Approaches

A multiple-use water system [Nepal]

Bahu uddhasaya Pani prayog pranali (Main contributor: Parmananda Jha, IDE/Nepal)

approaches_2532 - Nepal

Completeness: 86%

1. General information

1.2 Contact details of resource persons and institutions involved in the assessment and documentation of the Approach

Key resource person(s)

SLM specialist:
SLM specialist:

Jha Parmananda

98487 28274 / 97495 12791 (M)

pjha@idenepal@org / jhap-2003@yahoo.com

Food Security Project, Regional Office, Banke Bagiya, Shantinagar,Nepalgunj

Nepal

Name of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Approach (if relevant)
iDE Nepal (iDE Nepal) - Nepal
Name of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Approach (if relevant)
ICIMOD International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development (ICIMOD) - Nepal

1.3 Conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT

When were the data compiled (in the field)?

01/03/2013

The compiler and key resource person(s) accept the conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT:

Ja

2. Description of the SLM Approach

2.1 Short description of the Approach

A multiple-use water system gives a community access to water for domestic use and water for crop irrigation.

2.2 Detailed description of the Approach

Detailed description of the Approach:

Aims / objectives: A multiple-use water system (MUS) is a combined water facility that has proven useful as a means of providing drinking water and water for irrigation for smallholder farmers in the hilly areas of Nepal. Water is collected by gravity from a highland source into a holding tank and is shared by means of distribution lines, domestic tap stands, and irrigation off-take lines. It can also support application of micro-irrigation technologies (MIT) such as drip and micro sprinkler irrigation systems.

Methods: MUS is a community-managed system that caters mainly to smallholder landowners and marginal households in rural hilly areas. When properly implemented, it can help to alleviate poverty and increase food security for poor and marginalized groups. The first priority is to provide drinking water and water for domestic use to the community; any excess water is used for agriculture and irrigation.

Stages of implementation: The following points should be taken into consideration before a community establishes a MUS:
• The source of water should be clear of water-rights issues
• The water should be plentiful and of good quality
• There needs to be a sufficient drop in gradient between the source and the tank if the water is to be collected by gravity. If the drop is not sufficient, users should be prepared to consider lifting the water.
• The distance between the source and the village should be less than 3 km.
• The community should be ready to contribute unskilled labour as part of their contribution to the project.
• The community should be ready to put aside some funds for operational and maintenance costs; these funds can, in part, also be collected in the form of monthly users' fees.
• At least 70% of the water users should be ready to adopt micro-irrigation technologies (MIT) such as drip and sprinkler irrigation.

2.3 Photos of the Approach

2.5 Country/ region/ locations where the Approach has been applied

Country:

Nepal

Further specification of location:

Kaski, Lamjunj, Tanahun, Dhading, Sangjya, Gulmi, Arghakhanchi, Palpa, Udayapur, Pyuthan, Rolpa, Ruk

2.7 Type of Approach

  • project/ programme based

2.8 Main aims/ objectives of the Approach

The Approach focused mainly on other activities than SLM (Collect water from a small-scale source and distribute it both for domestic use and for the production of vegetables and high value crops)

• To provide a regular supply of water for domestic and agricultural use
• To supply water for micro-irrigation technologies such as drip and sprinkler irrigation systems
• To improve health and sanitation
• To help smallholder landowners improve their incomes and livelihoods as well as to adapt to climate change by having access to a regular supply of water so that they can grow crops regardless of changes
• To conserve water by using it more wisely

The SLM Approach addressed the following problems: The community needs to prioritize how it will partition the water for domestic use and for irrigation.

2.9 Conditions enabling or hindering implementation of the Technology/ Technologies applied under the Approach

social/ cultural/ religious norms and values
  • hindering

Management and operation of system

Treatment through the SLM Approach: Strong social mobilization is needed

legal framework (land tenure, land and water use rights)
  • enabling

The existing land ownership, land use rights / water rights helped a little the approach implementation: Since this approach uses small spring sources of water, there is usually only a minimum risk of conflict for water use. When the water source is registered with the local authorities, it helps to reduce potential conflicts over water rights between communities.

knowledge about SLM, access to technical support
  • hindering

Water supply insufficient to meet the demand

Treatment through the SLM Approach: Increase the capacity of the storage tank

other
  • hindering

The community often cannot agree whether to scale up the domestic or the irrigation water supply.

