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

{'additional_translations': {}, 'value': 236, 'label': 'Name of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Approach (if relevant)', 'text': 'ICIMOD International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development (ICIMOD) - Nepal', 'template': 'raw'} {'additional_translations': {}, 'value': 236, 'label': 'Name of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Approach (if relevant)', 'text': 'ICIMOD International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development (ICIMOD) - Nepal', 'template': 'raw'}

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 water use master plan supports the development of integrated water resources at the local level; all stakeholders, including disadvantaged groups, take part in the plan.

2.2 Detailed description of the Approach

Detailed description of the Approach:

Aims / objectives: A water use master plan (WUMP) is a holistic, participatory, and inclusive planning process that takes an integrated approach to the management of water resources and uses at the village level. The WUMP specifies the total water budget for its planning unit, the village development committee (VDC), and explores potential uses for it. It empowers marginalized groups to claim their rights to an equitable share of water within and between communities. The WUMP also helps local bodies with annual and periodic planning and project prioritization.

Methods: The WUMP is a 17-step process that includes social mobilization, the formation of inclusive management committees, capacity building for everyone involved in the process, and, as a final step, social assessment using various participatory rural appraisal (PRA) tools. Simultaneously, the technical part of the process evaluates the capacity of all water resources and their potential uses. In a workshop facilitated by NGO staff, the community discusses suggestions formulated by the two participatory assessments, prioritizes possible projects, and formulates plans. The VDC representatives decide which plans can be implemented using their own resources and which need external support. The WUMP then organizes a workshop to present these plans to various organizations in order to get their commitment and support. The prioritized projects are implemented according to the WUMP.
The plan also contains a series of long-term activities and during the course of its implementation, there is sufficient latitude to allow the community to rectify its original plans in order to put into practise lessons learned during earlier phases and to continue to review and modify the plan as needed.

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 SLM with other activities (Water conservation, water sources and catchment area)

• Establish inclusive water planning and water resource management at the community level
• Ensure the optimal use of water resources; see that water is equitably and efficiently distributed
• Promote conservation of water and natural resources linked to water; implement water projects based on the plan agreed by the entire community

The SLM Approach addressed the following problems: • Issues on access to water are often contentious, communities often quarrel over water rights
• A lack of coordinated planning at the local level
• A growing demand for water both for domestic and agricultural use
• Water sources are diminishing and the changing climate will further aggravate this

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	Community meetings, decision taken by the VDC on how to prepare the WUMP
planning	interactive	Social and resource mapping, social assessments, technical assessments and planning
implementation	self-mobilization	Implementation of the water projects, source protection/conservation
monitoring/ evaluation	interactive	Review of the plan, community monitoring during the construction phase, follow-up monitoring during routine operation
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:

• mainly land users, supported by SLM specialists

Explain:

Technologies are selected on the basis of suitability and availability of water sources by local communities with the support of technicians and the VDC.

Decisions on the method of implementing the SLM Technology were made by mainly by land users supported by SLM specialists. Since the VDC endorses the WUMP, it decides on implementation.

4.1 Capacity building/ training

Was training provided to land users/ other stakeholders?

Yes

• Local Community

Subjects covered:

• Social mobilization and awareness raising orientations, training
• Capacity building and training to WRMC and local service providers

4.3 Institution strengthening (organizational development)

Have institutions been established or strengthened through the Approach?

• yes, greatly

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

• local

Specify type of support:

• capacity building/ training
• equipment

Give further details:

Support is provided to the VDC for the preparation of the WUMP

4.4 Monitoring and evaluation

Is monitoring and evaluation part of the Approach?

Yes

Comments:

bio-physical aspects were monitored through measurements; indicators: Follow-up monitoring to check if the water sources are protected, and if the area is conserved by planting

technical aspects were monitored through measurements; indicators: Follow-up monitoring to check water sources and number of water projects implemented

socio-cultural aspects were monitored through measurements; indicators: Public hearings and audits to ensure transparency and community participation (especially of disadvantaged groups)

area treated aspects were monitored through measurements; indicators: Follow-up monitoring of implementation (as shown in the diagram )

no. of land users involved aspects were monitored through measurements; indicators: Public review, final commissioning: community contribution and participation (as shown in the diagram)

management of Approach aspects were monitored through measurements; indicators: WUMP follow-up: implementation of WUMP (as shown in the diagram )

Implementation of WUMP aspects were monitored through measurements; indicators: WUMP follow-up: implementation of WUMP (as shown in the diagram )

There were few changes in the Approach as a result of monitoring and evaluation: • All members of the community, even those with water resources on their own land, are willing to share water resources after participating in the WUMP.
• Disadvantaged groups participate on an equal footing in management committees and have equal access to water resources.
• The community realizes the need to protect water resources and begins to conserve water.

5.1 Annual budget for the SLM component of the Approach

If precise annual budget is not known, indicate range:

• 2,000-10,000

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

Approach costs were met by the following donors: national non-government: 75.0%; local community / land user(s): 25.0%

5.2 Financial/ material support provided to land users

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

No

5.3 Subsidies for specific inputs (including labour)

• none

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

• voluntary

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)?

• uncertain

If no or uncertain, specify and comment:

In order to ensure sustainability the following issues need to be addressed:
• Social: Coordinated planning in consultation with the local people; capacity building at all levels so that management committees, local service providers, local government, and the community as a whole can participate better, voice their concerns, and be part of the solution.
• Economic: The VDCs take a lead role, the beneficiaries need to be willing to share the costs and need to want to participate in activities such as quality control, and routine operation and maintenance schemes.
• Environment: Conservation of water sources, integrated water resources planning, and the efficient use of water

6.4 Strengths/ advantages of the Approach

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
Communities appreciate the WUMP approach (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: The Ministry of Local Development has expressed an interest in preparing national guidelines for this process in order to scale it up to all the VDCs in Nepal)
VDCs own the process both by participating and by contributing to the funding. (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Need to simplify the process and make it more cost effective so that it is easier to replicate.)
An integrated approach to the use of water resources may help in climate change adaptation. (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Strengthen awareness activities and continue to promote water conservation)
The WUMP process is inclusive and is managed by the whole community. (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Continue to strengthen the capacity of disadvantaged groups so that they can participate more actively.)

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?
Not all VDCs actively participate in the WUMP	When VDCs contribute funds for the WUMP, they are usually more actively involved.
Communities can have high expectations for WUMP but their VDCs may have limited resources.	The VDCs need to communicate clearly with their community so that they can prepare a realistic plan together.
Conflicts can arise over the allocation of water resources	The VDC and the management committee must work with the community to see that any contentious issues are resolved equitably
At times it can be difficult to get everyone to agree to a given WUMP.	The VDC authorities can improve their negotiating skills in order to make their demands heard with donors and district development committees.

7.1 Methods/ sources of information

7.2 References to available publications

Title, author, year, ISBN:

Water use master plan preparation guideline. Lalitpur, Nepal: WARM-P/HELVETAS; Rural Village Water Resource Management Project (2011) Proceedings of water use master plan national level experience sharing workshop. Lalitpur, Nepal, HELVETAS (2007)