Notes from Water Aid (2011)......................................................... 17
Table 7-1 Number of households (HHs), alternative sources and operation and maintenance
strategy of the first 19 schemes dealt for operation and maintenance .......................................... 28
Table 8-1: List of additional services from water point of the 26 schemes included in multiple
uses of water ................................................................................................................................. 38
Table 9-1 Type of latrine, its privacy, existence of cover for hole and presence of hand wash
facilities in the randomly observed households ............................................................................ 46
1
1 INTRODUCTION
Access to safe drinking water supplies and sanitation services in Ethiopia are among the lowest
in Sub-Saharan Africa. Access to safe potable water for urban areas was 91.5 per cent, while the
access to potable water in rural Ethiopia is about 68.5%1 (within 1.5 km) in the year 2010.
Systems are however frequently broken and not functioning with poor arrangements for
maintenance and repair. Access to sanitation facilities is reported to be 56%2. Despite this high
figure for sanitation in the country, latrines are virtually non-existent in rural communities with
defecation taking place in fields, bushes or along drainage ditches. Hand washing practice is
reported as 7% and open defecation is about 15%. Poor hygiene practices continue to cause
illness contributing to poverty in rural areas. Water and sanitation-related diarrheal disease is
among the top three causes of all deaths in Ethiopia, and Amhara region is one of the regions that
have faced this life threatening challenge for many years.
Increasing the number of people with access to safe water supply, sanitation and hygiene has
proven to be a tremendous challenge throughout the developing world. Despite huge
investments over the years in the water and sanitation sector in the Amhara Region, millions of
rural poor communities still remain without adequate water supply and lack improved sanitation
services. Although numerous schemes have been planned and implemented in Ethiopia, only a
proportion of these schemes continue to provide water to the communities that they were
intended to serve. The failure in service may have been caused by a multitude of reasons
including poor technology selection, insufficient maintenance, malfunctioning equipment,
inadequate community planning or participation and many others. By recognizing the
combination of factors that have led to the success or failure of a water scheme, more meaningful
and enhanced strategies can be arranged and employed for the preparation and implementation of
more successful schemes. Therefore, the chief factors of each Water, Sanitation and Hygiene
(WaSH) scheme should be fully documented by implementers, other partners and the
communities being served by them in order to better explore a scheme’s likelihood of remaining
functional and challenges to its sustainability.
1 Ministry of Finance and Economic Development: Growth and Transformation Plan, Draft, September 2010, p. 18
2 World Bank:Ethiopia Country Brief :Results, retrieved on July 17, 2011
2
Part of the problem of sustainability has been the lack of enough documentation of the work
bilateral and multi-lateral WaSH projects that existed in Amhara Region following different
practices to solve the problem. Documentation is currently not given due attention especially at
the woreda-level; and therefore, a limiting factor to the improvement of water supply and
sanitation. Government and non-government organizations had their own approach to water
supply and sanitation development. It is observed that there are large gaps in the sustainability of
water supply and sanitation services in different villages provided by different implementers or
providers. But these gaps are not well documented very well so that future implementation of
WaSH could have learned from previous works. Efforts to replicate local successes or successful
approaches have been very limited due to the lack of appropriate project documentation and a
dissemination mechanism in the region. Awareness on best practices can help guide a program
when designing and implementing an intervention strategy or other specific component in a
project. It is important to identify and understand approaches followed by implementers or
providers of WASH in the region, and then look for successful (and failed) approaches when
visiting the woredas. The lack of knowledge and capacity in documentation of projects by
woreda experts is one of the main causes in the lack of documentation.
We hypothesize that highlighting successful and failed practices of rural water supply sanitation,
and hygienic services are related to the sustainability of them. Therefore, successful and failed
WaSH services from different area of Amhara Region need to be assessed so that those factors
resulting or challenging the sustainability of the services should be identified. Training Woreda
experts using manual prepared during this project and highlighting successful and failed
practices will decrease the failure rate of WaSH schemes.
In an effort to initiate and expand this documentation and provide solid examples for continued
documentation, WaterAid funded a project with the School of Civil and Water Resource
Engineering at Bahir Dar University to evaluate WASH projects in 32 woredas distributed
throughout the Amhara Region and inventory the affordability, technical reliability, safety,
functionality, and the extent of community participation at existing schemes. In this way
successful and unsuccessful practices for planning and implementation of WaSH schemes could
be identified. Upon the completion of this wide-ranging documentation, successful practices can
be identified then promoted and replicated in the region. It is the expectation that this will aid in
3
meeting the Millennium Development Goals by enhancing access to safe water supply and
sanitation and ultimately increase the likelihood of sustainability of implemented schemes.
A group of members from universities, a non-governmental organization and governmental
organization had been established to work in the proposed research project. The leading
institution was Bahir Dar University in Ethiopia. Bahir Dar University located in the capital city
of the Amhara Region and on the shores of Lake Tana (the largest lake in the country) is a
rapidly growing university with a total of 45,500 regular and part time students with four
colleges (College of Agricultural and Environmental Science, Science, Business and Economics,
and Medicine and Health Science), with three faculties (Faculty of Education and Behavioral
Science, Health, and Social Science), and with three institutes (Institute of Technology, Land
Administration and Textile). Five years ago the Bahir Dar University had less than 8,000
students. Due its recent development, Bahir Dar University is looking for contacts with
universities outside Ethiopia and partners to deliver community and national services.
Cornell University was a partner and has a long term commitment to include social factors in
engineering design and has a collaborative agreement with BDU and regional offices through a
master’s program in Integrated Watershed Management and Hydrology. Cornell had been
delivering the same master programs to a new batch of students and focusing on rural water
supply and sanitation. The non-governmental organizations were Tsega, Tesfahun and Friends
Water supply, Sanitation and Hygiene Consultancy S.C, United Nations Children’s Fund
(UNICEF), Rural Water, Sanitation and Environmental Program (RWSEP) and the Organization
for the Rehabilitation and Development of Amhara (ORDA). These organizations are highly
involved in water supply and sanitation projects in the region. Finally, Amhara Region Bureau of
Water Resources Development is the partner institute from the governmental organization in this
project.
4
2 OBJECTIVES
The general objective of learning and communication in WaSH is to contribute to the
improvement of documentation in the WaSH sector of the Amhara region which may be
pertinent to efficient utilization and sustainability. Specific objectives encompassing the general
objective are as follows.
• To identify successful and unsuccessful WASH practices in the Amhara region for
selected woredas including community involvement and management, investment costs
and operation and maintenance.
• To document 27 WaSH cases that are successful or unsuccessful in the region through
written reports, briefing notes, photographs and documentary video
• To identify major challenges in the implementation of WASH program including
community participation, community perception, operation and maintenance and
institutional setup
5
3 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE PROJECT
The learning and communication project in WaSH sector directly uses the available knowledge
from the beneficiaries of the schemes and the documents and information generated can be
distributed to a multitude of stakeholders at the local, regional and national levels. The project
has aimed to scientifically relate legal, social and economic assessments of WaSH projects and
then mapped the potential roles of water supply stakeholders. Furthermore, trainings have been
conducted to promote the continuation of solid documentation at each WaSH scheme and to
illustrate effective methods of documentation to those working directly with the water users to
maintain and sustain their water supply.
Each scheme could be documented employing a common method and organized into a database
available to stakeholders and communities so that water supply information and implementation
innovations can be shared not only at the organizational level but at the community level as well.
Indeed, the communities should have a greater sense of ownership and responsibility towards
their WaSH scheme. This sense of ownership and the responsibility taken has been found
repeatedly to enhance the longevity of water supply schemes. Furthermore, the insight of the
water users is given validity and can be reviewed together with the science-based findings at
each scheme.
By documenting and promoting the continued documentation of structural and non-structural
aspects of WaSH programs in the Amhara Region, the management of resources is facilitated.
The pros and cons of WaSH implementation in the region will significantly help in designing
implementation techniques. Therefore, the documentation and inherent evaluation of the
existing WaSH projects are positive assets to improving the implementation of future projects.
Conducting this project has been greatly informative and educational to the researchers involved
from the School of Civil and Water Resources Engineering and this knowledge will be easily
transferred to graduate and undergraduate programs. Furthermore, the junior staff members of
the School and the university and decision makers in the WaSH sector have gained important
experience in the scientific methods of research and project management, including
documentation and implementation.
6
4 SITE DESCRIPTION OF SELECTED WASH SCHEMES
The study was conducted in the Amhara Regional State (Inset map of Figure 4-1) which is located
in the North Western part of the Ethiopian highland where Blue Nile River emanates. The
Region is one of the nine national regional states of Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia.
Amhara Region is divided into eleven administrative zones in which zones are divided into
woredas, and woredas are divided into kebeles. Woredas, 140 in total in the region, are districts
within Regional State and kebeles are the lowest level of government in terms of geographical
jurisdiction within woreda. The region took a share of approximately 25% of the national
population. The rural population is relatively poor, relying on traditional farming and small
holder livestock production, the success of which is threatened by unpredictable rainfall patterns.
Domestic water supply options include protected springs, shallow wells and hand dug wells or
unprotected spring, hand dug wells and streams. The dispersed nature of the settlements in the
rural areas makes point source extraction systems more appropriate. The protected water supply
for rural people is usually provided by government, national and international non-governmental
organizations
The 32 WaSH sites (despite 27 in the project proposal) in this project were selected based on
woredas, which were suggested by the zonal water supply representatives from nine zones in
Amhara National Regional State (ANRS) (Figure 4-1). Each scheme is summarized in Table 4-1
including the zone, woreda, kebele, locality, type of scheme, functionality status, implementer
and implementation date. Three woredas ranging from good to bad in water scheme development
were selected from each zone. Each site was further described by their particular kebele and
locality (Got); however, some of the sites were described by their kebele and did not have a
locality name. In addition, results from five woredas (Figure 4-1) studied by graduate students of
Cornell-BDU Mater of Professionals program are included in this project. The inclusion of these
woredas increased the number of water supply schemes to 98 located in 98 kebeles of 34
woredas of the region.
7
Figure 4-1: Location of 32 WaSH schemes in 31 woredas and five woredas studied by Cornell-BDU MPS
students throughout the Amhara Region
8
Table 4-1: Complete list of WaSH water supply projects selected for this study including their geographical location, scheme type and year of
implementation
Zone Woreda Kebele Locality Type of Scheme Year Functionality Appendix
Awi
Ankesha
Guagusa Sostu Segno Sostu Segno
Hand Dug Well
(HDW) 2006 Functional 1
Guanga Pawli Gongudinani Guangdinannena HDW 2008 Functional 2
Guagusa
Shikuda Mahel Anbera Chaqmite Spring 1997
Functional with
some disrepair 3
Bahir
Dar
Zuria
Bahir Dar
Zuria Yibab Eyesus Yibab Eyesus
Shallow well-
solar 1996
Functional with
some disrepair 4
East
Gojam
Awabel Yedebena Mariam Aliba HDW 2008 non-functional 5
Enebsie Sar
Midir
Dibo 01
Kidanemihiret Ermito HDW 1990 Functional 6
Debay
Telatigin Jeremis Hamusit HDW 2006 Functional 7
West
Gojam
Adet Ambatnna Dega Meske Spring 2009 Functional 8
Mecha Rime Koyou Gravity Spring 1998 Functional with
major disrepair 9
Sekela Abaysangib Manayita HDW 2006 non-functional 10
Quarit Girarma Kebele Girarma HDW 2008 functional with
major disrepair 11
North
Gonder
Chilga Angoba Buladege Sali Sefre Spring 2007 functional with
some disrepair 12
Dembia Jangua Wasadera HDW 2008 non-functional 13
Lay Armachiho Kokora Babawu Shallow HDW 2004 non-functional 14
South
Gonder
Farta Kanat Shinkurte HDW 2008 functional 15
Semada Kuasa Melame HDW 1999 functional with
major disrepair 16
West Este Shimie Gafate Spring 2004 functional with
major disrepair 17
Fogera Qhare Micheal Abate Barage Shallow well-
Solar 1994 non-functional 18
Fogera Awura Amba Awura Amba HDW/borehole 1997/2009 functional 19
9
Zone Woreda Kebele Locality Type of Scheme Year Functionality Appendix
North
Shewa
Mojana Flagenet Saye Meskel Spring 2006 functional 20
Menzmama Arate Kaba Spring 2009 functional 21
Tarmaber Dekakit SorAmba HDW 2005 non-functional 22
North
Wolo
Meket Kobo-025 Gondi HDW 2007 functional with
major disrepair 23
Raya Kobo Kobo-035 Mariam Sefer HDW 2008 functional 24
Habru Kule-07 Kule Borehole 2002 functional 25
South
Wolo
Kalu Chorisa Fontenina Spring 2005 functional 26
Tehuledere Gobeya Tigo Spring 1983 functional with
major disrepair 26
Werebabo Gedero Bekalu Wenz Spring 2005 functional with
major disrepair 26
Oromia Dawa Chefa Siter Siter Spring 2007
functional with
some disrepair 27
Bati Chachatu Habilalo HDW 2008 functional 28
Wag
Himra
Sekota Woleh Mahiberat Spring 2006 functional with
major disrepair 29
Dahina Kewuziba Kewuziba Spring 1998/2004 functional 30 Note: HDW is defined as hand dug well; shallow HDW is a shallow hand dug well; spring is a developed spring, shallow well – solar is a solar powered pump shallow well development; borehole is a
drilled well equipped with a pump
10
5 METHODOLOGY
After explaining the objectives of the research, thirty-one woredas were initially selected based
on extensive discussion with zonal Water Resources Developme Offices. Thirty two WaSH
schemes were selected discussing the research objective with woreda water resources
development offices and then visited and evaluated using a checklist in order to document the
good lessons and the challenges involved in sustaining WaSH. The checklist was developed
using the guideline document of CRS-USAID (http://www.ehproject.org/PDF/ehkm/crs-
usaid_watsan.pdf) and WaterAid’s checklist documents provided on the project cycle
management training conducted in August 2010 in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. Together with the
checklist, case stories guideline was adopted (Annex III) from Rural Water Supply Global Study
2010 (http://www.rwsn.ch/documentation/skatdocumentation.2010-01-19.0617698786).
