WASH and Increased Food Security

Ron ClemmerFSN Meeting

November 15, 2012

Increased Food Security and WASH

• Additional Productive Time

• Soil Fertility Improvement

• Better Water Management

Additional Productive Time

• One example – Dango, Angola

• Women walked 2 hours per day to get water from the river

• Reduced to 0.5 hour per day with installation of borehole, saving 10.5 hours or more per week

• Extra time results in 20% more time in agriculture activities

Soil Fertility

• Human excrement – feces and urine– waste or resource

• Feces – organic material, nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P),

potassium (K) – pathogens and intestinal worms

• Urine– N (urea), P, K– typically no pathogens

Thanks!

Arborloo

Urine diverted with special pedestals or squat plates

Examples from South Africa and Kenya from Peter Morgan

Urine diluted with water and applied to plants can enhance growth significantly Leafy green vegetables like spinach are particularly responsive

Courtesy of Peter Morgan

Most of this maize cob mass derived from Most of this maize cob mass derived from nutrients supplied by urine diluted in water (3:1)nutrients supplied by urine diluted in water (3:1)

Courtesy of Peter Morgan

Better Water ManagementMultiple Water Use Services (MUS)

Communities turn single-use designed water systems into de facto multiple use systems> may cause damage, as unplanned

ORCommunities construct multi-purpose water infrastructure> for multiple livelihood and domestic use benefits and broad basis for cost-recoveryandCommunities use and re-use multiple sources for multiple uses > for more holistic, efficient and sustainable water resource management

Source of some MUS info from Barbara Van Koppen, MUS, Stockholm World Water Week, 2012

Wider livelihood mandates:-Health from safe drinking water and reduced time for getting water, plus enhanced food and income Multi-purpose technology: -Higher service levels ‘climbing the water ladder’ for more water to homesteads-Often add-ons, like cattle troughs, community gardens

Domestic+ MUS

Irrigation+ MUSCrop-based food and income, plus non-irrigation uses

Multi-purpose technology: -water to fields, plus add-ons, like cattle ramps, washing places, and domestic water supplies

MUS Cost-Benefit Analysis

– More uses, so more livelihood benefits and resilience– Can be highly cost-effective investments with low incremental costs for

livelihood improvements in some cases– No damage from unplanned uses, so more sustainable

Midpoint estimates of income benefits by service level are:

Highest level multiple uses: $71/capitaIntermediate level multiple uses: $61/capitaBasic level multiple uses: $25/capita

Example: Per Capita Income Benefits by Incremental Service Levels for DomesticSource: Renwick et al. 2007. Winrock International, IRC and IWMI

Basic level MUS

Intermediate level MUS

Highest level MUS

Basic Domestic

Home gardens Livestock Small scale

enterprises Total

Midpoint $11 $27 $17 $25

Range $1-22 $4-50 $4-30 $1-50

Home gardens Livestock Small scale

enterprises Total

Midpoint $23 $67 $17 $61

Range $2-43 $14-120 $4-30 $2-120

Home gardens Livestock Small scale

enterprises Total

Midpoint $64 $87 $19 $71

Range $4-50 $36-138 $4-35 $4-138

Average incremental income benefit: $25

Average incremental income benefit: $36

Average incremental income benefit: $10

The largest incremental gains in income are achieved at the intermediate service level.

– Evaluation of Domestic+ MUS opportunities in Ghana showed high potential for significant population coverage

– “However, there would be a relatively small impact per person in terms of improved livelihoods.”

– “Total investment costs for increasing service levels is 30-60 USD/capita.”Source: Multiple Use Water Services Scoping Study Synthesis,” International Water Management Institute, Rockefeller Foundation,

IRC, March 2012.

MUS does not always provide a good return on investment

Feasibility / Sustainability Study

Technical Feasibility Environmental Sustainability Social Capacity Financial Feasibility and Sustainability

– Can require higher level of feasibility analysis– Different government ministries responsible for

different water uses– Different expertise and perspectives of local

implementers– Different water quality needs

Challenges for MUS

Increased Food Security and WASH

• Additional Productive Time – possibly much more time

• Soil Fertility Improvement – Ecological Sanitation and soil nutrients available

in every village

• Better Water Management – Multiple Water Use Services

WASH and Food Security - Resource

Conservation Linkages

Ron ClemmerFSN Meeting

November 15, 2012

Degraded Lands - Deforestation

• Can decrease soil moisture, groundwater and surface water resources

• Can cause increase in flooding and soil erosion from runoff and wind

Alternative for reforestation

• Farmer managed natural regeneration (FMNR)• Underground forest of millions of sprouting tree trunks with

20 or more sprouts

Impacts of FMNR in Niger

• Reforestation – 5 million hectares reforested

averaging 40 trees per hectacre• Increase in water resources• Increased incomes - $200/year for each family• Increased food security – Additional 500,000

tons of grain per year, enough for 2.5 million people

Water and soil conservation in the field

Stone bund

Trench bund

Gully Treatment with gabion check dam

Where 70% of the livelihood is from livestock, saving water and productive grazing land is crucial

Check dams – reducing flooding and providing irrigation water

Linkages with Resource Conservation

• Resource conservation to support resiliency and disaster risk reduction programming not only conserves water and soil for farming purposes and decreases flood, but also increases water resources for domestic water use

Thanks!

Ron ClemmerWorld Vision

rclemmer@worldvision.org