MakingMUSworkforclimatevulnerablefarmersthroughCSAapproachandsustainitsoutcomes:Acasestudyofavillagefrom

Majhthana,Kaski,Nepal

KeshabThapa,PashupatiChaudhary,KiranBhatta,PunaBhaila,andDeoNChaudharyLocalInitiativesforBiodiversity,ResearchandDevelopment(LI-BIRD)

InternationalMUSWorkshop,Kathmandu,25-26Feb2016

Introduction• MUShasbeenproventobenefitsmallholderfarmersbyimprovingincomethroughincreasingcroppingintensityandmaximizingwateruseefficiency,andreducingwomen'sworkloadanddrudgery.(Pantetal.,2006{ResearchfromNepal})

• MUSenhancesfarmers'adaptivecapacitytowaterstressduetoclimatechangethroughpromotingeconomicanddomesticuseofwater.(Kauretal.,2010{ResearchfromEthiopia})

• PolicyprovisionissmoothforMUSresearchandpromotion

Introduction…• ScalingupMUSiscontingentupon(VanKoppenetal.,2014)

Ø People'sprioritiesandchoicesØ Publicfunding(usersandlocalstakeholdersincludinggovernment)

Ø SmartsubsidiesforthepoorØ BenefitwomenandenhancingtheirdecisionmakingcapacitiesØ Costrecoveryandinfrastructuresustainability

• Withthisbackdrop,wehavebeenassessing

Ø  DoesMUScontributetoclimatesmartagriculturalsystem?Ø  IfitqualifiesasaCSAtechnology,howitcanbescaledup

consideringthelocalandnationalvulnerabilitycontext?

Methods

• Analyzedclimaticdataandcommunityperceptiononclimatehazards• ReviewedMUSthroughCSAapproachbasedonliteraturesandexpertjudgement•  Fieldobservationandcommunityconsultation• CasestudyatvillagelevelforMUSpackage

MUSAssessmentthroughCSAFramework

Where?

Results

Yearlyrainfallandtemperaturetrends(Kaski)

Comparisonofaveragerainfallofdecades

CommunityPerceptionLivelihoodResources(Capital) ImpactScore

(0=No;1=Low;2=Medium;3=High) Flood Landslide Wind Drought Hailstone Total

Natural Forest 1 2 1 0 0 6 WaterSource 0 1 0 2 0 5 GrazingLand 0 0 0 0 0 1 StapleCrops 1 1 2 2 2 9 Livestock 0 0 0 1 0 2

Physical Road 2 2 0 0 0 4 IrrigationSystem 2 2 0 2 0 6 School 0 0 0 1 0 1 Market/Haat 0 0 0 1 0 1 Houses 0 1 1 2 1 6 Comm.INST 0 0 0 1 0 1

Human HealthWorker 0 1 0 0 0 2 Teacher 0 1 0 0 0 2 SocialWorker 0 1 0 1 0 3

Social Women'sGroup 0 0 0 2 1 5 Cooperatives 0 1 0 0 0 2

Financial Banks 0 1 0 0 0 2 DailyWages 0 1 0 1 1 4

Total 6 15 4 16 5 -

MUSfromCSAapproachFoodSecurity:•  Production:Cropping

systemintensification,yearroundvegetableproduction,increasedyieldofvegetables(radish,onion,chili,garlic,potato)

•  Income:$200,$330peryearperhh

•  Nutritionaldiversity:Productionofvegetables,increaseddiversity

Adaptation:•  Increased

wateraccessbyimprovingstorage

•  Increasedwateruseefficiency(usingwaterfordifferentpurposes)throughmicro-irrigation

Mitigation:•  Notexplicit

dataorinformationavailable

GESI:•  Timesaving(1.5

hours,2.5hoursperday;2hoursperdayduringdryseason)

•  Consultationandjointdecisionmakingincreased

•  Accesstomarket

MikhailandYoder,2008;Clementetal.,2015

Kauretal.,2010

PilotingMUSthroughCSAapproachinoursites

FinancingMechanismCommunitiesCash

24%

CommunitiesKind

Labor

VDC

7%

LI-BIRD 69%iDE Technical

supportindesign

MUS•  Drinking•  Irrigation

(efficienttechnologies)