Structured interviews were then conducted with the beneficiaries of an improved water supply
scheme, the district WASH committee and Woreda Water Resource Development office
members in 32 schemes located at different zones and woredas using the checklist. The
beneficiary and WaSH committee interview covered topics on operation and maintenance
practices, and cost recovery policies, level of services, type of water supply facilities, type of
additional facilities, implementation procedure, and particular use of the services provide, water
user committees, community participation, who promotes constructing and using latrine, type of
latrines, who uses the latrine and current state of the latrine,. The woreda interview covered
topics on the general description of the Woreda, WaSH practices, implementation approach and
trainings. In additional to the interview, physical observation was conducted at each water supply
point and a randomly selected household latrines.
In addition to the 32 sites mentioned above, five master’s thesis which are the sustainability of
rural water supply and sanitation services in Ethiopia: a case study of twenty villages in Ethiopia
(Tegegne, 2009), the determinants of household participation in water source management in the
Achefer area at 16 villages (Aschalew, 2009), assessment of drinking water quality and
determinants of household potable water consumption in Simada district at 16 villages, Ethiopia
(Meseret, 2011), Factors Affecting the Sustainability of Rural Water Supply Systems: The Case
of Mecha Woreda, Amhara Region, Ethiopia (Habtamu, 2011) and Assessment of Challenges of
11
Sustainable Rural Water Supply: Quarit Woreda, Amhara Region (Zemenu, 2011) were
reviewed to supplement our findings of the research. The twenty villages were conducted in Libo
Kemekem Woreda conducting normal survey of 200 households and 180 households for Quarit
Woreda while in Simada, Mecha and Achefere Woreda, the survey included 160 households.
This research project was compiled from briefing notes produced during the project period and
focused mainly on the following six issues which are
• operation and maintenance
• multiple uses of water
• sanitation practices
• technology specifically on solar driven water pumping
• community management and participation
The briefing notes were compiled from the reports obtained from each professionals visited the
different WaSH schemes and from the data compiled in the three theses described above.
� Eighteen schemes were reviewed early in the study for an extensive look into the
operation and maintenance practices, challenges and generation of recommendations
� twenty four schemes were then reviewed to document about multiple use water services
practices, benefits and challenges and one master’s thesis were reviewed for additional
information
� Thirty-two schemes were evaluated to provide an overview of the efforts to improve
access to sanitation throughout the rural areas of the Amhara Region, and three master’s
theses were reviewed for additional information on sanitation.
� Two of these schemes involved the employment of solar power to run pumps installed in
the two shallow wells were studied and documented the adavantage and disadvantage of
solar panel
12
� Thirty two schemes were at the end evaluated to document about community
management and participation with additional information obtained from five masters
thesis.
To accomplish all these, two-day long site visits were conducted at each site by a team of two
staff researchers from the School of Civil and Water Resources Engineering. A total of 10 (8
from BDU and 2 from Cornell U) professional were involved in covering the evaluations of the
32 schemes and reviewing the five thesis. A series of photographs of the various components of
the WaSH scheme were also taken to document particular details covered in the interviews and
to confirm the current functionality of the scheme.
13
6 TECHNOLOGY
Approximately 40% of rural Ethiopia (WaterAid, 2010) still lacks access to clean water despite
rigorous effort by the Ethiopian government to increase water supply in the country. To improve
access, the use of solar for water pumping is an alternative option in the rural areas since most of
the population has no access to the electric grid to power mechanized pumps. Moreover, solar
water pumps will be preferred in the future if proper promotional measures are taken by the
concerned organizations. Solar water pumps could also be preferred because of their low
running and maintenance costs.
Different technologies are however employed at rural water supplies throughout the Amhara
Region. In this project, we were able to observe gravity springs, hand dug well with hand pump,
shallow wells with hand pump and solar driven pump and borehole with diesel powered pump.
Each of these technologies is described briefly below and how water is extracted. Solar
technology is however described relatively in detail as it was given special attention in this
project. It is simply because of the experience with the use of solar energy technologies for water
pumping in Ethiopia and as well in Amhara Region is limited. The promotion of the technology
by Hope 2020 and the project of African Water Facility with Government of Ethiopia are the few
examples of recent works in the country (AWF, 2008). Therefore, documenting any previous
practices to use solar as energy source for water supply and learning from them will help to
understand the advantages and limitations and then to promote and initiate development of a long
term investment in these technologies.
6.1 Spring
Groundwater seeping from the ground to the surface at springs provides an excellent water
supply source if it is developed appropriately and remains free from pollution. Springs have
variable flow so there low regime must be checked to determine whether it is sufficient for the
demand. Low flows coincide with the very beginning of the rainy season or at the end of the dry
season. According to Water Aid (2011), a flow of 0.1 liters per second (Lps) would result in a
daily flow of about 3,000 liters which would supply a community of 150 people with their water
14
requirements (20L per person per day). However, an addition of a spring collection box or tank
would allow even lower flows (< 0.1L) to be considered for water supply.
Pollution is a serious concern during development and use. Therefore, the construction site
should be selected where runoff cannot enter the spring; latrines have not been constructed
upstream, and children and livestock are prevented from entering the site (Water Aid, 2011).
Furthermore, the construction site should not experience saturation or subject to flooding and
eroding processes (Water Aid, 2011).
The majority of springs observed in the region are gravity distributed with components of spring
capping, collection chamber and water distribution point (water fountain). In most cases, these
three components were constructed at the spring spot in six of the research sites such as Koyou
locality in Mecha Woreda, Sali Sefre locality in Chilga, Chakamite in Guagusa Shikudad, Saye
Meskel in Mojana, Kaba in Menz Mama and Dega Mesk in Yilmana-Denas Woreda. Such type
of construction avoids pipe line that connects each system and the faucets are usually fitted with
the collection chamber.
In areas such as Mahiberate in Sekota Woreda, Bekalu Wenz in Werebabo, Tigo in Tehuledere,
and Gafate in W. Estie, spring capping structures are separated from the collection chamber
where faucets are fitted with. In this case, pipe is laid between the capping structures and the
chamber so that water will flow by gravity from the capping to the chamber structure. This
system might be expensive from the above because of the laid pipes. In areas where the spring
source is far from the community and where water fountains are required at different locations
within the community, these three structures will be separated. Such cases are observed at Siter
locality of Dawa Chefa and Kewuziba locality of Dahina Woreda. The later system observed to
be well functioning as compared to the above two systems except the problem of leakage from
the joints of the pipe systems.
6.2 Hand dug well
Hand dug wells (HDWs) are a common technology employed for rural water supply because of
its relative ease in construction, low cost input and its familiarity to most communities.
Nowadays, the technology has been modernized by using better linings and more efficient pumps
15
in order to improve a well’s performance. HDWs are shallow ranging in depths up to 20 meters
and approximately 1.5 meters in diameter, which accommodates the digging process. These
wells most often are dug down to tap water stored in perched water tables, clay or other
impermeable layers on which percolated water collects above the main water table.
The addition of a lining to the HDWs decreases the likelihood of a well collapsing and excessive
loss from seepage. From the Technology Notes published by Water Aid (2011), four different
linings have been suggested: pre-cast concrete caissons (cylinders), reinforced concrete, brick,
and galvanized iron. When using caissons, the initial concrete cylinder is pressed into the
excavation site and the soil extracted from within the cylinder, and as the depth of the well
increases, concrete caissons are added as the depth increases (Water Aid, 2011) (See Figure 6-1).
However, caissons of smaller diameters should be used when the well reaches depths below the
water table (Water Aid, 2011). Gravel is used to line the base of the well and to pack the sides of
the concrete cylinders in order to prevent sand, silt and other materials from entering the well
water (Water Aid, 2011). Finally, to prevent surface runoff from flowing over into the well, an
apron of concrete or puddle clay is constructed around opening, and a concrete slab is used to
cover the well (Water Aid, 2011).
Bucket and rope, hand pump or another mechanized pump can be used to extract the water.
Fourteen of the water supply schemes observed in this project is hand dug wells with pre-cast
concrete lining and hand pump. The hand dug wells were less than 30 meter deep and all were
fitted with Afridev type of hand pump.
Figure 6-1: Excavation and installation of lining procedure of
hand dug well below the ground water level (Source: WaterAid,
2011)
16
6.3 Shallow well and Borehole
Shallow wells are deeper than 30 m but lesser in depth than Boreholes which are much deeper
(up to > 100m) and have a smaller diameter, approximately 100 to 150 mm (Water Aid, 2011).
Boreholes or shallow wells often reach the main aquifer where sufficient water can be obtained.
However, pumping is the only option to extract the water from these wells. Similar to HDWs, a
borehole will have an internal lining, an apron and cover for situating a pump. The actual
excavation of the well is the challenge
Water Aid’s Technology Notes (2011) describe three excavation methods including auguring,
sludging and drilling. In Ethiopia’s highlands, drilling is common because of the rocky
subterrain. Percussion, rotary percussion, rotary drilling with flush and jetting are different
drilling methods described by Water Aid (2011).
Hand or other mechanized pumps must be installed to extract the water because of a borehole’s
depth. Five schemes of the sites visited in this project were observed with shallow well or
borehole. The Kule locality in Harbu Woreda and Awera-Amba locality in Fogera woreda has
borehole with a diesel pump. The Awera-Amba locality is challenged by the cost for fuel and is
usually using the additional hand pump well installed in their locality for only washing clothes.
Similarly, Kule locality (which is described briefly in the diesel pump section) has been able to
manage and use the scheme though they are also challenged by the cost. One shallow was
observed at Melame locality of Simada Woreda. This well was fitted with an Afridev hand
pump. During observation of the site, it was non-functional because of its location on user farm
land and conflict with the community. The last two sites were shallow wells with an approximate
depth of 60m and fitted with pump powered by solar. This is described in detail in the next
section after hand pumps and diesel pump.
6.4 Hand Pumps
Hand pumps are installed on hand-dug, shallow and deep wells in order to lift water from below
the ground surface to the users at the surface. A bucket and rope system is the traditional lifting
device but requires excessive effort and strength to lift the water, entails frequent replacement,
and subject to pollution both from the ground surface and the bucket and rope.
17
A hand pump is composed of a pumping arm, a piston or plunger, valves, pump rods and pump
cylinder. The arm is pumped by hand and drives the piston and pump rods up and down within
the pump cylinder causing the different valves positioned above and below the piston to open
and close depending on whether water is being pulled in or pushed up (Water Aid, 2011).
Several types of hand pumps exist and are used throughout rural Ethiopia.
Table 6-1 below lists several hand pumps with their maximum lifting heights and remarks on
their use. The pumps described in the table include suction, direct action, low to high lift, non
piston and diaphragm pumps. The suction pumps are only able to lift water a relatively short
distance of seven meters on the other hand a high lift pump, such as an Afridev pump, can lift
water as high as 60 meters. Suction, low lift and direct action pumps are most likely to be
utilized on hand dug wells because these wells are often less than 15 meters in depth.