Treatment through the SLM Approach: Concerned stakeholders need to confer and agree

3. Participation and roles of stakeholders involved

3.1 Stakeholders involved in the Approach and their roles

  • local land users/ local communities

This included women, men, dalits, janjati, brahmin, chhetri

  • SLM specialists/ agricultural advisers
  • teachers/ school children/ students
  • NGO

IDE Nepal

  • national government (planners, decision-makers)
3.2 Involvement of local land users/ local communities in the different phases of the Approach
Involvement of local land users/ local communities Specify who was involved and describe activities
initiation/ motivation interactive The community comes to a consensus on their water needs. They identify a source that it is within the 3 km limit and investigate the water use rights.
planning self-mobilization Technical aspects are dealt with; these include assessing the source to verify whether it has an adequate supply of water, assessing different schemes (for intake, take off, tap stands, and the like), preparing a design and estimating the cost, and discussing funding.
implementation self-mobilization A users' committee is formed and the community provides unskilled labour. Technical assistance is provided by INGOs/NGOs.
monitoring/ evaluation self-mobilization The work is monitored by the users' committee but monitoring and evaluation of technical aspects are provided by INGOs/NGOs at different times during the project.
Research none

3.3 Flow chart (if available)

Description:

Organogram
(Adapted from
(Mikhail and Yoder 2008)

3.4 Decision-making on the selection of SLM Technology/ Technologies

Specify who decided on the selection of the Technology/ Technologies to be implemented:
  • land users alone (self-initiative)
Explain:

The community discusses and makes a decision on the type of water supply system they would like and specifies how they would like to apportion water for domestic and agricultural use. They submit a proposal to the concerned authorities.

Decisions on the method of implementing the SLM Technology were made by mainly by land users supported by SLM specialists. Technical support is provided by IDE Nepal in collaboration with different national and international non-governmental organizations, government organizations, and local bodies.

4. Technical support, capacity building, and knowledge management

4.1 Capacity building/ training

Was training provided to land users/ other stakeholders?

Ja

Specify who was trained:
  • field staff/ advisers
  • Community
Form of training:
  • farmer-to-farmer
Subjects covered:

The approach provided training to the community through the users' committee, field staff, and an agricultural advisor. The local skilled body is trained during site visits. For the most part, information is transferred from farmer to farmer. Much of the training is hands-on.

4.2 Advisory service

Do land users have access to an advisory service?

Ja

Specify whether advisory service is provided:
  • at permanent centres
Describe/ comments:

An advisory service is provided for the land/water users, but what is given is usually insufficient to help farmers learn new techniques such as micro-irrigation.

4.3 Institution strengthening (organizational development)

Have institutions been established or strengthened through the Approach?
  • yes, moderately
Specify the level(s) at which institutions have been strengthened or established:
  • local
Specify type of support:
  • capacity building/ training
Give further details:

village development committees, local governance and community development programmes (LCGDP), community forest user groups, youth clubs, and women's groups. Village development committees can invest in MUS and micro-irrigation technologies as specified in their guidelines.

4.4 Monitoring and evaluation

Is monitoring and evaluation part of the Approach?

Ja

Comments:

bio-physical aspects were regular monitored by project staff, land users through measurements; indicators: Project staff and land users routinely monitor the water source and other biophysical aspects to ensure that the approach remains sustainable.

technical aspects were regular monitored by land users through observations; indicators: Commercial vegetable or high value crop production, micro irrigation, drinking water and sanitation

socio-cultural aspects were ad hoc monitored through observations; indicators: MUS schemes help to improve sanitation and thereby reduce the incidence of waterborne diseases. They also help to improve livelihoods by making more fresh vegetables available both for immediate consumption and for sale.

economic / production aspects were monitored through observations; indicators: MUS schemes help to reduce drudgery; the labour saved can be used in the production of vegetables and other high value crops.

no. of land users involved aspects were monitored through measurements; indicators: From 10 to 80; on average 28 land users are involved in one MUS scheme

management of Approach aspects were monitored through observations; indicators: Participatory approach with collaboration by government organizations, INGOs/NGOs and others to provide routine inspections and technical support

There were no changes in the Approach as a result of monitoring and evaluation: The approach, as it is now put into practice, is a result of incorporating technological improvements that were originally identified through years of monitoring and evaluation.

There were no changes in the Technology as a result of monitoring and evaluation

4.5 Research

Was research part of the Approach?

Ja

Specify topics:
  • technology
Give further details and indicate who did the research:

IDE has researched and implemented this type of MUS concept, system design, and methodology in Nepal since 2003; now other agencies also provide similar systems.

Research was carried out both on station and on-farm

5. Financing and external material support

5.1 Annual budget for the SLM component of the Approach

If precise annual budget is not known, indicate range:
  • 10,000-100,000
Comments (e.g. main sources of funding/ major donors):

Approach costs were met by the following donors: international non-government: 30.0%; local government (district, county, municipality, village etc): 26.0%; local community / land user(s): 44.0%

5.2 Financial/ material support provided to land users

Did land users receive financial/ material support for implementing the Technology/ Technologies?

