Ways for Sustainability of Rural Water supply and Sanitation - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Ways for Sustainability of Rural Water supply and Sanitation Service Delivery in Ethiopia

By Beshah Mogesse

• Doct. Candidate at TUT, Finland

Lecturer at Arba Minch University, Ethiopia October 17, 2012

Second ReCMP workshop

Supervisors

• Adj. Prof Tapio Katko
• Adj. Prof Jarmo Hukka
• Dr. Gashaw Y

Outline

• Background
• Research questions
• Research objectives
• Methodology
• Selected kebeles from different woreda
• Few field observation

Background

• 2.5 billion People of the developing countries lack

improved sanitation facility where as over 780 million are without safe drinking water (Unicef, 2012)

• The problem is multidimensional – it related with health,

education, socio-economy and privacy (dignity)

• Waterborne diseases caused due to lack of adequate

sanitation result in health problem – rural community spent significant amount of money for medication from their little annual income and to make the matter worse the working force deprived from the developmental activity.

Cont’d…

• Children spent their time in fetching water and they stay

away from their school – thus the futurity of the children and the need of education remain unattainable

• Where there is no sanitation facilities women and girls

suffer more due to privacy and losing dignity.

• When we think about Sustainable development, the

primary thing to be addressed should be the provision of water supply and sanitation for all. And it have to be sustainable delivery.

Cont’d …

• For the same reason, efforts have been made towards

water supply and sanitation coverage in developing countries following the MDGs. The campaign is massive and involves several donors and actors, who are investing huge money and human resources.

• Thus, we need to give equivalent attention to

functionality as currently we do for the coverage of water and sanitation facilities.

Cont’d…

• Because, water points that estimated to be 25% of the

implemented in any year found to be non-functioning in two years of their inauguration and

• 33-50% of the overall water supply systems become none

functioning before their expected service life (Dandida, 2007) (WaterAid, 2011) and (Taylor, 2009).

Background

What is CMP and how it emerge?

• Community Development Fund (CDF) model in Ethiopia is

introduced in 2002 to Ahmara Region by the support of the Government of Finland (Harold lockwood, 2011, p 128).

• It was developed under the Finish-supported Rural Water

Supply and Environmental Programme (RWSEP). Having had started in Amhara in 1994 now it is running in benishangul Gumuze (Chaka et al., 2011)

• CDF an implementation approach which focuses on

strengthening ownership feeling over services, and improve transparency in the use of fund and quality of system (Harold lockwood, 2011, p 104)

• Why CDF come to exist?
• Efficient utilization of the Partners’ resources:
• Enabling an environment for optimizing woredas’

capacity

• Establishing a genuine role of the communities for

sustaining the benefits of investments

• Building up the private sector’s role in construction,

maintenance and spare part supply

• Creation of decentralized, material, goods and services

supply chain, including spare parts supply

(Closure of RWSEP, 2011)

Introduction

• Since August 2011 CDF is incorporated into the National

WASH Implementation Framework. The principles and basic procedures of the CDF approach are built into the WaSH program as part of the Community Managed Project (CMP) funding mechanism (WIF, 2011).

• Community Managed Projects (CMP) and nationwide

scaling-up started 2011 to 2014.

Statement of the Problems

• Water supply coverage of the country, especially the rural is so

small;

• Constructed water points not sustainable;
• The scientific implication of CMP is not studied so far and
• Appropriate approach of implementation is vital in attaining

MDGs

Research questions

• Is CMP approach the best of other managed projects ?
• Is there significant impact over the past projects executed

by the Finnish-Government under CDF and CMP approach when compared with none CDF and CMP?

• Can indigenous knowledge of water system management

contribute for sustainability of water and sanitation facilities?

• What experience be obtained from WMP and NGOMP,

and how we can incorporate them in CMP to come up with sustainable water and sanitation delivery?

Objectives

• To investigate the scientific reaction of CMP on

sustainability of Rural water supply systems and evaluate advantages and disadvantage of CMP comparing with

• ther approaches.

Specific objectives

• To identify principal factor(s) of none functionality of

water systems in Ethiopia

• To learn the relationship between principal factors and

approaches, and the significance of their interface on sustainability.

• Investigating good experience of indigenous knowledge
• f water supply sources management.
• Come up with a new approach integrating the

advantage of approaches under consideration.

• Scalability of CMP to medium and large scale schemes ???

Methodology

• Methods to be used in this research are ideal, cross-

sectional survey and case study.

• Base line study

Subsequent study Water and Sanitation project with (after) improvement Control Area/Village without improvement

Cross-sectional Survey Cross-sectional study: in selected Woredas of Amhara and Benishangul Gumuze regions

Cont’d …

• Case study: will be done in Konso and Borena where there

are good indigenous water management system.

Base line study Subsequent study Water and Sanitation project with (after) improvement Control Area/Village

Case study

Cont’d …

• The surveys expected to collect both qualitative and

qualitative data, with the help of group discussion, questionnaire and observation.

• information sources of the study : WASHCO, elders and

local leaders, woreda water

• fficers/technicians,

implementing agencies and user communities.