Table 6-1: Different types of hand pumps, their maximum depths and remarks on their use as described in
the Technology Notes from Water Aid (2011)
Type of Pump Maximum
Depth, m Considerations and Remarks
Suction pumps 7 Up to 30% in losses due to poor seals and friction;
priming required
Low lift pumps 15 Greatest lift provided if cylinder and piston below
water level.
Direct action pumps 15
strength of pump from operater; no leverage,
linkages or bearings, but lifting made easier with a
pump rod filled with air or very small diameter
cylinders and rising mains; Less expensive than high
lift pump.
Intermediate lift
pumps 25
Cranks and levers aid pumping; pumps designed to
handle greater stresses needed to lift water
High lift pumps 45, up to 60 Similar to Intermediate; 'Afridev' high lift is an
example of high lift pump used in Africa
Non-piston pumps Depends on type Maintenance requires special lifting equipment
Diaphragm pumps Not available
Diaphragm often component of hand or foot pumps.
Contraction allows suction and water is pulled into
cylinder, and expansion allows water to be pumped
up. Easy maintenance but diaphragm requires
frequent replacement.
18
6.5 Diesel pump
Motorized pumps such as those powered by diesel fuel are often utilized in rural villages and
towns where availability of water from spring and shallow well is much lower, the demand is
higher and the distance between the source and the users is great. The Harbu area is for example
known as one of the water scarce areas of the Amhara Region described as semi-arid. Alternative
sources, such as springs and shallow wells, do not exist. Society Rehabilitation Development
Fund (SRDF), a former governmental agency, in response to Kule community’s request and the
obvious need for an improved water scheme, the implementation of a borehole equipped with a
diesel pump planned and developed in 2000. The improved water supply system comprises a
borehole as a source, a diesel pump, a rising main, 40m3-capacity reservoirs, three water
fountains and a separate water fountain for Kule Elementary School (Figure 6-2).
The operation of such technology is very expensive. In Kule, there is one guard who is
responsible for monitoring and recording household consummation rates and making the
fountain accessible at the specified time period: 6:00 to 8:30AM in the morning and 4:00 to
6:00PM in the evening. In addition, the guard has to protect and clean the surrounding of the
fountain. In return, he receives a salary of 70 Birr per month. Furthermore, two pump house
guards are hired each for 150 Birr per month in order to protect the pump house and water
source. A motor (pump) operator receives a monthly salary of 200ETB while the school guard
receives 50 ETB for protecting the reservoir located in the school compound. In addition, fuel for
the diesel pump costs the community approximately 7,000 ETB per month, and the fuel can be
purchased from nearby Mersa city. All of the scheme’s maintenance and operation costs are
covered by the beneficiaries (~2500HH) in the form of monthly payments i.e. assuming one
jerry-can per household per day, 6 birr/month/HH during 2010 and 7 birr/month/HH during
2011. This works out to 20 cents per day and 23 cents per jeri-can in 2010 and 2011,
respectively. According to the regulations, a household will pay 30 cents for an additional jerry-
can. An average household consumes 3 jerry-cans (75Liters) per day. The monthly payment is
collected every six months using cash payment voucher prepared by the committee. The
committee is saving this collected money in Amhara Saving and Credit Institution (ASCI). The
community currently has 37,000ETB in their account.
19
Figure 6-2: Diesel motor powering pump in the borehole (at the left) and borehole source site and power
house (right) of Kule, Harbu, N Wolo (Photo by: Teshale T, 2011)
In an effort to improve the pumping mechanism and possibly alleviate some of the high fees, the
committee is planning to change the current diesel powered pump to one powered by electricity.
This modification will require a heavy cost of 170,000ETB. This high cost is necessary in order
to reduce the future monthly expenses of the system and the monthly household payments so that
the system will be more affordable. The community’s major challenge is therefore accruing the
high pump-modification cost.
6.6 Solar Driven pump
Since most rural areas are far from the electric service in the Amhara Region, most hand dug
wells, shallow wells and boreholes are equipped by hand pumps or diesel and petrol driven
generators. The drawback of hand pumps are first, the energy they require from women, lack of
additional services and, the frequent touch of the hand pump by human leads to disrepair of the
system. In addition diesel/petrol pumps have many drawbacks such as high running and
maintenance costs, unreliable supply of fuel, and poor availability of spare parts as describe
above for Kule locality in Harbu Woreda. Therefore, it is important to look for and try other
sources of renewable energy such as solar, wind, and mini-hydropower.
Although limited in number, solar-driven pumps installed on shallow wells proved to be a
promising technological innovation and worthy of further review. Solar photovoltaic (PV) water
pumping has been recognized as suitable for grid-isolated rural locations in poor countries where
20
there are high levels of solar radiation. The recognizable challenge, however, are feasible only
for shallow water depth with small discharge and the high initial cost of solar water pumping
systems; though they demand virtually no maintenance, and requires no fuel.
Therefore, documenting this technology practice in the region will help to gain knowledge of its
advantage and limitation from past experiences as well as to consider as technological option in
the future of rural water supply implementations.
Here, the story of Abate Barage locality in Fogera Woreda of Kuhar Michael Kebele of south
Gonder (black dot east of Lake Tana, Figure 6-3) and Yebabe Eyesus locality in Bahir Dar Zuria
area (black dot south of Lake Tana, Figure 6-3) were presented as a case to evaluate the
technology of solar for water supply (Figure).
Figure 6-3: Location map of solar
powered shallow well in this
research project
21
6.6.1 History and description of the solar powered schemes
Of the 32 schemes visited, only two were utilizing solar energy to pump the water from
underground to storage tanks above ground and then to the community. Abate Barage, located in
Kuhar Michael Kebele, Fogera Woreda in South Gondar, and Yebabe Eyesus in Bahir Dar Zuria
have schemes that were constructed in 1994 and equipped with solar-driven pumps. The initial
investment involved was excessive for rural water schemes, more than 150,000 US dollars, but
included
• shallow well (~60m)
• the solar panels,
• the DC/AC inverter (converts DC to AC),
• submersible pump (~1.5 to 2 kW) with stainless steel casing,
• two imported glass-reinforced plastic (GRP) tanks of 6000 litres capacity each
• cattle trough, a shower stall, clothes-washing station
In both localities, the water supply scheme was implemented by Amhara Water Works and
Construction Enterprise (AWWCE) and funded and supplied with equipment by the United
Nations Children Fund (UNICEF) as a pilot to evaluate the technology options in terms of
investment requirement and the reliability of supply.
6.6.2 Current status
Unfortunately in 2004, the pump at Abate Barage locality (~100HH) failed and the scheme
became non-functional, whereas the scheme at Yebabe Eyesus (~900HH) is still operational with
major disrepair of all components. Since the pump failure was beyond their capacity at Abate
Barage locality (Figure 6-4) and response from regional water resources bureau (BoWRD) was
not timely, the beneficiaries requested assistance to develop a new water supply source and a
hand-dug well situated 100m downstream of the previous scheme was provided by the Rural
Water Supply and Environmental Program (RWSEP). According to the opinion of the ex-
22
BoWRD expert, only the pump required replacement, and if this had occurred on a more timely
basis, the community would continue to benefit from the water supply provided by the shallow
well equipped with the solar-powered pump.
Figure 6-4: Failed solar powered water supply scheme
due to pump at Abate Barage locality of Fogera
Woreda in S. Gonder (photo by Michael A. 2011)
In contrast, the solar-driven pump at Yebabe Eyesus obtained continuous support from BoWRD
when the inverter failed twice; it was repaired on a timelier basis. Consequently, the scheme is
still operational (Figure 6-5). The serious drawback of the scheme is the lower output of energy
and the consequential lower pumping rate of water during cloudy days, common in the main
rainy season. And the elevating tower carrying the tanks had tilted, the pipes connecting the
tanks are damaged and are leaking considerable amount of the locally scarce water. In addition,
the cloth washing trough and the shower are no more in place and the cattle trough is badly
damaged and do not provide services.
Figure 6-5: Functional (with major disrepair) solar powered shallow well water supply system at Yebabe
Eyesus, Bahir dar Zuria (Photo by: Teshale T, 2011)
23
6.6.3 Points to be considered
From these two schemes, it was discovered that the solar pumps approached their design life of
twenty to twenty five years, but both sites experienced failure when the pumps and inverters
malfunctioned. While the solar panels (photovoltaic cells) have proven reliable well beyond
expectations, the pumps and inverters require appropriate well design and sufficient maintenance
and repair for consistent and prolonged use. If these components have got appropriate
maintenance, they would have exceeded the design life.
6.6.3.1 Advantages of the technology
� Low running costs to help offset the high initial costs
� Less environmental impact (AWF, 2008) or pollution than other forms of energy-driven
pumps (diesel, petrol, etc.) which release fumes and fuel
� Less human contact with water supply equipment so less deterioration.
� Able to extend the service of the well to multiple uses.
� Utilizing a free and abundant source of energy
� Extended operational life of water supply systems as long as the pump is well cared for
and maintained.
6.6.3.2 Disadvantages of the technology
� Excessively expensive initial cost
� Most cost effective for low power requirement (up to 5 kW) in remote places (Omer,
2001)
� Relatively complex technology: operation, repairs and upkeep require strong training of
community water supply committee or frequent follow up by implementers
� Requires elevated storage tanks to store pumped water
24
� Pump powered by solar energy usually has an operation life less than that of the solar
panel and also requires more aggressive maintenance and repair
� Lower energy output thus less water observed during extended cloudy periods, which are
likely to occur during the main rainy season
6.6.4 Recommendations
1. Solar PV an alternative but not a priority
Solar PV system can be alternative technology for remote rural areas where grid electric
power is not available. Grid electric power is the more cost effective power supply than a
solar-powered system, but this system can be alternative for diesel pump system by
checking first the cost effectiveness.
2. Modifying the Solar PV system components
The disadvantages of Solar PV system are the expensive cost associated with
maintenance of inverters and submersible pump. Research should be done to adapt the
system to developing countries so that it will be cost effective.
3. Sustainable in off-grid remote rural areas
Despite the higher expense, the technology proved to endure for much longer time and
relatively sustainable for a period of 15 years. If there is enough funds from NGO’s and
Governments to support remote rural communities with larger household number, the
technology is feasible by ensuring appropriate operation and maintenance cost recovery
mechanism and implementing multiple uses of the water to maximize the benefits from
the technology.
4. Continuous technical support
Continuous technical support is a necessity and responsibility of regional, zonal and
woreda water resources development offices and NGO’s for problems beyond users.
25
Such technologies require the support of appropriate experts for a much better
sustainability of water supply systems.
5. Support modification of technologies:
Government and non-governmental organizations are more focused on improving the
coverage of water supply. However, due attention is necessary to address the issues that
improve sustainability, such as introducing new or modifying previous technologies. The
Kule community, as a good example, has expressed serious interest in exchanging the
diesel pump for an electric-operated one.
6. Not always simple technology:
It is assumed that only simple technologies are more easily managed and maintained by a
community; however the rate of failure is high for technologies, such as hand pumps,
which are assumed to be the simplest water supply technology available. The water
supply scheme at Kule locality has provided solid proof that a community can manage
complex technologies, such as a diesel pump and borehole in water scarce such as no
alternative sources.
26
7 OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
Despite many years of development efforts, access to safe water supplies and sanitation services
in Ethiopia continues to be negligible. As of 2010, the national rural water supply coverage of
Ethiopia and Amhara Region was estimated at only 60% (WaterAid, 2010). If the current trend
of management and utilization of water supply facilities continues, a minimum of 35% of the
currently functioning facilities will become non-functional (ADF, 2005). Poor operation and
maintenance (O & M) of water facilities is one out of the many factors contributing to the failure
of these schemes (Carter et al, 1999).
Like many sub-Sahara African countries’ rural areas, maintaining water facilities that frequently
break and managing their operation of water sources in a sustainable manner are still extremely
challenging in rural areas of Amhara Region. Though the Ethiopian water policy states that rural
tariff settings should be based on the objectives of recovering O & M costs, the actual O & M of
schemes is low (MoWR, 2004). In most rural areas of Amhara Region, operation & maintenance
are not practiced instead communities often wait for the intervention of government or non-
governmental organizations (NGO’s). In places where users are paying tariff, either it is not
enough or it is used only to cover a portion of the O & M costs. Therefore, most facilities in the
region are under threat of losing functionality if the practice of O & M is not improved.
