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

Name of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Approach (if relevant)

CDE Centre for Development and Environment (CDE Centre for Development and Environment) - Switzerland

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

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

Yes

1.4 Reference(s) to Questionnaire(s) on SLM Technologies

2.1 Short description of the Approach

Working with communities to demonstrate and disseminate methods for improving drinking water quality using structural and vegetative measures

2.2 Detailed description of the Approach

Detailed description of the Approach:

Aims / objectives: The People and Resource Dynamics in Mountain Watersheds of the Hindu Kush- Himalayas Project (PARDYP) implemented this approach with 30 drinking water user households at Barbot in the Jhikhu Khola watershed, Kavre Palanchok. The aim was to improve water quality and availability from an open spring source through participatory planning and implementation. The approach first identified local concerns and observed the sanitary situation of the catchment area. Meetings were held jointly with men and women users from different caste groups (Brahmin, Chhetri, Newar and Kami) to discuss the problems and issues and to identify viable solutions. The advantages and disadvantages of the various options were discussed, after which users selected the following three measures to improve the drinking water supply: 1) building a brick-cement walled structure around the main local spring, 2) establishing check dams across nearby rills and gullies, and 3) planting grass around the spring box and tree saplings within the catchment area. The aim was to prevent direct flow of surface water into the spring and reduce contamination and turbidity of the source. Understanding and support was gained by demonstrating the technology and running an awareness campaign.

Role of stakeholders: The project helped form a users committee made up of 11 women and 1 man and encouraged them to plant grass and tree seedlings across the entire catchment. The project regularly measured the quality of the water and shared the results with the users. Rules and regulations were developed to ensure equitable access to the spring and its sustainable use and management. A notice board with do’s and don’ts was placed near the spring. The users held monthly meetings and established a revolving fund for maintaining the structures. Spring users followed the rules and regulations by washing, cleaning, and bathing at separate sources. Livestock grazing was stopped in the nearby area and the area was regularly cleaned. Furthermore, users were encouraged to treat water for drinking using simple methods like SODIS and the low cost Safa filter to avoid microbiological contamination. They were made more aware of water quality, sanitation, and health issues.

2.3 Photos of the Approach

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

2.6 Dates of initiation and termination of the Approach

2.7 Type of Approach

• project/ programme based

2.8 Main aims/ objectives of the Approach

The Approach focused on SLM only

- To explore and demonstrate appropriate water quality improving technologies and methods in a participatory way. - To increase awareness on water quality, water treatment, and health and hygiene. - To share knowledge gained on the water improvement options with farmers and other stakeholders

The SLM Approach addressed the following problems: Weak institutional collaboration to develop technological options for improving drinking water quality and availability and to raise awareness on health and hygiene and waterborne diseases.

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

3.1 Stakeholders involved in the Approach and their roles

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	public meetings; meetings organised to identify problems and possible options to overcome them.
planning	interactive	public meetings; organised regularly to identify implementing steps, and role and responsibility of different stakeholders in overcoming problems
implementation	interactive	responsibility for major steps; the user group responsible for implementation and the project for technical support
monitoring/ evaluation	interactive	The quality of the water was measured in each season to monitor the impact of the technology. Detailed progress reports, results, and lessons learned were shared with district level institutions and authorities, water quality reports were shared with spring users at public meetings
Research	passive	Water quality and availability recorded before and after technology implemented. Studies on access to water and confl icts among users

3.3 Flow chart (if available)

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

Specify who decided on the selection of the Technology/ Technologies to be implemented:

• mainly land users, supported by SLM specialists

Explain:

Users selected three of the potential conservation options.

Decisions on the method of implementing the SLM Technology were made by mainly by land users supported by SLM specialists. The technology and associated measures were not new to the area and the implementing methods were simple and have been practised for a long time. The project initiated the formation of a users committee and the committee conducted the conservation activities.

4.1 Capacity building/ training

Was training provided to land users/ other stakeholders?

