factors in sub-optimum performance of rural water supply (rws) systems (as lessons learned for rain...
Upload: international-water-management-institute-iwmi-cgiar-water-land-and-ecosystems-program
Post on 22-Jun-2015
390 views
DESCRIPTION
Presented by Seifu Tilahun, Aschalew Tigabu, Tegegne Tarekegne , Meseret Addisie, Habtamu Beyene, Zemenu Alemeyehu, Manyahlshal Ayele, Amy Collick and Tammo Steenhuis at the Nile Basin Development Challenge (NBDC) Science Workshop, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 9–10 July 2013TRANSCRIPT
Factors in sub-optimum performance of rural water supply (RWS)
systems (as lessons learned for rain water management (RWM)
systems) in the Ethiopian Highlands
Seifu A. Tilahun, Aschalew D. Tigabu, Tegegne M. Tarekegne , Meseret B. Addisie, Habtamu
A. Beyene, Zemenu A. Alemeyehu, Manyahlshal Ayele, Amy S. Collick, Tammo S. Steenhuis
Nile Basin Development Challenge (NBDC) Science Workshop
Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 9–10 July 2013
Rural Water Supply • For more than two decades ,
various efforts have been done
to increase water supply
coverage and to provide safe
water supplies
• The information of failure or
success from constructed
water supply points could be a
lesson to rain water
management systems
• Give an overview of the
survey results of the
performance of the more than
100 rural water supply point
Study Area
Study Study Area
(Districts)
Area
(km2)
Population
(2007
census)
Zone % of rural
population
Selection
Method
A1
Achefer 2500.0 173,211 West Gojam 93 randomly 16 water
supply systems
(WSS)
Libokemekem 1706.2 198,374 South
Gondar 88.9 randomly 20 WSS
Semada 2281.7 228,271 South
Gondar 95.5 randomly 16 WSS
A2
Mecha 1612.5 292,250 West Gojam 92.4
randomly 16
WSS; 50%
functional & 50%
non functional
Quarit 613.6 166,848 West Gojam 97.5
randomly 12
WSS; 50%
functional & 50%
non functional
B Amhara Region 161,828 17,214,056 11 zones 89% 32 WSS selected
based on success
and failure
Methodology • Formal interview, focal
group discussion and field observation in 2008, 2010 and 2011
• Descriptive statistics based on percentages and ratios
• Linear regression model
– For example, per capita water consumption with household size and distance from the source
– contributions of cash with number of alternative water sources, degree of household participation, and trust on water use committees
Result • Functionality of schemes:
about only two thirds were operational
• Amount of water use per day: Water use was between 10 and 15 l/day per capita
– an increase of household by one person decreases significantly the per capita water consumption by 1.5 l/day
– increase in travel by 1 km to the water source decreased water use by 6 l/day per capita
Result
• Alternative sources:
– 70% of the 160
respondents in
Semada had more
than one source
– 65% of the villages
from Study B had
unprotected
alternative source
– A unit increase in the number of
alternative sources decreases
the contribution of cash by 0.25
Ethiopian birr from a household
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
River unprotectedspring
Traditionalhand dug well
Other
Pe
rce
nt
Functional Schemes
Nonfunctionalschemes
Type of water source used before the developed scheme in Mecha woreda
Result
• Operation and maintenance: In about 60% of the sites in the region, no cash contribution is observed
• the contributions were not more than 1 birr except for sites with borehole
• they are poor which is not taken into account when systems are planned (Carter, 2009) and
• low participation of beneficiaries in the design and construction as explained by Deneke et al (2011).
Result
• WUCs: Water Use Committees (WUCs) were instituted in many villages for governing water systems
• Ratio is 5 experts for 200 water supply points
• An increase of the level of trust in WUCs by one unit significantly increases the cash contributions by 0.19 ETB per month
• Not effective because local indigenous institutions missing (Deneke et al., 2011)
Community, local leader and implementers share responsibility in site selection in Quarit and Mecha Woredas
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
community local leader implementers community local leader implementers
Pe
rce
nt
Quarit Mecha
Functional Non-functional
Result
Result
Project Cost in Mecha woreda
Most successful RWS
• The Harbu area which is the water scarce areas described as semi-arid.
• There are no alternative sources such as springs and shallow wells.
• System is borehole
• 6 Birr/month
• RWS with multiple use • 6 HDW, one is constructed for
livestock water
• Fontenina springs-developed by Water Action that have strong revenue
• Irrigation user safe-guard the system
Most successful RWS
Conclusions
• The availability of alternative water sources was
an important factor in the failure of the system
– improving unprotected alternative sources near the
houses
• most cash collected for O & M should be spent
on maintenance rather than operation such as
payment for guard
– Operation payments could be in kind by through
participation of all households
Conclusions
• RWS is relatively successful in community that local leaders participated in the selection of site, project scheduling, and important decisions during construction
• Improving the functioning of the Water User Committees (WUCs) – be preferable to use local indigenous institutions as described in
Deneke et al (2011) or local leaders
Further Information
http://soilandwater.bee.cornell.edu/research/international/eth_pubs.htm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ckAgEUFK5yM
Thesis, briefing notes and main report
Documentary Film
Thank You!!