Cash is not the only requirement for effective operation and maintenance. However, effective O
& M also requires the users to efficiently and appropriately manage the water supply technology,
but this effective management is lacking in most areas of the region that will be discussed in the
other chapter of this document. Administration of finance, the control of water collection point,
the requirement to repair parts by users, conflict between users or within committees are several
of the observed and documented challenges that weaken Africa to manage their water points
(Carter, 2009).
These challenges could be applicable lessons for water point implementation in the Amhara
Region, but it is important to verify these challenges also exist in Amhara, to investigate such
issues at the regional level, and to document them for future lessons in the implementation of
water points. This would help to understand practices that could be adopted in different areas
27
and to identify the challenges that affect the principles, such as users covering the costs of O &
M and managing their scheme. Documenting the O & M practices would provide an opportunity
for dealing with an efficient O & M of water facilities for various implementers of WASH,
Government and responsible stakeholders in the region. The key findings discussed here were
compiled after visiting multiple research sites (Figure 7-1 and Table 7-1). Although the findings
are not the same at each site, they are presented as critical points to be extrapolated to many sites
throughout the region.
Figure 7-1: Location map of water points
monitored in this study (Map by: Seifu A.,
2011)
7.1 Definition of Terms
Operation: deals with the actual running of a service such as starting or handling of hand
pumps, guarding water collection points, provision of fuel for motorized pumps, by laws or rules
governing the system, hygienic handling of the water point, etc.
28
Maintenance: Maintenance deals with the activities that keep the system in proper working
condition, including management, cost recovery, repairs and preventive maintenance.
Table 7-1 Number of households (HHs), alternative sources and operation and maintenance strategy of the
first 19 schemes dealt for operation and maintenance
No Locality Zone Type of
Scheme HHs Operation Maintenance
Alt.
sources
1 Sostu Segno Awi HDW 90 10.6 ETB/year river
2 Guangdinannena Awi HDW 77 none none river
3 Chaqmite Awi Spring 300 none none spring
4 Aliba E. Gojam HDW
none none developed
spring
5 Ermito E. Gojam HDW 100 1 ETB/month/HH none
6 Hamusit E. Gojam HDW 50 0.5 ETB/month/HH and new
members fee
developed
HDW
7 Sali Sefre N. Gonder Spring 69 none none none
8 Wasadera N. Gonder HDW
none none river &
HDW
9 Babawu N. Gonder Shallow
HDW none none
river at
0.3km
10 Gondi N. Wolo HDW
Elementary
school
students
and 15 HH
none none
traditionally
protected
spring
11 Mariam Sefer N. Wolo HDW 80 1.25ETB none spring at
5km
12 Kule N. Wolo Borehole 600 6 ETB/month/HH river at 2km
13 Shinkurte S. Gonder HDW 50
the guard is
getting help
for his work
from users
0.5
ETB/month/
HH
spring at
4km
14 Melame S. Gonder
2 HDW/
shallow
well
360 none none unprotected
HDW
15 Gafate S. Gonder spring 228 none none spring
16 Dega Meske W. Gojam Spring 167 Rotation of
HH
0.5
ETB/month/
HH
river
17 Koyou W. Gojam Gravity
Spring 400 none none
unprotected
HDW
18 Manayita W. Gojam HDW 50 none none river &
Spring
19 Girarma W. Gojam HDW 40 none none river
29
7.2 Cash contribution for operation and maintenance
In about 60% of the sites, it is observed that there is not any cash contribution. In those locations
where cash was contributed for operation and maintenance, the contributions were not more than
6 Ethiopian birr (ETB) per month per household (HH) (Table 7-1). Higher contributions were
observed at sites with borehole water points. According to a user in Shinkurt, Farta woreda, “If
there is any damage to the HDW, the caretakers try to maintain it. When it is beyond them,
Artesian and Woreda water offices provide assistance. The operation and maintenance cost of
the scheme is covered by the monthly contribution of 0.5 ETB per month per beneficiary
household”.
Not all water users agree with the amount or reason for contribution. Kule locality from Harbu
Woreda states that “6 Birr per month to fetch only 25 liters per day is expensive and an
additional jerry can is 30 cents.” However, fees collected from new user members could be
saved for addressing the maintenance needs of the water point. An appropriate amount for this
new member fee should be adjusted according to these new members’ ability to pay because
“those who are not able to afford to pay the 100 birr membership fee are forced to fetch water
from unprotected springs and streams. This needs to be adjusted,” according to Debay Telatigin
woreda at Hamusit locality.
Furthermore, different conflicts involving water users lessen their willingness to pay for water
use. A woman at Sali Sefre locality of Chilga “heard a rumor that the previous owner of the
parcel of land where the spring was developed is planning to dig a new well at the head of the
spring to have his own water supply system and to destroy the existing one.” She wonders why
she should pay if this is to happen. At the few of the sites visited, upfront cash contribution by
the users ensured the availability of funds for operation and maintenance in the future.
7.3 Safeguarding the water source
Hiring a guard to safeguard the resources of the water scheme is a common practice at the
different sites throughout the region. Guards prevent the intrusion of non-user members and
check the scheme for damage or other problems. The O & M cash contributions are sometimes
used only to pay the guard (Table 7-1). Another possibility for payment of the guard would be for
30
every user household to contribute labor to the guard’s agricultural activities. In the case of water
schemes used for multiple purposes, such as irrigation, the particular users of this extra use
would be responsible for guarding the scheme in turn. Finally, an opportunity some scheme
users have taken to decrease the amount of cash contribution per household or to eliminate it
completely is for every household to guard the scheme upon rotation.
7.4 Alternative sources
The average water consumption of people from the sites observed in this study is significantly
lower than the WHO guidelines, which state that the per capita water consumption should be at
least 20 liters per day (Mengesha et al., 2002; Minten et al., 2002; and Collick, 2008). From all
functional schemes of the study sites, the average water use per capita per day is approximately
14 liter per capita per day (Table 7-1) suggesting that the developed sources in the study area
fulfilled only the minimum requirement defined by Gleick (2006), which is between 3 to 10 liters
per day. This low per capita water use (10-12lit/capita/day) is also reported by the six woredas
studied by master students. To fulfill the per capita water consumption beyond their minimum
requirement, peoples are usually forced to go to alternative sources that are unprotected spring,
homemade hand dug well and streams. From all 19 sites observed for this study, only one site
i.e., Ermito locality of Enbesi Sar Midir Woreda of East Gojam does not have an alternative
water supply source.
Availability of alternative sources has likely relation with functionality of water point in the
region. In Mecha Woreda, it is observed that about 56.2% of the household in the nonfunctional
water scheme use currently their previous unprotected spring and about 51.2% of the community
in the functional water scheme had been using traditional hand dug well-constructed at the back
yard of the household (Figure 7-2). The preference of users going to their alternative source if it is
available at their proximity is also observed in Semada.
31
Figure 7-2: Type of water source used before the developed scheme in Mecha woreda
In areas where there are no alternative sources, it is observed that the functionality of scheme is
relatively better. It is likely lack of alternative source that Ermito locality has been able to use
hand pump well for approximately 20 years. It is also found in Achefer that over 60% of HHs
did not have an alternative source at their proximity and complete non-functionality was not
observed. This means that if users are not satisfied with the improved source in terms of its cost
recovery, proximity, quantity or quality, then they would not take care of their developed
scheme. This is mainly affecting the operation and maintenance of water supply points in the
region.
The analysis in Achefer showed that a unit increase in the number of alternative sources
decreases the contribution of cash by 0.28 Ethiopian birr from a household. This suggests that
the existence of alternative water sources such as rivers, undeveloped springs and home-made
wells decreases households’ willingness to make cash payments for operation and maintenance
that affects the sustainability of the water point
7.5 Trainings on maintenance
Water users’ perceptions and evaluations of the maintenance trainings were commonly negative.
Often the trainings were provided to only men so that the caretakers of the schemes are
exclusively men although women have a great interest and are the dominant users of the
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
River unprotected
spring
Traditional hand
dug well
Other
Functional Schemes
Nonfunctional schemes
32
schemes. Furthermore, the per diem provided for these trainings have led to corruption. One of
the committee members at Melame locality of Simada explains, “Other committee members
exclude me from the trainings. They have replaced me with their friends.” Finally, a woman
from Gafate in West Este summarizes the training situation: “Committees are only interested in
the per diem and trainings. They don’t care about the water.”
Challenges that influence the operation, maintenance and willing to contribute cash for O & M
are identified as follows:
� Spending more cash on operation costs than those costs related to maintenance
� Weak user committees that did not stimulate users to contribute cash and to utilize money
in the saving account
� Lack of preventive maintenance action; instead maintenance undertaken only in
responses to breakdown (such as lost or broken parts, such as faucets (See Figure 7-3))
� Shortage of spare parts in the local market
� Provision of maintenance training to mostly men within the community
� Insufficient training provided for community members. Members are less likely to be
able to maintain their own system and they may begin to lose interest in the scheme
(Damage requiring training to repair at a hand pump in Figure 7-4)
� Loss of trust in the committee or lack of faith in source reliability
� Unsettled disputes between users and land owners on which the water point is situated
33
Figure 7-3: Missing faucets and other
disrepair make the water point at the
Gafate locality (W. Este) inoperable
(Photo by: Meserte B., 2010)
Figure 7-4: Damaged hand pump at
Manayita locality, Sekela, not an easy repair
(photo byWondimu P, 2010)
7.6 Recommendations
1. More organized participation of households
A true and higher involvement of households starting from the planning of the water point will
influence the willingness to pay cash and, operate and maintain the scheme after implementation.
2. Establishing trustworthy committee
Water user committees in most areas are looked upon as individuals who will collect benefits,
such as per diem. Establishing committee members trusted by the community would also
improve the willingness to pay for operation and maintenance. Existing age old indigenous
34
institutions such as ‘Edir ‘(a traditional informal farmers’ organization mainly created for the
purpose of mutual help in case of death of family members) could be used to manage water
points instead of externally installed institutions.
3. Upfront cash contribution
Setting initially a requirement of upfront cash contribution as a percentage of capital cost before
construction of scheme for operation and maintenance would give opportunity to sustain a water
point. Government, Implementers and NGO’s should inscribe this in their implementation
approach of rural water supply. And this also promotes preventive maintenance.
4. Paying maintenance than operation
As the willingness to pay cash is challenging in rural areas, most cash collected for O & M
should be spent more on maintenance than operation. Operation could be paid in the form of
kind or it could be implemented through participation of every households.
5. Improving the training quality
Most training provided to communities or committee members are not sufficient to enable them
maintains the systems. After the NGOs and implementers hand over the projects, continues
follow-up of the trainees is needed from the woreda experts.
6. Inclusion of women on training
Operation and maintenance training is usually given to men in the rural water supply system.
Women suffer a lot when there is no clean water as they are the primary care takers of the family
and the community at large. There is no doubt that their knowledge and involvement in operation
and maintenance largely contributes to the sustainability of water schemes.
7. Increasing Income of Households
Depending on the availability of water, it is important to devise mechanism to use water for
multiple uses in order to address the poverty of the communities. The support of government
offices, implementers and NGO’s on the uses of water beyond its basic need, such as micro-scale
35
irrigation is crucial. Therefore, horticultural development initiatives increase their income and in
turn positively affect their willingness to pay more cash and labor.
8. Improving the technology
Parts of the hand pump, which are installed widely in the rural area, are made of plastic and wear
easily. Finding locally available materials that could replace these parts or substituting parts by
materials that require low maintenance through research is important in addition to increasing the
availability of spare parts in the local market.
9. Promotion and Influencing
Advocating for the operation and maintenance and its contribution to the sustainability of water
schemes is necessary. Recruitment of volunteers as local promotion agents focusing on operation
and maintenance issues will likely increase the community’s willingness to contribute in cash,
kind and labor.
10. Dispute Resolution
User should be free from any possible conflict due to installed water points. This can be done by
understanding all possible issues that could be source of dispute and planning solutions in
advance. If it is not avoidable, dispute should be resolved involving the users as soon as it
occurs.
11. Developing alternative sources
It is recommendable to develop communities preferred nearby source and provide sufficient
water at a fair distance from households to improve the per capita water consumption. This can
be done by improving their unprotected alternative sources. By doing this, users would care for
the scheme.
