Published by IRC WASH, The Hague, Netherlands 2010 WASHCost (India) Project researches on the unit costs providing the WASH service delivery in rural and peri urban areas. As part of the research, the survey was conducted in 20 villages to find out the Transparency and Accountability and Participatory (TAP) systems using the qualitative and quantitative methods. The preliminary analysis of the data from 20 villages in Rural Andhra Pradesh clearly establishes that “if relevant transparency, accountability and Participatory (TAP) systems are in place there was higher level of WASH service delivery. Further there is a clear difference among the award winning and non award winning villages on WASH service delivery and across the different indicators of TAP”
Published by The Hague, The Netherlands 2011 This paper illustrates the usefulness of the life-cycle costs approach (LCCA) framework and methodology in addressing slippage and sustainability issues in the WASH sector in the State of Andhra Pradesh (AP), India. The paper examines the actual cost of provision in 40 villages spread over two agro-climatic zones by cost components and identifies the gaps in (public) investments and how these gaps are responsible for poor, inequitable and unsustainable service delivery. The analysis brings out clearly that government expenditure on WASH is almost exclusively capital expenditure on infrastructure while other important cost components like planning and designing, capital maintenance, source sustainability, water quality, etc., receive little or no allocation. Moreover, the actual life of infrastructure is much less than the normative life span, which is the basis for cost estimates. This results in ad hoc investments in capital maintenance expenditure and poor service levels. The key message of the paper is that “the rural drinking water sector is underfunded and funding allocations for rural water are distorted”. It is argued that budget allocations to the drinking water sector need to be revised with due allocation for other important components such as source sustainability, capital maintenance, water quality and climate change, etc. The paper argues in favour of a paradigm shift in terms of developing a comprehensive and realistic costing mechanism that addresses various aspects of drinking water like slippage, water quality, etc. LCCA is one such tool that can contribute towards achieving water security at the household level.
Published by WASSAN 2008
This report presents the patterns of WASH services in rural Andhra Pradesh. This report is produced by WASSAN and is an output of rapid survey conducted by WASSAN as part of Process Documentation task, during the inception phase of WASHCost Project. This report is based on the data bases generated by local communities on WASH costs and life cycle analysis. It also profiled WASH situation in selected villages that project a diversity of WASH governance issues in the state.
Published by Centre for Economic and Social Studies and IRC Perceptions of communities on the performance of 1400+ public water points in their locality gave an insight to the complex nature of WASH governance, influence of technology and natural resource endowment in 9 agro climatic zones of Andhra Pradesh. This community based performance assessment gave an opportunity to the rural households to reflect on the service levels (adequacy, quality, predictability and accessibility) of each of these water points. The assessment indicated that the good practices in WASH services are in minority, which also reflected WASH governance in the state. Based on this community’s assessment, one could infer that several key elements of WASH policy are not being implemented in true spirit. The gaps between policy and practice seem to have influenced the performance of water points negatively and the villagers are certainly not happy with the current level of service in rural Andhra Pradesh. This paper is jointly authored by MV Rama Chandrudu; R Subramanyam Nadu; Safa Fanaian and Radha Shree of WASSAN.
Published by WASSAN 2000 The process of degradation of fragile drylands affects 25 per cent of the earth’s land area and threatens the livelihoods of 900 million people in one hundred countries. Desertification affects one-sixth of the world’s population. 800 million people live without adequate food resources in these drylands. The problem is particularly endemic in India. Droughts have been a major impediment in India’s development, a country heavily dependant on monsoon rains to annually replenish its water sources. A poor monsoon caused draught like situations in 77.6 per cent of India’s geographical area at least once or twice in every five years. Forcing people to sell their livestock and leave their homes, droughts cause large-scale misery in the lives of the poor and the marginalised. Combating the effects of drought often precipitates into larger crisis, as drought relief operations struggle to provide wage employment, drinking water, food, fodder and often wage employment to those affected. The drought in 1999-2000 affected around 100 million people and 3.4 million cattle.
We are already into the 4th year since the ‘New Guidelines’ have come into force. I have a strong feeling that the spirit and approach of the guidelines has been missed by most who have tried to mechanically interpret them for their own convenience and ease. Everybody claims to have implemented the programme strictly according to the guidelines and some even quote para numbers of the guidelines right from their memory. Before going into the details of the Dynamic Group strategy let us review what the guidelines expected out of this programme. Like poor people we have poor lands: poor in water resources, poor in soil fertility, poor in vegetation and poor in productivity. These are the arid and semi-arid lands of the country. These lands are drought prone. The DPAP, DDP and IWDP have failed in their objectives and the recommendations of the Hanumantha Rao Committee resulted in prescription of great paradigm shift in the approach of these programmes. The words ‘watershed’ and ‘participation’ have become popular but the reversals that were expected in the implementation of these programmes have by and large not taken place.