•  Vegetables•  Market

Promotionoflocalseedssystem

ImprovemanagementofFYManditsuse(reduce

useofchemicalfertilizers)

Promotebio-pesticidesandreduceuseofpesticides

Considerrespondingweatheranduncertainties(hail,floods,

etc)

Minimizeunplanned

developmentchallenges(roads,etc)

Promotewater

conservationtechnologies(maximizingwateruseefficiency)

ICT

1.Designapackage

3.Formalizethecontractwiththegrassrootinstitution

2.Developafinancingmechanism

DiscussionandConclusion

•  Fromthereviewofliteratures,wefoundthatMUShasimprovedyieldandincomethroughaccessingwateranditsefficientuse.Insomecases,increaseddiversityofvegetablewasobserved.

• MUSisGESIresponsive:MUShascontributedtoincreaseincomeofpoorfarmersandwomen.Contributiontosavingtimeisexplicit.

Discussion…•  InNepalesecontext,MUScanbeaclimatesmartagriculturaltechnology.

• However,mitigationaspectofMUSisleastexplored/studies.AlthoughtheMUSdonotdirectlycontributetoGHGemission,therecanbeindirecteffects(suchaspromotionofchemicalfertilizersandpesticidesforcommercialvegetablecultivation).

•  Inthechangedclimaticcontext(withmultiplehazards),thepromotionofMUSshouldalsobeplannedtoaddressotherclimatichazardstobuildcommunityresilience.

Recommendation(forscalingup/out)

• MUSdesignshouldbeinapackage(notinisolation)consideringmultipleclimaticandnon-climatichazardsofthevillageorterritory.

• AwellplannedfinancingmechanismensuressustainabilityofMUSpackage.Itshouldbediversifiedincludingmandatorycashand/orkindcontributionfromcommunities.CommunitiescannotalwaysthemselvesestablishMUSfromtheirownresources.

•  Thegrass-rootinstitutions(suchasfarmer'sgroups,cooperatives,mothergroups,etc)shouldbeempoweredtofacilitategovernanceofMUSpackageforitssustainability.

Acknowledgement

• ClimateandDevelopmentKnowledgeNetwork(CDKN)• CGIARResearchProgramonClimateChange,AgricultureandFoodSecurity(CCAFS)

Furthercommunication:kthapa@libird.org;info@libird.org

ThankYou

SelectedReferences•  Clement,F.,Pokhrel,P.,andSherpaTYC.(2015).Sustainabilityandreplicabilityofmulti-usewatersystems(MUS):studyforthemarketaccessandwatertechnologyforwomenproject.IWMI,IDE,SAPPROS,Samjhauta,andNTAG.

•  vanKoppen,B.,Smits,S.,RumbaitisdelRio,C.andThomas,J.B.(2014)Scalingupmultipleusewaterservices:Accountabilityinthewatersector,Rugby,UK:PracticalActionPublishinghttp://dx.doi.org/10.3362/9781780448299.000

•  Kaur,N.,Getnet,M.,Shimelis,B.,Tesfaye,Z.,Syoum,G.,andAtnafu,E.(2010).Assessingtheeffectivenessofplannedadaptationinterventionsinreducinglocallevelvulnerability.Rippleworkingpaper18.http://www.odi.org/sites/odi.org.uk/files/odi-assets/publications-opinion-files/6111.pdf

•  Mikhail,M.,andYoderR.(2008).MultipleusewaterserviceimplementationinNepalandIndia:experienceandlessonsforscale-up.IDE,CPWF,andIWMI.

•  Pant,D.Gautam,K.R.Shakya,S.D.Adhikari,D.L.(2006).Multipleuseschemes:Benefittosmallholders.Colombo,SriLanka:InternationalWaterManagementInstitute.48p.(workingPaper114).www.ageconsearch.umn.edu/bitstream/91944/2/WOR114.pdf