36
8 MULTIPLE USE OF WATER
8.1 Background
Faal et al (2009) shows that rural water supplies can be built to provide a range of services in
addition to the domestic supply. These additional services are usually termed as multiple use
water services (MUS), which include water for livestock, irrigation, home gardens or other
small-scale productive uses in addition to water for drinking, washing and cooking. Multiple-use
water services are intended to meet the domestic and productive demands of the poor in a more
comprehensive manner. If appropriately planned, designed and managed, MUS have a much
greater potential to reduce poverty, to lesson health hazards and to circumvent the vulnerability
of rural households.
However, the extent of these additional services depends on the capacity (quantity) of the water
supply and the particular geographical location of these sources. Around 220 million people in
sub-Saharan Africa (about 52% of the rural population), for example, could significantly benefit
from MUS if it is properly designed and integrated (Faures et al, 2008). MUS can be
implemented by upgrading the existing system, by developing a system that can be expanded in
the future or by implementing MUS at the onset (Faal et al 2009). Multiple use water services are
part of an approach within the concepts of Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM)
principles considered in the water policy in Ethiopia (MoWR, 2004 and Faal et al 2009). In
recent years, Water supply, Sanitation and Hygiene (WaSH) implementers in Ethiopia also have
shifted to MUS although the WaSH water supply points are often not implemented in an
integrated way (Adank et al 2008). Application of MUS are for example documented in areas of
Eastern Hararghe and have shown a rewarding cost- benefit analysis of MUS compared to single
use (Adank et al 2008). There are some efforts underway by different implementers or NGO’s to
implement MUS in the Amhara Region, but the particular implementation practices and the
consequent benefit to the sustainability of the water supply service is not well documented in the
region.
Thus, understanding and documenting the current status and future potential of MUS is very
important in order to improve the implementation and sustainability of WaSH services (See
37
Figure 8-1 and Table 8-1 for WaSH sites involved in study). By documenting practices of MUS, it
will help to gain important insight from past experiences how to link income generating activities
with water provision for drinking as well as to improve future efforts in implementing MUS
water services.
Figure 8-1: Location map of water points
monitored in this study (Map by: Seifu A.,
2011)
8.2 Conditions for MUS
The majority of the protected springs have additional facilities and services, such as water
clothing, cattle trough and irrigation (Table 8-1). Only those springs in difficult topographical
locations did not include additional services beyond the domestic water supply. For example, a
spring development at Sali Sefer in Chilga lacked multiple uses because its implementation was
limited by topography and its proximity to the edge of a cliff.
38
Table 8-1: List of additional services from water point of the 26 schemes included in multiple uses of water
No Locality Zone Type of
Scheme Additional services
1 Sostu Segno Awi HDW none
2 Guangdinannena Awi HDW none
3 Chaqmite Awi Spring only washing basin
4 Aliba E. Gojam HDW none
5 Ermito E. Gojam HDW one hand pump for livestock drinking
6 Hamusit E. Gojam HDW none
7 Sali Sefre N. Gonder Spring none but people wash cloth on the collection chamber
8 Wasadera N. Gonder HDW none
9 Babawu N. Gonder Shallow HDW none
10 Saye Meskel N. Shewa spring cloth wash and cattle trough
11 Kaba N.Shewa spring cattle trough
12 SorAmba N.Shewa HDW none
13 Gondi N. Wolo HDW none
14 Mariam Sefer N. Wolo HDW Cattle trough and cloth washing sinks that isn't
functional
15 Kule N. Wolo Borehole none
16 Fontenina S. Wolo Spring cloth washing trough and traditional irrigation
17 Tigo S. Wolo Spring cloth washing trough, shower and irrigation canal
18 Bekalu Wenz S. Wolo Spring cloth washing trough
19 Shinkurte S. Gonder HDW none
20 Melame S. Gonder 2 HDW/
shallow well none
21 Gafate S. Gonder spring none
22 Abate Barage S. Gonder Shallow well-
Solar there was but non-functional
23 Dega Meske W. Gojam Spring shower, cattle trough
24 Koyou W. Gojam Gravity Spring Traditional Irrigation
25 Manayita W. Gojam HDW none
26 Girarma W. Gojam HDW none
It is observed that implementers opt for hand dug wells because of their low cost and short
construction time although there are possibilities of applying MUS by developing a nearby
spring. Gondi locality in Meket Woreda of North Wolo zone is a good case where Gondi first
cycle school and surrounding communities are using unprotected spring in place of disrepair
hand dug well. None of the hand pumps observed in this study has any of additional services.
This is because they are manual and the rate of extraction of water is very low. However, there is
a possibility of developing additional hand dug for additional benefits. Ermito locality in Enbesi
Sar Midir, one of the hand pump out of five is used for livestock drinking as the community do
not have any alternative water source at proximity.
39
8.3 MUS at the onset
In areas where MUS has been implemented at the onset, communities are receiving various
services from the scheme. Users in Degameske locality of Yilmana Dense Woreda have
improved their hygiene through the availability of shower facilities and clothes-washing stations
(Figure 8-2). They are also generating income by providing the service to outsiders and collecting
a fee of 0.50 ETB per person. Furthermore, an astonishing example in Kalu woreda where the
Fontenina springs have been developed by Water Action has shown that the strong revenue
generated from irrigation activities has triggered the willingness of the community to pay more
to sustain their water services. A single managing committee collects monthly flat rates for the
different services provided by this spring: 2 birr per month for house connections, 10 birr per
month for irrigation use and hotel connections and 1 birr per month for water point users. At
Luhudi located in Kuala Baka village in Achefer, water scheme users have benefited greatly
from MUS. Some households in this village have taken advantage of the additional water by
growing fruits and vegetables. The single water user committee in the village has enforced
regulations that require households using water for irrigation to safeguard the water source on a
rotational basis. This is the only spring source that has been implemented with multiple uses in
Achefer Woreda.
Figure 8-2: Functional MUS spring at Degameske locality of Yilmana Dense Woreda (Photo by: Teshale T.,
2010)
40
8.4 Upgrading the existing system to MUS
Upgrading a single use spring development to MUS requires the communities’ participation and
proper technology selection for implementation and integrated management. Tigo Spring in
Tehuledere Woreda was initially developed for domestic water supply but an upgrade of the
system was implemented in order to provide three shower huts, a clothes-washing station, and an
irrigation diversion (Figure 8-3 A). The water fetching site was moved further downstream from
the spring box and consists of a three-tap fetching station. However, the fetching station had to
be situated below the ground surface in order for the spring water to flow by gravity. Now
runoff floods the excavated site forcing women to wade through stagnant water to reach the taps
(Figure 8-3B).
Figure 8-3: Irrigation canal and shower (A) provided at a poorly implemented gravity spring scheme (B) at
Tigo spring in Tehuledere Woreda (Photo by: Wondimu P., 2011)
Furthermore, the roof-level tanks for operating the showers must be filled manually from below.
Because of the heavy lifting necessary to fill the tanks, the showers were quickly abandoned and
often used as latrines. Only the irrigation channel continues to operate as intended partly due to a
separate management committee operating and maintaining the irrigation services from the ten
birr contribution of irrigation users, on the other hand no fees were collected for the domestic use
by the separate domestic water supply committee.
Ultimately, despite ample water quantity, this WaSH water supply scheme has failed due to
insufficient community input into the choice of the water services and technologies and a lack of
commitment by the water committee.
A B
41
8.5 Pitfalls of lack of MUS
Water supply policy dictates that water supply schemes should be planned with domestic water
supply as the main and too often the only priority although many spring developments are
suitable for multiple uses. The limitation in the scope of the water supply scheme has been partly
responsible for the complete failure of the system in Koyou locality, Rime Kebele, Mecha
Woreda. The community from Koyou formerly collected water from a site downstream of the
spring where pipes and a faucet were designed to fetch water. However, due to the demand for
irrigation water and livestock drinking water, the system was destroyed and covered by mud
forcing women to fetch water from failed system. Similarly, Gedero spring in Werebabo woreda
had no additional services, thus the owner of the land where the spring originates began to
irrigate near the spring box and ultimately damaged the scheme.
Furthermore, the particular water supply technology may limit the scope of the services
provided. For example, developed springs are much more likely to have MUS, but none of the
hand dug wells observed had additional services besides domestic water supply. Unless hand
dug wells become exploited for additional services, the development of springs is the water
supply technology of choice for MUS. In addition to lacking additional services, hand dug wells
equipped with hand pumps are plagued with frequent equipment failure and low service
reliability.
Even if the users realize a need to enhance their scheme and add more services, upgrading was
not part of the initial planning phase and unlikely or impractical. For example, users in the
locality of Kaba and Sayemeskel in Menzemama and Mojana Wadera Woreda, respectively,
have an interest to upgrade their scheme in order to exploit the potential for irrigation in addition
to providing cattle drinking troughs and clothes-washing sinks. Unfortunately, future upgrades of
the scheme were not considered in the initial planning and development, but users are planning
to divert the overflow of the tanks for traditional irrigation.
A B
42
8.6 Recommendations
1. MUS as key principle
In areas where topography allows and there is sufficient water quantity, implementers should
take multiple use of water as the standard in the development of water sources for water supply.
When users are not capable to incorporate MUS at the onset, the sources should be developed in
a way that can be upgraded in the future when opportunities arise.
Implementers of water supply points should discuss a community’s priorities when it comes to
water. Although water supply schemes are developed commonly with a priority on domestic
supply, a community’s priority may be different. However, multiple water services can be built
into a spring development.
2. Integration among sectors
To link rural water supply development to income-generating activities, the integration and
better coordination between different sectors at any level of institutional arrangement is
important. This helps to understand the opportunities available in the market. Integration must
also involve the development of a common user committee for the different water services and
an appropriate management approach for the services as seen at Fontenina spring but not at Tigo.
In addition, implementers should be flexible enough to provide other services in addition to
drinking water supply.
3. MUS to the willingness to pay
Providing additional services gives an opportunity to increase user’s income through vegetable,
fruit and other horticulture crops cultivation and in turn positively affect their willingness to pay
more cash and labor. This helps the operation and maintenance part of water supply management
which affects the sustainability of rural water supply services.
4. MUS as a conflict resolution mechanism
MUS, if properly planned at the onset, can be used to enhance user satisfaction by providing
various water services at the demand of different community members. This in turn will likely
43
prevent future disputes between users as seen at the Koyou spring where the domestic water
component was destroyed for the sake of irrigation demand. Furthermore, if the land owners of
the scheme at Gedero spring were allowed from the beginning to utilize the water for irrigation
in return for the use of their land, the disputes between land owners and users could be resolved.
5. Considering users’ choices on technology
The majority of the protected springs have additional facilities, whereas none of the hand-pumps
observed have any of these services. Because of the lack of these services, the low system
reliability and the frequent pump failures, many users complain about hand pumps and seem
unwilling to manage them properly. In addition, technologies for additional services should be
based on choices of the community, but they should not be designed in a way that requires a lot
of extra time and effort for users to effectively utilize them.
44
9 SANITATION AND HYGIENE
9.1 Background
Inadequate sanitation and hygiene is one of the factors that cause 80 percent of all sickness and
disease in the world (WHO, 1997). In Ethiopia, it has been reported that 60% of overall diseases
is related to poor sanitation and lack of hygiene (Gebreselassie, 2007). Admassu et al. (2004)
showed that approximately half of all water sources (protected and unprotected) in North Gonder
of Amhara Region are polluted by feces, specifically human, which is the most likely source of
diarrhea and the main breeding media of Musca sorbens, the eye-seeking fly that transmits
trachoma (Emerson, 2001). It is generally believed that proper latrine construction, use and
hygienic practices can reduce communicable diseases, such as diarrhea and trachoma arising
from the environment, especially water and sanitation.
Government and non-governmental organization (NGO’s) have dedicated considerable resources
to improve sanitation and hygiene in Amhara Region. For example, the Ministry of Health in
2003 launched a new health care plan to provide quality preventive health services in an
accessible and equitable manner to all segments of rural population through a comprehensive
Health Extension Program (HEP) (Alula, 2008). One of the focal points of this program is
hygiene and environmental sanitation. And HEWs are working at the kebele level in order to
promote proper and safe excreta disposal system in households throughout the region. Moreover,
the rural water supply providers of local and international NGO’s are promoting sanitation and
hygiene in conjunction with water supply improvements. But this is not the case for all NGO’s.
Some are working integrating water supply, sanitation and hygiene and others not.
