[Anonymous].  Submitted.  Nepal: attribution gap in CBA of MUS, Merino, EkoRural.

This presentation by Jorge Merino looks into the difficulties in attribution in CBA of MUS. This is illustrated by case work from Nepal.

[Anonymous].  Submitted.  A struggle for water rights in Upper Mustang, Nepal.

This ethnographic research, by integrating historical and comparative approaches, investigated how water rights are defined and contested in a cold, arid region of upper Mustang in Nepal. The struggle for water rights was found to take place at three levels:

  1. to acquire and defend rights to access water;
  2. to defend to take part in collective decision making, and defining water rights contents; and
  3. to legitimize contesting claims.
[Anonymous].  Submitted.  Technology Adoption and Adaptation for Multiple Use Water Services in the Hills of Nepal.

This paper draws on seven years of multiple use water services (MUS) development effort by International Development Enterprises and partner organizations in Nepal. It describes the genesis of the MUS work and the unique combination of technologies utilized to provide domestic and productive water services. The introduction of micro irrigation technologies enabled households to begin production of high value vegetables, increase their cash income and increase food security. However, scaling up introduction of these technologies required a way for households to increase access to a reliable water supply

[Anonymous].  Submitted.  Nepal: analysis of the MUS learning alliance process.

Powerpoint presentation by Monique Mikhail and  Bob Yoder, IDE-International, given at the World Water Forum in Turkey, 2009.

[Anonymous].  Submitted.  Conclusion.

Chapter 14 contains the conclusion. An abundance of lessons emerged from the MUS work in Nepal and Maharashtra, India. While the experiences in the two places were incredibly different, several common threads emerged, albeit with distinctive situational spins. Perhaps the simplest emergent theme was that MUS is not a new concept for rural villagers in either Nepal or Maharashtra. In both regions, communities have found ways to achieve their own integrated water resource management by combining various “projects,” either brought to them via external implementers (the government or NGOs) or accomplished via their own efforts.

[Anonymous].  Submitted.  Applying the learning alliance approach in Nepal.

Chapter 7 deals with the Learning Alliance experience in Nepal. It was an experiment in working with all stakeholders at all levels to concurrently garner partner support for MUS project implementation and propagate the idea of MUS throughout the country.

[Anonymous].  Submitted.  Community-level lessons - Nepal.

The organization of chapter 6 is based on the 14 principles outlined in the CP-MUS Action Research Framework that are required at the community, intermediate, and national levels to implement and scale up multiple use water systems.

[Anonymous].  Submitted.  Krishnapur: scarce water.

Chapter 5: The Krishnapur Tole cluster within the village of Karre Khola in Surkhet District was chosen as a case study due to the unique MUS situation that arose from the area’s incredible water scarcity.

[Anonymous].  Submitted.  Senapuk: moderate water.

In chapter 4 the village of Senapuk in Syangja District was chosen as a case study to represent a moderate water supply and the birthplace of the double-tank, twoline distribution system.

[Anonymous].  Submitted.  Chhatiwan: abundant water.

Chapter 3 discusses Chhatiwan Tole cluster. This cluster of the Chirtungdhara VDC in Palpa District was chosen as a case study to represent a community with an abundant water supply. It was the very first MUS system constructed.