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)

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:

Yes

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

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

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	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)

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.

4.1 Capacity building/ training

Was training provided to land users/ other stakeholders?

Yes

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?

Yes

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?

Yes

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?

Yes

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

5.1 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?

Yes

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?

No

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:

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.

7.1 Methods/ sources of information

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