Despite the ambitious plan to achieve 100% improved sanitation and hygiene coverage by 2012,
access to sanitation services in Ethiopia is currently reported as 43% (WaterAid, 2010)
approaching only the Millennium Development Goal (MDG) target. According to literature, the
sanitation coverage in the Amhara Region increased from 4% in 2004 (O’Loughlin et al., 2006)
to 63% in 2010 (WaterAid, 2010). Despite such figures, latrines are virtually non-existent in
rural communities with defecation taking place in fields, bushes or along drainage ditches. The
non-functionality of the available latrines was estimated to be greater than 80% in the country
45
(Gebreselassie, 2007) which is likely the same in the region. If this trend of non-functionality of
sanitation facilities continues, the risk of fecal-oral transmission and the mortality rate of
children due to poor sanitation increase.
This chapter provides an overview of the research specific to the current situation and problems
of sanitation and hygienic practices that were implemented by various WaSH implementers,
government agencies and responsible stakeholders in the region (See study sites in Figure 9-1 and
explained in Table 9-1). These would finally provide an opportunity to revise and evaluate current
strategies for improving sanitation in the region.
Figure 9-1: Location map of water
points monitored in this study
(Map by: Seifu A., 2011)
46
Table 9-1 Type of latrine, its privacy, existence of cover for hole and presence of hand wash facilities in the
randomly observed households
No Locality Zone Type of Latrine Privacy Cover Hand Wash
facilities
1 Sostu Segno Awi pit latrine with wall and roof yes yes yes
2 Guangdinannena Awi no latrine no no no
3 Chaqmite Awi pit latrine with wall and roof yes no yes
4 Yibab Eyesus B/ Dar Zuria pit latrine without wall & Roof no no no
5 Aliba E. Gojam no latrine no no no
6 Ermito E. Gojam pit latrine with wall and roof yes no no
7 Hamusit E. Gojam pit latrine without wall & Roof no no no
8 Sali Sefre N. Gonder pit latrine without wall & Roof no no no
9 Wasadera N. Gonder pit latrine without wall & Roof no no no
10 Babawu N. Gonder pit latrine with wall and roof yes/partial yes no
11 Saye Meskel N. Shewa pit latrine without wall & Roof no no yes
12 Kaba N.Shewa pit latrine with wall and roof yes/partial no yes
13 SorAmba N.Shewa pit latrine with wall and roof yes/partial no yes
14 Gondi N. Wolo no latrine/pit latrine without
wall & Roof no no no
15 Mariam Sefer N. Wolo pit latrine without wall no yes yes
16 Kule N. Wolo pit latrine with wall and roof yes no no
17 Siter Oromia pit latrine with wall and roof-
slab floor yes/partial no yes
18 Habilalo Oromia no latrine no no no
19 Fontenina S. Wolo pit latrine with wall and roof-
slab floor yes/partial no yes
20 Tigo S. Wolo pit latrine without wall & Roof no no no
21 Bekalu Wenz S. Wolo pit latrine with wall and roof-
slab floor yes/partial no yes
22 Shinkurte S. Gonder pit latrine with wall and roof yes yes yes
23 Melame S. Gonder no latrine/pit latrine without
wall & Roof no no no
24 Gafate S. Gonder not using/pit latrine with wall
and roof no no no
25 Abate Barage S. Gonder pit latrine without wall & Roof no no no
26 Awora Amba S. Gonder pit latrine with wall and roof yes no yes
27 Mahiberat Wag-himra pit latrine with wall and roof yes yes yes *
28 Kewuziba Wag-himra pit latrine without wall & Roof no no no
29 Dega Meske W. Gojam Pit latrine with wall no no no
30 Koyou W. Gojam pit latrine without wall no no no
31 Manayita W. Gojam pit latrine without wall & Roof no yes no
32 Girarma W. Gojam not documented in this project no doc. no doc. no doc.
* Not used
47
9.2 Hygienic practices
Currently the sanitation and hygiene facilities promoted in all of the woreda of the 32 sites are
latrine, “Afe tebaba” (a plastic container used to fetch water instead of traditional pot made of
clay), and hand wash facility. The advantage of “Afe Tebaba” over the traditional pot as the
woreda’s expert explanation was that the opening is so small that the risk of contamination is
minimized. This is the major practice in the region in terms of safe water handling. But
unpublished research results by CARE South Gonder have showed that turbidity levels of the
HHs water are more than water at the schemes.
The hand washing stations (Figure 9-2) at all sites were made of waste plastic materials such as 1
to 3 liter disposed plastic bottles of water, edible oil and car oil for lubrication which can be
found easily. In most cases, HHs do not use this facilities because either they are not using the
latrine or they do not have hand washing facilities. From randomly visited HHs in the 32 sites,
only approximately in 40% of the sites, we have observed hand washing facilities. The
percentage of users of the hand washing facilities will probably lower than this as users don’t
usually use their constructed latrine.
Figure 9-2: Never used hand wash facility at Saye
Meskel locality of Mojana Woreda N. Shewa Zone
(Photo by: Michael A., 2011)
Other indicators of hygienic practices are keeping the environment clean through liquid and solid
waste management. From all sites observed, liquid waste management are only at Sosetu Segno
locality of Ankesha Guagusa, Kaba locality of Menth Mama, Shinkut locality of Farata woreda
and Awora Amba locality of Fogera woreda observed. Surprisingly, the Awora community has
48
not been included with the Health Extension Program as they have sufficient knowledge on
sanitation and hygienic practices. Solid waste management practices are exceptionally observed
in this locality. The solid waste collecting containers is made of wooden sticks placed at
different location within the villages (Figure 9-3). According to one respondent from the
community, every HH knows where to dispose the solid waste. When the container gets filled in,
it would be transported to a burning place where it will be burned.
Figure 9-3: Solid waste management system at Awora Amba locality of Fogera Woreda, S. Gonder Zone (left)
liquid waste pit at Kaba Locality of Menth Mama woreda of N Shewa Zone (Photo by: Teshale T., & Michael
A., 2011)
9.3 Latrine coverage and use
The sanitation coverage reported from woredas in the region ranges from 30 to 100% but the
spatial coverage variability of latrine within the woreda is very high as learned from Libo
Kemekem such as 67.5% in some villages to 31.3% to the other villages within the woreda. The
survey in the same woreda demonstrated that if a latrine was constructed, it did not mean that it
was used regularly. Only 20% or less of those who constructed latrines used them regularly. This
was also the case for the 32 sites assessed within the Amahara Region. Most latrines were not
used or had not been constructed completely (Incomplete walls in Figure 9-4). A teenager from
Gafate locality of West Este showed an excavated hole for an unfinished pit latrine in their back
yard. The latrine was started upon her request, and she explained, “I learned about sanitation in
49
my elementary class and asked my father to construct pit latrine. He started digging the hole but
he could not finish it because of his poor health condition”.
Ato Ambaw Geremew in Ermito locality of Enebsie Sar Midir Woreda, East Gojam said,
“Although there are many toilets built in this village to escape the 25 ETB penalty set by HEWs,
the actual number of people using toilets is rather low”. The latrines were rarely used because of
the bad odor around the latrine and not feeling comfortable using the latrine. In addition, those
living in households with latrines must travel long distances from their agricultural fields back to
their home to use the latrine. Furthermore, a household family in a sub-urban or market area is
likely to use their extra open land for income generation instead of constructing a latrine. In
Semada, the percentage of households in non market centers having a latrine (52.5%) far exceeds
the coverage the percentage of households with latrines in market centers (31.6%) and in sub-
urban peripherals (27.3%). One of the respondents from a market center said, “It is nothing to
dig a pit for a latrine unless my neighbor does the same because his children will likely defecate
in the neighbor’s open land which attracts flies and easily spreads disease to my children’’. The
case in Dembia at Wasadera locality is different. Wayzaro (Mrs.) Mantegbosh Fenta explained,
“Three years ago, we had latrines in our backyard, but we stopped using the latrines since the
first fill up of the pit and digging another pit was our headache”.
Figure 9-4: Poorly walled Pit Latrine Mekidela- Mariam sefer locality
of Raya Kobo Woreda, N.Wollo Zone (Photo by: Teshale T., 2010)
50
9.4 Promotion of Sanitation
It was observed in areas where sanitation promotion was implemented concurrently with water
supply provision that HEWs house to house advocacy, latrine construction and latrine use was
relatively better. Kanat Kebele in Farta Woreda was chosen as a model kebele by practicing
sanitation and hygiene programs because of the close work and cooperation between CARE
South Gonder (Water provider) and HEWs in this kebele. The Shinkurt locality (Example latrine
in Figure 9-5) in this Kebele has, for example, separate latrines for men and women at some
households. In the case of Lay Armachiho, Babawu locality, most HH’s initially constructed
latrine around their yard because sanitation was set as a prerequisite to get improved water even
though the scheme at last stopped delivering water. For continuous use of their latrine by users,
the continuous functionality of such water supply scheme is a priority.
Figure 9-5: Well roofed and walled pit latrine at
Shinkurt locality of Farta Woreda S. Gonder Zone
(Photo by; Wondim P., 2010)
51
9.5 Type of Latrines
At all the sites where latrines were constructed, people with disabilities were not considered in
their design. In most cases, the response from respondents about such people’s presence in the
area is none. The type of latrines that were constructed in the regions was open pit latrine without
house, pit latrine with walls but without roof, and pit latrine with closed wall and roof. On the
average over the Libo Kemekem Woreda, 37% of the latrines had a wall and roof (Tegegne,
2009). Similarly, only 40% of the latrines observed at 32 villages of Amhara Region have wall
and roof. Most of the latrines including those who have wall let in light through their wall and
roof, and did not have a door to ensure privacy. All of the latrines are constructed from local
materials of wood, mud, straw and stones. It is only observed in Oromia Zone at Dewa Chefa
Woreda and South Wolo area at Werebabu and Kalu Woreda that concrete slab for floor was
provided at a cost of 200ETB by water supply provider (Water Action and World Vision).
However, it had a poor seal between the slab and the ground. Despite this limitation, Shihe
Endris Mohamed (WaSH committee) at Siter Kebele in Dawa Chefa Woreda expresses the
advantage obtained by using latrines made from such slab “Previously, we didn’t use latrines
and we were practicing open defecation and every place was dirty to sit down and to do our
prayer. As it rained, the smell of the surrounding was also bad. Now after we started using
latrines, our surrounding environment is clean and therefore we can worship our God at any
places and at any time. And we relived from bad smell during the rainy season.”
9.6 Cover for latrine hole
Air vents are used to reduce the bad odor emanating from the latrines. However, in most of the
latrines observed randomly at the 32 WaSH sites, Air vents weren’t available and holes were not
properly constructed and were not covered.
A hole in a latrine demarcates the area to be used for defecation and urination, defines the area to
be covered by a plate to prevent odor and reduce flies, and ultimately to help maintain a clean
environment within the latrine. Only 10% of the 32 villages covered their latrines holes.
Similarly, less than 35% of the latrine holes were covered in Libo Kememkem Woreda
(Tegegne, 2009). This poses a risk as far as human health is concerned due to a high probability
of water and food contamination by flies visiting the latrines. Moreover, covering the hole in the
52
latrines may prevent bad smells from spreading beyond the latrine. The funnel-shaped covers of
local mud and straw constructed in some villages of Libo Kemekem and Ermito locality in East
Gojam Zone can be taken as examples for other communities to share. They are easy to construct
and use.
9.7 Water Quality Anaalysis
Water quality analysis in conjunction with improved sanitation practices is important to ensure
that the particular practices implemented significantly decrease water supply contamination. In
rural areas void of industry and concentrated animal holdings, the major causes of decreased
water quality is improper and poor human sanitation, livestock intrusion and in-home
contamination. At the source, human and livestock waste is likely the common source of
pollution. Implementation of preventative measures, including improved sanitation, and frequent
water quality testing will help guide appropriate and effective management of water quality.
In this study, limited water quality analysis was conducted at 26 sites. Chloride, hardness,
ammonia, pH, total dissolved solids (TDS) and turbidity were analyzed, and at less than 10 sites,
alkalinity, conductivity and dissolved oxygen were also measured. The three master’s theses that
were reviewed for water quality results covered Achefer (Aschalew Demeke Tigabu, 2009),
Simada (Meseret Belachew Addisie, 2012) and Quarit (Zemenu Awoke Alemayehu, 2011) and a
wider range of quality parameters: In Achefer, pH, conductivity, nitrate, nitrite, fluoride and total
coliforms; in Simada, ph, TDS, conductivity, turbidity, nitrate, nitrite, iron, manganese and
chlorine; and in Quarit, ph, turbidity, conductivity, nitrate, nitrite, ammonia, alkalinity, fluoride,
hardness and TDS.