Ja

If yes, specify type(s) of support, conditions, and provider(s):

All MUS systems in Nepal are built by communities or community groups in collaboration with the government and NGOs. The fact that MUS systems provide multiple benefits is seen as a plus point for institutions looking to invest in community projects.

5.3 Subsidies for specific inputs (including labour)

If labour by land users was a substantial input, was it:
  • paid in cash
Comments:

Unskilled labour is provided by the community; skilled labour is provided by the implementing organization. The implementing organization pays for both the skilled and unskilled labour.

Materials that are available locally are contributed by the community. Materials that are not available locally are paid for out of project funds. Equipment, tools, and specialist materials are purchased through collaborative partners. Training programmes aimed at capacity building and upgrading skills are subsidized.

5.4 Credit

Was credit provided under the Approach for SLM activities?

Nee

6. Impact analysis and concluding statements

6.1 Impacts of the Approach

Did the Approach help land users to implement and maintain SLM Technologies?
  • No
  • Yes, little
  • Yes, moderately
  • Yes, greatly

The approach supports sustainable land management because micro- irrigation technologies promote optimal use of water and help to retain nutrients in the soil. Similarly, the production of high value crops and vegetables further increases the fertility of the soil.

Did the Approach empower socially and economically disadvantaged groups?
  • No
  • Yes, little
  • Yes, moderately
  • Yes, greatly

The wellbeing of marginalized and socio-economically disadvantaged groups improves significantly.

Did other land users / projects adopt the Approach?
  • No
  • Yes, little
  • Yes, moderately
  • Yes, greatly

Since the reduction in drudgery and the improvements in livelihoods are so great, many communities would like to implement this approach. INGOs/NGOs can help with the financial and technical aspects of implementation.

Did the Approach lead to improved livelihoods / human well-being?
  • No
  • Yes, little
  • Yes, moderately
  • Yes, greatly

This approach helps to reduce drudgery and to improve sanitation; overall, it improves livelihoods and contributes to human wellbeing. It also increases the production of crops, and helps to conserve the soil and improve its fertility.

Did the Approach help to alleviate poverty?
  • No
  • Yes, little
  • Yes, moderately
  • Yes, greatly

Through increased income from the production of vegetables and high value crops

6.2 Main motivation of land users to implement SLM

  • increased production
  • increased profit(ability), improved cost-benefit-ratio
  • well-being and livelihoods improvement

6.3 Sustainability of Approach activities

Can the land users sustain what has been implemented through the Approach (without external support)?
  • yes
If yes, describe how:

Since the approach was requested by the community as a whole, they all have a vested interest in seeing that it remains sustainable. When technical support is needed, it can be obtained from the concerned agencies.

6.4 Strengths/ advantages of the Approach

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
A reliable water supply for both the domestic and irrigation needs of hill farmers (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: The continued involvement of the community, the government, and assisting INGOs/NGOs.)
The MUS is a simple gravity system that does not require either sophisticated equipment or training. (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Continue to investigate how it can be simplified even further)
A MUS system has a minimum lifespan of ten years and is easy to install even in remote areas. (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Continue to investigate how it can be improved even further)
MUS is well suited to the dual purpose use of water for both domestic and agricultural use. (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Continue research and development to see how it can be improved even further.)

6.5 Weaknesses/ disadvantages of the Approach and ways of overcoming them

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view How can they be overcome?
Installation costs can be a challenge for very poor communities. It can only irrigate small areas (0.1-0.15ha). Installation costs can usually be recovered within 1 year when the irrigation water is used to produce high value crops.
The intake and reservoirs need to be inspected regularly. Either devise a means to ensure that inspections are conducted regularly or find a system that requires fewer inspections
Reservoir tanks and intake pipes can deteriorate over time and pipes and joints can start to leak. Local skilled labour can be employed to carry out needed repairs. Pipes and fittings should be checked regularly. Routine inspection and maintenance are essential.
Costs can be high when imported materials are needed for repair and maintenance. At the outset, some money needs to be set aside for operation and maintenance costs; additional funds should be collected by charging monthly users' fees.

7. References and links

7.1 Methods/ sources of information

  • field visits, field surveys
  • interviews with land users

7.2 References to available publications

Title, author, year, ISBN:

Multiple use water service implementation in Nepal and India: Experience and lessons for scale-up, Mikhail, M; Yoder, R (2008)

Available from where? Costs?

http://www.ideorg.org/OurStory/IDE_multi_use_water_svcs_in_nepal_india_8mb.pdf

Links and modules

Expand all Collapse all

Modules