Site selection and criterion

• The Finn-WASH project has five intervention

Woredas

• Of which Dibate, Pawi and Mandura were considered

due to

• Having multi approach projects
• Accessibility and
• availability of medium and large scale schemes by

CDF

Google Earth

Site selected

Sr. No Organizatio n PA Selected PAs 1 UNicef Ejenta, Tumadalush, Dunzababuna, Du’a gubash, Du’a maksegnt, Tuni, Gilgel Beles, jigda silase, Adida #2, Photo majare and Genet mariam

• 1. Dunzababuna,
• 2. Du’a gubash
• 3. Adida #2
• 4. photo majare
• 5. Genet mariam

2 FinnWASH 3 EBM adida #2 4 CRS photo majare, Du’a gubash 5 Chisp Dunzababuna, Du’a gubash, Du’a meksegnt, Jigda silase, Adida #2, photo majare and Genet mariam

• Pawi Woreda

– 9 shallow wells ------ 6 will be considered in the research stratified Random sampling – 40 hand dug wells ---- 16 will be considered in the research by stratified random sampling – The rehabilitation of the Ali Spring will also include – as how to upscale CDF/CMP approach

Mandura Woreda

Dibate

• Parzayit, Simanda and Kido PAs are selected as research

focus

• Due to serious breakdown and community ownership

conflict

Whom I met and their comment

• COWASH staff== Amhara Region
• Abreham Kebede (Technical Advisor)
• The region is where the Finland-Ethiopia bilateral project

running for two decades The intervention is large, inters

• f:
• Many administration units 271/470 coverage
• Different aged water schemes (Since 1994).
• Different climate
• Approaches (RWSEP  CDF  CMP) and
• Availability of sister organization for comparison

Site selection criterion

• The criterion for selection of woredas in Amhara Region

are

• Worwdas which involve CDF/CMP before 2 years
• Woredas where there is water schemes that constructed by other

approaches

• Climate regions (woredas of Humid, semi-arid and arid) and
• Accessibility

Selected

Sr No Woreda Kebele (PA) 1 Farta Arga (kimir Dingia Zuria 2 Farta Awzet 3 Farta Ayiban’ibi 4 Farta Kolay 5 Farta Kanato 6 Farta Ata 7 Farta Saharna 8 Fogera Shina 9 Fogera Wagatera 10 Fogera Wereta Zuria 11 Fogera Kuhar Mikael

12 East Estie Mikri Hana 13 East Estie Mikri Kuskuam 14 East Estie Gena Memcha 15 East Estie Licha 16 East Estie Disekuam 17 East Estie Alemaya 18 East Estie Gindatiba

19 Guangua Bizrakani 20 Guangua Tiru Birhan 21 Guangua Dega Abo 22 Guangua Tirgi 23 Guangua Dangula 24 Guangua Addis Alem

25 Dega Damot Zikual Wegem 26 Dega Damot Fenkatit Gindwiha 27 Dega Damot Shangi Dereke 28 Dega Damot Feresbet Michael

Field observation

• It is difficult to get the right responsible and knowledgeable

person at woreda level due to meeting, and other duties.

• All woreds of the Metekel Zone entirely relay on the zone’s

technical staff.

• Sanitation issue under each woreda considered as

secondary element according to the preliminary discussion we had with woreda’s water offices.

• Off course village(s) which claim fund for water

development imposed to have toilet for each members to get an approval. In my view they are rarely assisted technically and trained for behavior change. Thus, I have doubt whether such toilets are in use or not.

• Staff turnover is obstacle to the progress of projects and

created technical gap

Publications Plan

To show how the approach is developed, achievements and pros and cons and its progress when compared with non-CMP approach schemes done by Finland-Ethiopia cooperation since 1994 Historical development of CMP There are several factors which affect the sustainability of water systems like, Technical, social, economical and environmental. Thus , a through investigation will be done on before going to evaluate approaches Investigation of principal factor that favor none functionality in rural water supply Here different implementation approaches evaluated with respect to the principal factor(s). Moreover, functionality rate, implementation rate, and acceptability will be investigated and ranked based of their significance to sustainability Is principal factor(s) dependent of approaches? Countries like Ethiopia, which have divers culture and living norm, is difficult to implement same approach for all. Traditionally some communities are endowed good management practice of their water sources. Thus, it is very important to learn why such systems are more sustainable than modern schemes. The result surly point

• ut what to do in our new approach.

How indigenous knowledge contribute for the sustainability of water points Bringing advantages of different approaches together, by avoiding their short coming for sustainable development of rural water supply and further suiting for other developmental activities . Developing New or improving approach from experience of all approaches and the indigenous knowledge

Thank you

1.

Community Managed Project in implementing rural water supply in Amhara region of Ethiopia - Nabin Sharma, TUT

2.

Sustainability of Water Services Implemented Using CMP Approach - Ahmed Muhumed, HAMK

3.

Assessment on CMP Approach in Developing Rural Water Supply and Sanitation Schemes: A Case of Benishangul-Gumuz Regional State - Meron Mebratu, AAU

4.

A Comparative Study on Woreda Managed and Community Managed Rural Water Supply Projects – Yewondwossen Tesfaye,

Ways for sustainability

• f RWSS

Community Managed Project in implementing rural water supply in Amhara region of Ethiopia

Assessment on CMP Approach in Developing Rural Water Supply and Sanitation Schemes: A Case of Benishangul-Gumuz Regional State A Comparative Study on Woreda Managed and Community Managed Rural Water Supply Projects

Sustainability of Water Services Implemented Using CMP Approach

x z

Nabin Meron YW T Ahmed