Chloride: Chloride is a naturally occurring compound found in groundwater supplies. It causes a
salty taste, often at levels greater than 250mg/L, and depending on alkalinity, excess chloride
may accelerate corrosion (WHO, 2011). Five of the 26 sites analyzed for water quality had
chloride levels greater than 250mg/L; three located in Awi Zone, one in South Gonder and one in
Oromia.
Hardness: Hardness is a measure of both the magnesium and calcium contained in the water,
and it relates to how the water can mix with soap. Too little hardness makes the water more
53
corrosive while too much reduces the effectiveness of soap. Water that has a higher hardness
inhibits soap from lathering and more soap is consumed than normal. This is quite disappointing
to users in rural Ethiopia where soap is actually a luxury when it is available. WHO (2011)
suggests levels between 150 and 300mg/L.
For 15 of the 26 WaSH sites sampled, hardness levels of less than 150mg/L were found.
However, none of the sites analyzed had hardness levels above the recommended 300mg/L.
Low hardness, specifically magnesium, may contribute to low magnesium intake and have
human health impacts, such as high blood pressure (Refer to WHO, 2009). All of the Quarit
samples were lower than 150mg/L.
pH: Although it is not a regulated parameter for drinking water, pH is one of the key factors in
the operational aspects of water supply (WHO, 2011). It has to be carefully controlled in order to
ensure the proper clarification and disinfection of a water supply. pH levels closer to 8 are more
suitable for effective operation in water treatment plants while values less than 7 can lead to
corrosion of distribution pipe materials. Unofficial recommendations suggest pH levels between
6.5 and 8.5 are acceptable (WHO, 2011).
None of the samples in this study and the theses were above pH of 8.5. However, eleven of 26
and two of the eight in Achefer had lower pH values (as low as 5.56). If effective disinfection
could be implemented at these sites, the pH levels would have to be controlled better.
Total dissolved solids (TDS): Dissolved solids are often composed of inorganic salts and
organic matter, are usually tolerated up to 600mg/L but are unacceptable at levels greater than
1000mg/L (WHO, 2011). The level of total dissolved solids is directly related to conductivity,
chloride and hardness since it is the measure of inorganic solids (sodium, chloride, magnesium,
calcium and others) occurring in the water. Higher levels of TDS often alter the taste of water
and cause dissatisfaction by the water consumers.
A total of six samples, including sources in North and South Wollo, WagHimra and Oromia, had
extremely high TDS levels. This may indicate the presence of underground salt stores and the
near arid conditions of some of these areas. Both Simada and Quarit had normal TDS levels.
54
Turbidity: Turbidity measures levels of inorganic and organic solids in water in nephelometric
turbidity units (NTU). Groundwater may contain clay and chalk substances while surface waters
may contain various natural or human-induced particulates. Sediments settled in waterways can
be disturbed and increase turbidity during heavy precipitation events.
Turbidity less than 1 NTU are necessary for effective disinfection, either chemical (chlorine or
ozone) or physical (UV or irradiation) disinfection methods, and turbidity levels greater than
5NTU are a clear indication of the presence of solids (potentially harmful) in the water (WHO,
2011). Six of the 26 sites, five of the eleven samples in Simada, and none of the samples for
Quarit had turbidity levels exceeding 5 NTU. In wells during the height of the dry season,
turbidity may increase due to low water yield; however, turbidity also indicates the presence of
contaminants.
Water samples both in this study, in Achefer and in Quarit were normal for conductivity and in
this study and in Quarity were normal for ammonia and alkalinity. Nitrate, nitrites, and fluoride,
although not tested in this study but in Achefer, Simada and Quarit, were normal or below
permissible maxima. Iron and manganese, only tested in Simada, exceeded recommended levels
in four and eight samples, respectively, and all samples except the tap water sample had no
traceable amounts of chlorine.
The key difference between the thesis research and this study was the inclusion of colifom
analysis in Achefer, Simada and Quarit. Total colifoms include both fecal and environmental
types of coliforms so in large numbers indicate overall poor quality. Escherichia coli (E. coli) is
a thermotolerant coliform (group within total coliforms) often found in association with fecal
pollution. Therefore, WHO (2011) recommends E. coli as the best indicator of fecal
contamination in water supplies. Tadesse et al. (2010) also recommend fecal streptococci for
monitoring fecal contamination and “microbiological quality” of water since these organisms are
more associated with human diarrhea illnesses. However, testing for both E. coli and fecal
streptococci are more rigorous and time consuming than those tests for total coliform and even
tests for thermotolerant coliforms (Tadesse et al., 2010).
In Achefer, four of the eight samples had total coliforms above WHO standards of 0colony
forming units per 100mL of water (0 cfu/100mL) (Aschalew, 2009). Only one sample from an
55
unprotected spring used by humans and animals in Quarit tested positive for total coliforms
(Zemenu, 2012). On the other hand, all ten of the protected and unprotected water supply
sources tested in Simada exceeded WHO standards for fecal coliforms (Mesertr, 2012). Little
decrease was observed from unprotected to protected sources. However, no coliforms were
present in the tap water sample due to regular disinfection with chlorine. Disinfection can be
very effective in improving the quality of water supplies, but it is not the only means of
disinfection and protection.
To truly determine if sanitation practices are effective in reducing water contamination at the
source then regular monitoring will be necessary. Although not all the parameters analyzed in
this study or in the thesis are related solely to poor sanitation, monitoring more than those
associated with sanitation are very helpful in overall water quality management. For example,
Cameron (2009) showed that there is no significant difference between pit latrine users and open
defecators in terms of health outcomes in Ethiopia. This suggests that the current sanitation
practice should be appropriately monitored and/or one should come up with a better disposal
mechanism.
Tadesse et al. (2010) conducted an extensive water quality monitoring study, which prioritized
key parameters to be tested at both improved and unprotected sources. These parameters have
greater health implications for the total population in addition to children less than five years of
age, elderly and immune-compromised and included microbiological, physical and chemical
parameters: Thermotolerant coliforms, Faecal streptococci, Turbidity, pH, Chlorine residuals,
Conductivity, Nitrate, Iron, Arsenic, Fluoride and Copper. Observation of taste, odor and
appearance and inspection of sanitation facilities can also indicate the necessity of closer
monitoring and potential intervention.
9.8 Recommendations
1. Integrate sanitation and hygiene with water supply provision
Promotion and implementation of sanitation and hygiene should be interlinked with the provision
of water supply since poor sanitation practices affects the water source, which should be
reasonably free from biological contamination for drinking water. Sanitation promoters or water
56
supply providers of government or NGO’s should no longer address sanitation or water supply
independently.
2. Sanitation for all
During construction of latrine, it should be inclusive by considering disabled, old and sick
people. Promoters should advocate that disability, sickness and being old could happen to
anyone at any moment this time and in future and helping community members how to consider
such issues in their design and construction of latrine must be a priority.
3. Re-evaluation of sanitation technology
It looks as if the current practices of pit latrines are not bringing the required impact in the
community even though it requires further research on the area. NGO’s and Government
organization should monitor and evaluate the current practices and its impact on human health
and water sanitation to learn from previous. If pit latrine isn’t working well, finding other
technologies that solves challenges of users are paramount importance. And if latrine use is not
improving, awareness through formal education by including sanitation in the curriculum could
be done.
4. Regular assessment of water supply sources and storage
Regular bacteriological assessment of water supply sources and storage in conjunction with
sanitary and hygienic survey at the household level for drinking water should be planned and
conducted to monitor the impact of using latrine and hygienic facilities on drinking water supply
quality. Sources of contamination of water and then preventive strategies could be defined from
regular assessment.
5. Improving latrine and hygienic facilities user than coverage
Government and NGO’s should devise strategies on how communities use their constructed
latrine than simply focusing on improving sanitation coverage by constructing latrine within the
region. This might require an effective monitoring mechanism that will serve as the learning
platform and solve user challenges to use their latrine than penalizing them for not constructing a
latrine.
57
10 ADMINISTRATION OF SCHEMES
10.1 Background
In Africa and other developing countries, the sustainability of rural water supply is quite low
with 30 to 60% of the schemes becoming non-functional at some point after implementation
(Brikké and Bredero, 2003). Harvey and Reed (2006) explain that “community participation does
not automatically lead to effective community management, nor should it have to. Community
participation is a prerequisite for sustainability, i.e. to achieve efficiency, effectiveness, equity,
and replicability, but community management is not“. The lack of community participation has
been recognized as one of the reasons for this low sustainability (Carter.1999). For example,
limited involvement of the community at all stages of water development, the lack of a modest
water service fee and a shortage of adequate skill and capacity to maintain water resources are
specific aspects of community participation that have decreased sustainability of rural water
supply in the Amhara Region of Ethiopia (Mengesha et al, 2003). Furthermore, the available
local government water supply experts are overwhelmed by the vast quantity of water points that
have been installed recently and are unable to administer and manage all of them effectively.
All water supply providers in Ethiopia are currently following the principle of community
participation and community management in the rural area. Request for improved water point,
selection of the water point site, the technology type, the administration of the scheme’s finances
and procurement, the contribution of labor and cash during construction and the contribution of
cash and labor for operation and maintenance are positive indicators of community participation
at the initial and later phases of the water supply project. The community management in rural
Ethiopia is based on the formation of water user committees usually at each water point in order
to follow up the implementation, to manage the WaSH scheme during operation, to set
regulations concerning the scheme after discussion with the community, to collect fees for the
operation and maintenance and to monitor the scheme after implementation. The committees are
literally the only responsible body for the installed water point since the sheer number of WaSH
schemes in a woreda cannot be managed effectively by the limited number of water supply
experts available in the vicinity. However, this type of management system is not always
sustainable (Deneke et al, 2011) because every community and water point is different (Carter,
58
2009). And it is often assumed that a water point will be established under the participation of all
the users, but this is definitely not always the case.
This chapter provides an overview of the research on the challenge of community participation
and management and the level of community participation and community management through
water user committees within the Amhara Region. See Figure 10-1 for location map of study sites.
Figure 10-1: Location of 32 WaSH schemes
throughout the Amhara Region, Ethiopia monitored
in this study (Map by: Seifu A., 2011)
10.2 Non-functionality
From 32 schemes observed in the study area, it is only 44% of the schemes are functional
whereas the remaining 56% is either completely non-functional (13%) or functional with
disrepair (43%) under the current management arrangement. However, if those schemes
functioning with some disrepair are not properly maintained, they will stop functioning within a
short period of time. Consequently, non-functional schemes in the study area will rise to 56%.
Among those functioning with some technical breakdowns, damage of the faucets and valves are
the major disrepair followed by leakage from pipes and poor construction of the scheme’s
components. The majority of disrepair of hand pumps involves mechanical problems leading to
59
leakage of water during fetching causing the leaked water to flow back to the well. Complete
non-functionality was caused by unproductive wells, breakage of the hand pump, failure of the
spring box and a malfunctioning pump.
10.3 Community Participation
As previously described, community participation is crucial for the sustainability of rural water
supply systems. Analysis from the 32 sites showed that the majority of the villages (75%) asked
for improved water supply system. Similarly, in the other specific study areas of Achefer,
Mecha, Simada, Libokemekem and Quarit, the majority of the water points were installed at the
request of community or their representatives, such as elders. The major issues were then
observed during the implementation of the water point. For example, beneficiaries from the sites
with non-functional or functional with damage were not involved in selecting the site of neither
the water point nor the technology. Also, they were not involved in administrating the neither
finances nor procurement during construction, but they did contribute labor and local
construction materials during construction. On the other hand, it was observed for functional
water points that community’s contribution to the project cost was more than 10%, and they were
also involved in deciding the location of the water point. Unfortunately, the most frequent case
observed from the 32 sites was the lack of participation of the community or the WUCs in site
selection. This absence of participation alienates the community and does not generate the sense
of ownership, causes an unwillingness to use the water and leads to unsettled disputes between
beneficiaries and land owners on which the water point is situated. The descriptive analysis
(Figure 10-2) from both Quarit and Mecha Woreda showed that the involvement of communities
and local leaders on site selection resulted in continued functionality and a desire by
beneficiaries to sustain their water point. When implementers decided the location of the water
point, more schemes became non-functional in the case of Quarit Woreda.
60
Figure 10-2: Relationship of the site selection capacity of community, local leader and implementers and
functionality in Quarit and Mecha Woredas (Habtamu, 2012 & Zemenu, 2012)
Contributing only labor and local materials is not enough for a greater likelihood of sustainability
of water point. For example, in Lebo Kemekem, 20% of respondents have contributed cash and
in kind while the remaining contributed only in kind (Tegegne, 2009). The most common reason
for not contributing cash or in kind is not actually being asked for contribution. More reasons
included being poor, being old and unable to contribute in kind, the distance and the unreliability
of the scheme.