Published by WASSAN 2004
Community based management of natural resources in the framework of watershed program is now an accepted approach for ecological regeneration and sustainable use of natural resources. The Guidelines issued by Ministry of Rural Development, Government of India (Oct 1994) have significantly contributed to popularize watershed approach in communities, NGOs, academicians, donors and government departments. These Guidelines have shifted the paradigm from centralized top driven approach to decentralized and bottom up approaches and initiated a new era in the ecological restoration. Since 1994, the country has wide variety of experiences in facilitating the watershed program. Eventually, the Guidelines of watershed development program are revised in 2001 (Watershed Guidelines – Revised) and 2003 (Hariyali). Apart from these guidelines, Ministry of Agriculture also issued guidelines for National Watershed Development Project for Rainfed Areas (2000). In state like Andhra Pradesh (which has highest number of watershed development projects in the country) Government of Andhra Pradesh has recognized the need for strengthening participatory processes and supported a process of consultations on the issue. As a result of this, “Process Guidelines for Watershed Development Program” came into existence in Dec 2002. These Process Guidelines were conceived in the broad framework of earlier guidelines (1994 and 2001).
Published by WASSAN
This paper reflects on the experiences of implementing the watershed development programme in Andhra Pradesh. Key issues that emerge from this analysis form the basis for ‘reforming’ the watershed development program in terms of policy framework and interventions needed to strengthen the programme. The first three chapters present the analysis, reflections and thus a rationale for ‘reforms’, while the remaining three chapters propose a refined or redefined framework for watershed development program in terms of programme components, thrust areas, policy options and agenda for generating new knowledge to enhance the performance of program.
Published by WASSAN
In a male dominated society like ours, one has to accept the fact that women are at the receiving end. The opportunities and access to decision-making institutions are not equal to men and women. Because of this less access, the needs /issues of women aren’t given priority and therefore not addressed. We see a clear division of labour among men and women, designating certain tasks exclusively to each other. Most often we see that the activities, which are considered of low value, or those which do not have the element of market or money attached to them are treated as women’s sphere and the others of men. It clearly shapes the livelihood pattern of men and women. With women spending most of their time in household maintenance and the men in the matters of so called productive activities getting an image of bread winner. Women’s livelihood then clearly made dependent on the men. Though she interacts with the natural resources relatively more, she doesn’t have the rights over them. If we take the case of water, Women’s priority concern is very largely the water for domestic use. Providing water for domestic purpose has been traditionally the responsibility of women. Family water needs like drinking, cooking, bathing, washing clothes, water for animals to drink and wash, for making cow dung cakes, construction etc. Depending upon the no. of people, season and animals in the family women have to go far distances to fetch water.
Published by WAASSAN
Many critiques negate the term ‘livelihoods’ as one of those new buzzwords in the development jargon. Suddenly everyone seems to be busy promoting livelihoods of poor. Many are trying to bring their past experiences into the framework of livelihoods, to gain some credibility. Irrespective of the criticism associated with the term, many agree that the framework of livelihoods provides an over arching and comprehensive understanding of the reality in a systematic manner. The contribution from international donors (SDC, DFID, OXFAM, UNDP and others) and academic institutions (IDS, IRMA and others) in developing conceptual frameworks and crystallizing the philosophy was well recognized. Watershed Development program also tried to expand its scope by adopting the terminology of livelihoods and tried to rediscover itself in Andhra Pradesh. This paper tries to analyze the present preparedness of watershed program in addressing the livelihoods concerns. Conceptually, can watershed program contribute to the cause of livelihoods approaches/ philosophy? Let us explore this, using the key words of livelihoods framework.
Published by Springlink 2010
As opportunities to enhance the irrigation base for raising food production in the country are dwindling, India needs a more concerted effort to increase the efficiency and productivity of its irrigation systems. This study, based on an analysis of experience from the state of Andhra Pradesh, addresses the potential of the System of Rice Intensification (SRI) to contribute to systemic corrections in present paddy cultivation, both with regard to agronomic productivity and irrigation water use efficiency. This study points to the considerable increase in rice productivity and farmer incomes, which is being achieved in Andhra Pradesh with substantial reduction in irrigation water application, labor, and seed costs through utilization of SRI methods. Potential public savings on water and power costs could be drawn upon not only for promoting SRI but also to effect systemic corrections in the irrigation sector, to mutual advantage.
Published by IIED
India is increasingly focusing on its rainfed areas due to demand for food and nutrition security, and escalating farmer distress. But agricultural policy paralysis has meant that the familiar, external input-intensive, technological approaches of the Green Revolution are to be transferred to these rainfed areas – despite their diverse and highly integrated production systems that are better adapted to climatic variability. A new macro policy that articulates for decentralised, location-specific, integrated approaches in its rainfed areas is necessary for agriculture to be inclusive, climate-resilient and sustainable, and to provide the food and nutritional security that India needs.
Published by IIED
More than two thirds of India’s arable land is under rainfed farming. Local and national authorities, public sector agricultural research and extension, and commercial ventures are designed to supply ‘one-size-fits-all’ technologies, inputs and advice through uniform administrative apparatus or market protocols. This approach limits their capacity to work with the diversity and variability of rainfed agriculture. But with support that complements the variable nature of rainfed farming tracts, communities can improve farm productivity and sustainability. We present the case study of a farming community reclaiming its knowledge of variability through the revival of mixed cropping and millet production. We argue that decentralised support, with public investments appropriate to each agro-ecological system, ssis necessary for more communities to follow this lead.