Results
Powerpoint presentation by Gerardo E. van Halsema, Centre for Water and climate Wageningen, given at the World Water Forum in Turkey, 2009.
Powerpoint presentation by Jonathan Chisaka, International Water Management Institute, given at the World Water Forum in Turkey, 2009.
Powerpoint presentation by Ian Thorpe, Pumpaid, given at the World Water Forum in Turkey, 2009.
Powerpoint presentation by Stef Smits, IRC International Water and Sanitation Centre, Multiple-Use Services Group, given at the World Water Forum in Turkey, 2009.
Powerpoint presentation by Mitsukuni Watanabe, International Network for Water and Ecosystem in Paddy Fields (INWEPF), given at the World Water Forum in Turkey, 2009.
Powerpoint presentation by Daniel Renault, FAO, given at the World Water Forum in Turkey, 2009.
It is postulated that 'multiple use systems' allow efficient and effective supply of water from different sources to communities for its domestic and for its productive purposes and allow effective interaction with providers of water related services. Such multiple use systems would be highly desirable from the perspectives of using scarce water efficiently, promoting gender equity and improving livelihoods. It is therefore necessary to carry out scientific research to verify the statement about this water-innovation. The mode of research must be 'action research'.
The specific form and management of multiple use systems depends on local socio-economic and biophysical factors, as well as on local institutions and legislation. Eleven 'cornerstones' need to be in place to realize a full multiple use system. Since a blue print cannot be made and many parties are involved, 'learning alliances' have to be set up at the local, intermediate and national levels. These learning alliances identify how much of these cornerstones of multiple use systems are still lacking and members work together to create or implement these. Guidelines are needed for setting up learning alliances and for actually implementing systems of multiple water use.
The multiple-use water services (MUS) approach to water services takes multiple water needs of rural and periurban communities as the starting point for planning and designing new systems or rehabilitations. By overcoming the administrative boundaries between single-use sectors, MUS contributes more sustainably to more dimensions of well-being than single-use approaches: health, freedom from drudgery, food, and income. The action-research took place in 25 study areas in eight countries in five basins. The project brought global, national, intermediate level, and local partners together who were champions of MUS at the time. This paper presents some of the project findings.
Looking at livelihoods strategies of poor rural communities, it becomes evident that people require water for both domestic and productive needs. Access to reliable supplies of water affects a great number of activities, and water availability can provide a wide range of opportunities for the rural poor. However, traditionally, water supply planning has focussed on meeting basic domestic needs only. To achieve greater water security at village level, and for water to meaningfully tackle poverty, a more holistic and integrated approach to water planning is needed, which is based on an understanding of people’s livelihood strategies and the role of water resources (and constraints) within those.
This paper attempts to discuss such an approach, which was developed and piloted in Bushbuckridge, South Africa. SWELL (Securing Water to Enhance Local Livelihoods) is a community-based planning approach that aims to enable improved allocation and use of water resources for water-related livelihoods. The SWELL methodology is based on a participatory process that brings together villagers, water service implementers and other agencies. The process enables stakeholders to develop a greater and shared understanding of people’s multiple water needs and available water resources, and to jointly develop strategies and plans, based on that information. The paper provides an overview of the methodology, as well of the application in Bushbuckridge, through to the outcomes of the assessment processes and how those were taken forward.
This paper was presented at the 7th WaterNet/WARFA/GWP-SA Symposium, held in Lilongwe, Malawi.
In South Africa multiple water use services have been recognised as an important component for poverty reduction and rural economic development. This has been made explicit in, for example, the Strategic Framework for Water Services. However, this policy isn’t yet elaborated into local government guidelines. Likewise, there exists a conducive policy environment for integrated planning and cooperative governance, two key issues to facilitate institutional support to multiple use services. This paper examines to which extent these policies are followed in Bushbuckridge Local Municipality, a poor rural area in Mpumalanga Province.
Bushbuckridge is currently struggling with reducing service delivery backlogs. There are many reasons for that, including the pre-democratic governance and neglect of rural areas, while others are the institutional confusion that has arisen as a result of changing mandates for water services provision and a lack of staff capacity (both in terms of absolute numbers and skills profile). Even providing Free Basic Water remains a challenge.
One way, in which planning for multiple uses could be improved is through integrated development planning. Although the framework for that is clear, it is followed in a minimal way. Assessment of the village water situation is not done in a comprehensive way, the time of planning is way too short and not all relevant stakeholders, including decentralised line departments are involved. Again, lack of staff and skills, is a main reason for this. But there is also a failure to learn from past mistakes and to see the benefit of true integrated planning, rather than a box-ticking exercise. Although the Municipality is trying to respond to this, by improving its skills profile, in the meantime backlogs will remain and performance of systems will be poor. In such a context, supporting livelihoods, through multiple use services will be a tough call.