The opposite was observed in Achefer where about 92% had provided labor for site clearing and
construction; 75% had provided cash in response to the notification by the local organization that
10 to 12% of the project cost would be covered by the community; 81% had provided local
materials such as wood for the construction of the water sources and fencing (Aschalew, 2009).
In Achefer, no water point completely failed likely due to the better community participation in
covering the project cost. There was a similar situation in Mecha Woreda. For functional water
schemes, the majority of the community (47.5%) contributed cash, labor and local materials
which increased the ownership of the community (Habtamu, 2012). However, in the case of
nonfunctional water points, the majority of the community participated by providing only food
and local beer for laborers as shown in Figure 10-3. However, it was still a challenge to get full
participation of beneficiaries as 42.5% of respondents for functional water points did not
contribute at all.
0102030405060708090
Quarit Mecha
Functional Non-functional
61
Figure 10-3: Percentage Distribution of Respondents in Mecha based on type of contribution for project cost
(Habtamu, 2012)
10.4 Water user committee
The idea of water point management by water user committees (WUC) might be appropriate for
the scattered settlement of rural peoples and the small number of woreda level experts relative to
the number of water supply systems existing in the Ethiopian highlands. For example, there are
only five experts (an office head, a planning and documentation expert, an operation and
maintenance expert, a pump attendant and a water quality expert) for the total of more than 200
water supply points in the Quarit and Mecha Woredas (Habtamu, 2012 & Zemenu, 2012). This
shortage of human resources is the case in all 32 woredas evaluated by this project. Therefore, in
the place of woreda experts, WUCs, manage and oversee the system’s operation. This may
include conducting preventive maintenance, collecting tariffs or payments for repairs, keeping
records of financial transactions, organizing manuals and blueprints, and managing conflicts.
Sixty percent of the 32 sites have functioning WUCs consisting of 5 people on average -- two
women and three men. The remaining water points’ WUCs are not functioning because the water
point is not functioning or functioning with disrepair; the committee did not exist from the start
of implementation; or there is confusion about the ownership of the water point. Regarding the
latter, for example, it was observed in two villages that two hand-dug wells (HDWs) were
constructed for communities and a school or clinic leading to confusion about who should
manage it. Similarly, 90%, 100% and 62% of villages in Semada, Achefer and Mecha Woredas,
2.5 5.0 2.5 0.0
47.542.5
6.2
15.0
0.0
61.2
0.0
17.5
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
Cash Labor Local
Materials
Other (food,
local beer)
All (cash, labor
and local
materials)
None
Functional Schemes Nonfunctional schemes
62
respectively, have WUCs (Meseret, 2012; Aschalew, 2009; Habtamu, 2012). However, they are
less organized than expected and their responsibilities and authority are unclear. A majority set
monthly cash donations and called for communal labor contributions. Some have imposed
monetary fines on those who violate the management rules.
WUCs in the region are less effective likely due to an institutional structure based on outside
influence instead of those based on indigenous institutions as described in Deneke et al. (2011).
The water point managing institutions are not locally initiated nor autonomous, on the contrary
do they only seem to be established as a prerequisite for receiving project assistance and
developing a water supply point. For example, from the total respondents (n=160) in Semada,
47% did not know the presence nor the role of the water user committee indicating that the
participation of the community in selecting the committee was questionable in the area. In
addition, it is observed that the members of the WUCs in the majority of the study areas were not
selected based on their willingness, especially with regard to women who were selected for
formality only.
If committee members are not selected in cooperation with the whole community, they are likely
not to be trusted by beneficiaries, and this affects the sustainability of the water point. In
Achefer, the linear regression between trust of WUCs and contribution of cash showed that the
households’ level of trust in WUCs significantly influences cash payments with a positive sign at
a significance level of 10% (Aschalew, 2009). An increase of the level of trust in WUCs by one
unit significantly increases the cash contributions by 0.19 ETB per month This indicates that
households with high levels of trust in WUCs that the money raised would be used for the
intended purpose and contributes more for operation and maintenance in order to sustain their
water point.
10.5 Recommendations
1. Give priority for indigenous institutions: instead of initiating new institutions, learn first
about existing local institutions and work on how this institution may be able to manage the
water point. Traditional irrigation schemes, local grazing conservation efforts and other
outside initiated projects may provide examples of traditional institutions.
63
2. Develop network of the WUC’s with woreda-level experts: It really should not be
expected that the local government water supply experts be responsible for managing all of
the implemented water supply points. Rather the goal should be for autonomous
administration and management of water points by the community beneficiaries in each
locality. The WUC’s would be encouraged to record and document their water supply efforts
and report to the woreda experts. This will expand water supply coverage, promote
documentation of each water supply point and enhance sustainability.
3. Establish committee with full participation of community: The community should decide
who should be the members of the committee. In addition, emphasis should be given to
increase the trust of community on the committee so that schemes will be sustainable.
4. Community management not always a solution: water supply providers can think of
provision of continuous institutional support to communities where there is limited capacity
of its implementation. Provision of water to individual households could be another
alternative in areas, such as in Rime Kebele Mecah Woreda, for example, where households
have their own unprotected hand dug wells. In such areas, the communities only need a
support to make the well protective and households manage their system.
5.Strengthening community participation: Community participation should not only be
limited to labor and cash contribution. Community members should truly participate and
decide on site selection, technology selection, the design of the technology and other aspects
of the development of their water point. Depending on the area, elders should be given
enough room for participation. For instance, they may have great insight into the indigenous
management institutions available in the community because of their long life experiences.
Women should be encouraged to take a greater interest and a more active role in water
management. Now, they often only included women because it was obligatory to gain
support from outside agencies.
64
REFERENCES
Abdeen Mustafa Omer (2001). Solar water pumping clean water for Sudan rural areas.
Renewable Energy 24: 245–258
Adank, M., Jeths, M., Belete, B., Chaka, S., Lema, Z., Tamiru, D. and Abebe, Z. (2008) The
costs and benefits of multiple uses of water: The case of Gorogutu woreda of East
Hararghe zone, Oromiya Regional States, eastern Ethiopia: RiPPLE Working Paper 7.
www.rippleethiopia.org
African Water Facility (2008). Utilisation of solar and wind energy for rural water supply in
Ethiopia, appraisal report
Alula Sebhatu (2008). The implementation of Ethiopia's Health Extension Program: An
overview. Partners in Population and Development Africa Regional Office, A south-
south initiative. http://ppdafrica.org/index.php/en/publications/documents/139-
ethiopiahep
Aschalew Demeke (2009) DETERMINANTS OF HOUSEHOLD PARTICIPATION IN
WATER SOURCE MANAGEMENT: ACHEFER, AMHARA REGION, ETHIOPIA. A
Thesis Presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School of Cornell University In Partial
Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Professional Studies, Ithaca,
NY
Brikké F. and Bredero M. (2003) Linking technology choice with operation and maintenance in
the context of community water supply and sanitation: A reference document for planners
and project staff. World Health Organization and IRC Water and Sanitation Centre,
Geneva, Switzerland
Carter, R.C. (2009) Operation and maintenance of rural water supplies: Rural Water Supply
network Perspectives no 2
Collick, A. (2008) Community Water Use in the Yeku Watershed and Hydrological Modeling in
Watersheds of the Upper Nile Basin, Northern Ethiopia: Dissertation, Cornell University,
Ithaca, NY, USA.
65
Deneke, T.T., Mapedza, E., and Amede, T. (2011) Institutional Implications of Governance of
Local Common Pool Resources on Livestock Water Productivity in Ethiopia.
Experimental Agriculture 47 (S1), 99-111.
Emerson PM, Bailey RL, Walraven GEL & Lindsay SW (2001) Human and other faeces as
breeding media of the trachoma vector Musca sorbens. Medical Veterinary Entomology
15,314–320.
Faal, J., Nicol, A., and Tucker, J. (2009). Multiple-use Water Services (MUS): Cost-effective
investments to reduce poverty and address all the MDGs: RiPPLE briefing Paper.
www.rippleethiopia.org
Faurès, J.M., Santini, G., and Nepveu de Villemarceau, A. (2008) ‘A livelihood approach to
water interventions in rural areas and implications for Multiple Use Systems’ in Multiple-
use Water Services (Eds. J, Butterworth, M. Keitjizer, I. Smout and F. Hagos)
Proceedings of an international symposium held in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 4-6
November 2008. MUSGroup.
Gebreselassie, W. (2007). ‘Mainstreaming Hygiene and Sanitation into Preventative Health Care
Programmes: The Incremental but Exciting Path to Achieving the Hygiene and Sanitation
Related MDGs in Ethiopia’, Powerpoint Presented at Water Week,
siteresources.worldbank.org/INTWRD/Resources/Worku_Gebreselassie_Ethiopia_Mains
treaming_Hygiene_and_Sanitation_Into_Preventive_Health_Care_Programs.pdf
Gleick P. (2006) The World’s Water 2006-2007. The Biennial Report on Freshwater
Resources. Island Press, Washington, D.C.
Guidelines for Drinking-water Quality, 4th ed. (2011) World Health Organization (WHO).
Habtamu A. Beyene (2012) Factors Affecting the Sustainability of Rural Water Supply Systems:
The Case of Mecha Woreda, Amhara Region, Ethiopia. A Thesis Presented to the Faculty
of the Graduate School of Cornell University In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements
for the Degree of Master of Professional Studies, Ithaca, NY
Harvey P. A. and Reed R. A. (2007) Community-managed water supplies in Africa: sustainable
or dispensable? Community Development Journal, 42 (3), 365–378
66
Mengesha A., Mamo W., Baye G. (2004) A survey of bacteriological quality of drinking water in
North Gondar. Ethiop.J.Health Dev.;18 (2) 112:115
Mengesha, A., Abera, K. & Mesganaw, F. (2003) Sustainability of Drinking Water Supply
Projects in Rural of North Gondar, Ethiopia, Ethiopian J. Health Dev. 2003; (3):221-229.
Meseret B. Addisie (2012) Assessment of Drinking Water Quality and Determinants of
Household Potable Water Consumption in Simada District, Ethiopia. A Thesis Presented
to the Faculty of the Graduate School of Cornell University In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree of Master of Professional Studies, Ithaca, NY
Minten, B., Razafindralambo, R., Randriamiarana, Z. & Larson, B. (2002) Water Pricing, the
New Water Law, and the Poor: An Estimation of Demand for Improved Water Services
in Madagascar, SAGA Working Paper. USAID-Ilo program-Cornell University.
MoWR, National Water Development Report for Ethiopia (ENWDR), 2004. United Nations
Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization, World Water Assessment Program,
UN-Water/WWAP/2006/7, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
O’Loughlin R., Fentie G., Flannery B. and Emerson P. M. (2006) Follow-up of a low cost latrine
promotion programme in one district of Amhara, Ethiopia: characteristics of early
adopters and non-adopters. Tropical Medicine and International Health 11 (9); 1406–
1415
P. Andrada, and J.Castro (2007). Solar photovoltaic water pumping system using a new linear
actuator, in: INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON RENEWABLE ENERGIES AND
POWER QUALITY (ICREPQ'07) at Sevilla, Spain 28,29 and 30 Mach 2007.
(http://www.icrepq.com/icrepq07-papers.htm).
Tadesse, D., Desta, A., Geyid, A., Girma, W., Fisseha, S., Schmoll, O. (2010) Rapid assessment
of drinking-water quality in the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia: country report
of the pilot project implementation in 2004-2005. Country Report, World Health
Organization and UNICEF.
Tegegne M. Tarekegne (2009) Sustainability of rural water supply and sanitation services in
Ethiopia: A case study of twenty villages in Ethiopia. A Thesis Presented to the Faculty
67
of the Graduate School of Cornell University In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements
for the Degree of Master of Professional Studies, Ithaca, NY
WaterAid Ethiopia (2010) Regional Water Supply and Sanitation Coverage in Ethiopia:
according to 2001 EFY reports
WHO (1997) The world health report 1997- conquering suffering, enriching humanity
Zemenu A. Alemeyehu (2012) Assessment of Challenges of Sustainable Rural Water Supply:
Quarit Woreda, Amhara Region. A Thesis Presented to the Faculty of the Graduate
School of Cornell University In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of
Master of Professional Studies, Ithaca, NY