Yes

Specify who was trained:

• land users

Form of training:

• public meetings

Subjects covered:

Concept of conservation measures, and methods of treating contaminated water using SODIS and safa filter.

4.2 Advisory service

Do land users have access to an advisory service?

Yes

Specify whether advisory service is provided:

• on land users' fields

Describe/ comments:

Name of method used for advisory service: Sharing information on water quality status, and raising awareness among users.; Key elements: catchment conservation, health hygiene, water treatment methods; 1) Advisory service was carried out through: projects own extension structure and agents; Extension staff: specifically hired project employees 2) Target groups for extension: land users; Activities: awareness on health hygiene; catchment conservation activities and water treatment methods were shared during meetings.

Advisory service is quite adequate to ensure the continuation of land conservation activities

4.3 Institution strengthening (organizational development)

Have institutions been established or strengthened through the Approach?

• yes, a little

Specify the level(s) at which institutions have been strengthened or established:

• local

Specify type of support:

• capacity building/ training

Give further details:

Training on water quality treatment provided to local club

4.4 Monitoring and evaluation

Is monitoring and evaluation part of the Approach?

Yes

Comments:

bio-physical aspects were ad hoc monitored through observations; indicators: land use and degradation, sanitary inspection, history of spring, available resources to trap water

technical aspects were regular monitored through measurements; indicators: seasonal water quality and discharge

socio-cultural aspects were ad hoc monitored through observations; indicators: number of spring users, household water requirements, users' issues

no. of land users involved aspects were regular monitored through measurements; indicators: participation in conservation activities

There were few changes in the Approach as a result of monitoring and evaluation: The project consulted with the local women's cooperative to solve a conflict over water quantity and access to spring source.

4.5 Research

Was research part of the Approach?

Yes

Specify topics:

• sociology
• technology

Give further details and indicate who did the research:

Access to drinking water, conflicts at water fetching times, water quality and quantity measurement, and effectiveness of water treatment methods.

Research was carried out on station

5.1 Annual budget for the SLM component of the Approach

If precise annual budget is not known, indicate range:

• < 2,000

Comments (e.g. main sources of funding/ major donors):

Approach costs were met by the following donors: international (SDC, IDRC, ICIMOD): 90.0%; local community / land user(s) (users group): 10.0%

5.3 Subsidies for specific inputs (including labour)

• other

If labour by land users was a substantial input, was it:

• voluntary

Comments:

In implementing the technology and the approach

5.4 Credit

Was credit provided under the Approach for SLM activities?

Yes

6.1 Impacts of the Approach

6.2 Main motivation of land users to implement SLM

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:

Users are maintaining the implemented technology and also protecting the other nearby spring sources.

6.4 Strengths/ advantages of the Approach

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the land user’s view
Water users committee formed, revolving fund collected, and rules and regulations developed for the sustainable management of the drinking water system (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Maintain links with local community mobilisation groups for continuous guidance and support for the user group and for the proper use of the revolving fund.)

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
Users have become more aware of sanitation issues than before (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Awareness campaigns should be organized regularly covering more villages.)
Users have become more aware of 1) the quality of their drinking water, 2) its impact on their health, 3) water quality improvement options, and 4) the importance of soil and water conservation (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Water quality testing campaigns should be continued and technical know how about different water quality treatment methods for improved health shared at regular meetings)

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

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the land user’s view	How can they be overcome?
Water aviallability is still insufficient during dry period (March -May)	Other available nearrer sources should also be used, catchment protection activities should be continued.

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view	How can they be overcome?
Conflicts are visible during the dry season due to insufficient quantity of water.	Good coordination among the group members should minimise conflicts- the strong and balanced role of users committee is vital for the equitable sharing of benefits.

7.1 Methods/ sources of information

7.2 References to available publications

Title, author, year, ISBN:

ICIMOD (2007) Good Practices in Watershed Management, Lessons Learned in the Mid Hills of Nepal. Kathmandu: ICIMOD

Available from where? Costs?

ICIMOD